Notes from peer evaluation discussion

Notes from discussion & questions to consider:

• What is the thinking and intention behind the techniques? What did those practitioners want theatre to do?
• What are the difference between Gestus and Gesture?
• What do you value in feedback? 
• In feedback what is the balance between personal feelings and objective analysis?

Zoe & Chris:

Quickly established 4th wall. touchy subject approached with humour. Character changes were clear. Interesting, clear & engaging use of gestus and narration. Impressed with the signs as they were very visual. Gameshow idea was interesting. Easily imagine lighting supporting the decisions; effectively staged. Use of levels made it easy for audience to focus and be drawn but not too much; reminding audience of theatrical setting. Would have liked to have seen swapping of characters to emphasise the mechanics of demonstrating character. Disagree; you don't have to use all of the techniques in one performance to make it effective as a Brechtian piece.

Yvette & Greg:

Engaged the whole time; i could see the truth. The change in Greg's emotion was truthful. Note to Greg; found stillness in beginning to be truthful but later the physicality wasn't there slipped into 'Greg hands'. Emotions were effective as were the changes. Atmosphere was strong in the beginning and then changed effectively; by looking at it i could feel it before speech happened. Natural, conversational dialogue; atmosphere of power struggle. Like watching a tennis match where we didn't know outcome. I did not feel the atmosphere, it felt like one character had simply forgotten lines rather than a filled silence. Interesting point; how can audience read an actor thinking or the character thinking? A small 'something' movement to show connection between characters. Chekhovian in the way it set up solid atmosphere in the beginning.

Sam & Jonathan:

Engaging and intriguing; the mixture of sign and spoken language. It could have been more truthful; ie when hearing aid came out it could have been part of the piece. Sam held tension well with his breath created empathy. Fishing rod disappeared? No it was put down but needed more detail. Sam's character had been calmer with violent outbursts in rehearsals. In final performance more mixed. Better not to be as vicious as in rehearsal; motivation was more truthful to keep the friendship. Jonathan strong posture showing introversion; could see emotion memory in the cowering. Something snapped in anger which may have come from emotion memory. Verbal and sign language combination very truthful. Relationship seemed to have history to it. Anger gesture for Sam could be more definite with arm movements. Physicality and breath showed attempt to control anger. Suspense until hearing aid moment  where energy dropped.  Last shout did not feel as truthful; the last pause too long. Disagree the sex gesture was more for audience rather than the truthfulness of the scene. What is difference between Stanislavski & Chekhov?

Laura & Gonzalo:

The relationship of siblings was clear. Not sure how old G's character was. 13? G started with high energy and that was engaging though too young? Laura's characterisation clear except the line 'i am the moustache', not as truthful that character believed that. Disagree that G played character too young; sibling relationship makes you behave younger. Felt connected with Laura's character and atmosphere had impact. Diction very clear by both. Couldn't really see Laura's face from where i was sitting. Too cruel a character though? Was the love there as well?

Paige & James:

Clear gestus made character swap very obvious. Loved the use of placards; time and place and also thoughts. James needed a little more work on diction. Paige performance strong with elements of comedy and consistency kept me interested. Another comment on diction; breaking fourth wall was effective. The song was very funny as was character swap. Good ending. A lot of Brechtian elements; most effective when adjusting each other's character. Issue for me Brecht supposed to make you think; did this piece do that? The piece did well ' actors concentrate on characters and audience concentrate on actors'. Brechtian moment was brilliant; the push away of James. The singing part was Brechtian and expressionist. Adjusting each others' gestus not as effective could be made more of.


Harry & Chris & Sam:

Well done Harry for dealing with change. Good idea to stage by the doorway but the squeeze disengaged me. Could have given yourself more space. But closeness good technique for giving feeling of changing room. Disagree; the spacing helped show relationships and motivation. As an actor, spacing made lines intimate. Portrayal of sexuality was very clear. Stanislavskian choice to not go for camp cliche choice. The second eye; if you were gay that is how you would be a gay man so that was truthful. Physicality demonstrated attraction and was believable. The leaning in for kiss was natural without hesitating. Truthful portrayal of character; physicality affecting your speech was truthful. I could see you were thinking about a million things.