Harmonia
Harmonia is the first play in the City of Wine cycle,
commissioned by Nightswimming in 2005.
Synopsis:
Harmonia is the daughter Ares and Aphrodite and husband to the mortal Cadmus, with whom she founds the city of Thebes. This play follows them from their first meeting in the kitchens of Mount Olympus, where Cadmus has been enslaved by Ares. Surrounded by the lusty desires and petty games of the gods, Cadmus wins the love of their daughter and as they flee Olympus, they vow to found a great city dedicated to equality and truth.
HARMONIA directed by DD Kugler
SFU Contemporary Arts, Burnaby
cgi.sfu.ca/~scahome/?q=theatre
February 25 – March 7, 2009
FAVOURITE LINES:
PARENT: Poor thing. The gods have noticed him. (14)
ZEUS:
Tell me, do you recall each grape you burst between your teeth when you were young?
But on your tongue the taste of grapes, all grapes, remains eternally.
So are these little fruits to me: all one, forever sweet. (63)
***
FAVOURITE IMAGE: the hot coal in the bowl
ATHENA: (Athena reaches into the fire and holds a small glowing coal in her hand. She squeezes it.)
This stone bears on one side the imprint of my thumb, the other side is smooth. I roll it in my empty bowl. . . (42)
Favourite Lines: “I was to find a certain cow, and follow it until it died.”(Cadmus) also “Before you came, my lord, we shared a bowl with one below, And in his shallow pool glimpsed a light of something new.” (Athena)
Favourite Image: Bowl begins to speak in one world and is heatd in the other.
Day 2: August 14, 2007
Questions for City of Wine: Harmonia for Concordia University, Theatre Department.
Please answer two of the following questions for Thursday, August 16th:
1) What is the play about?
2) From the perspective of the character you read,
what things can you figure out about the character?
3) Who is seen and unseen in the play? When and where
is it happening?
4? Describe 2 of the the UNNAMED Characters. What is
their relationship?
Favourite Images after Harmonia Reading:
-stories in the bowl
-the web in Ares’ room
-Zeus’ eyes
-when gods appear and disappear
-drinking around the fire with Bowl
-gymnastic act of sexuality
-spider trap in its own web
-mud
-”a little patience is much to ask to those who have immortality.”
-grapes between teeth (Zeus)
-coming and going of servants
-cracks
-image of the storm (fight between Zeus and Poseidon)
-Poseidon falling asleep in the trial
-the child likeness of the gods
-names of the Unnamed and the images of their names
-beginnings (beginning of Cadmea, beginning of time, beginning of the story of man)
-crack in mortality
-different ideas of love
-relationship between gods and humans
Favourite Line:
Cadmus
And we shall name our town Cadmea,
After me.
**We enjoyed this line. Many laughed.
1) “Harmonia” is about a web of relationships and experiences in constant change moving through the twists and turns of everyday exsistence and survival within the confines of their society’s classist pyramid. These relationships and experiences are tremendously affected by clashes of EGOs that occur quite commonly within their ancient society depicting the clear division of class, culture, etc. due to the circumstances of that moment. This play focused on the remarkable relationship between Cadmus and Harmonia, a mortal and an immortal goddess who secumb to their hearts rather than the expectations of the society around them. They allow their two distinct worlds to combine into one to achieve the love, truth, and equality they desire and face the consequences when doing so.
2)Poseidon has two distinct sides to his character; the pacifist and the warrior. For Poseidon, “drink” is a favorable crutch that blurs the boarders of the classist pyramid he belongs to allowing some understanding and relating to those that are mortal. ie: Drinking with Bowl and the Gods. Showing empathy for Cadmus and Harmonia.
Poseidon has the huge ego of a god and repeatedly clashes with the egos of other gods such as Athena and Zeus, but does so in a way that is using his power to stand up for those that have less power and are less ridiculous and of course most of all for his personal benefit.
Nevertheless, Poseidon is a listener (when he is coherent). He regards what is being said by mortal or god and takes note. He loves being a god but deep down he knows (but would probably never admit it) that it lacks truth, love and equality, therefore never feeling complete. Drinking fills these gaps, arguing and fighting fills these gaps, and performing outlandish godly acts fills these gaps.
What I got out of the reading of HARMONIA was that it might represent the beginning of secularism. Where human kind is taking the first steps away from living a life of servitude and worship of the gods and towards a life of love for each other. The relationship between Cadmus and Harmonia is not so much about equality, but of choice. That one could finally make their own choices, but that they must deal with the consequences attached to them. But, this could all have been manufactured by the gods themselves and fate has won out again, only dressed a little differently.
I read the character of BLOOD and I took him to be middle management. He seemed to be in charge of the others, or at least thought he was, but that he’s still subservient to the will of his master. I think he’s got a thing for Parent, but she might have something going on with Cloth. I’m not sure if this arc shows up in some of the other plays in the cycle, but I was not completely sure what was happening there. It’s seemed a little vague but I’m not sure if that’s because there’s something missing in the text, my reading of it or is this part device (a hint/foreshadowing) or standard structure when dealing with such a large story arc and that all things will make themselves known in the end.
1. What is the Play about?
The play explores the contradictions that exists between the omnipotent power of the gods and the gentleness of relationships, and the nuances of small moments of time: touch, sound, smell, etc. It compares the great distances attached to immortality with the precious little time we have together here on earth as mortals. The play encourages us to be bold in our choices and love passionately. When Harmonia talks about seeing the universe in Zeus’ eyes, I thought “how beautiful”. But when she went on to speak about the flickering flame she saw when looking into Cadmus’ eyes, I thought “how beautiful, despite”. Despite what we are up against, the brevity of life, she saw in him, what is a common wonderful characteristic we all share: that desire to live, much like a flower has to grow, to move forward through time and to continue to burn on despite the sometimes cold wind of being human.
2. From the perspective of the character you read,
what things can you figure out about the character?
I read for Cadmus. He seemed quite innocent, floating in and out with the tide. Although, I guess that’s the way things go when you live under the gods. However I wanted him to fight more for what he wanted. I wanted him to challenge fate, challenge the gods. Although at second glance there are some very profound moments on his part, where he speaks his mind and makes a stance. But for someone so deeply in love he seems too aware of everything, to in control. What distinguishes mortals from immortals is a mortals’ sense of the present: That knowledge of the present must raise the stakes somewhat shouldn’t it? Doesn’t it? He’s all those fiery imperfections that exist in mortals. He combines all his flaws and traits to focus on winning his love.
All this to say, I think this is a wonderful script, an exciting read, with pace and it filled me with exciting questions and ideas throughout.
“Harmonia” is a play which shows the audience that love can conquer all things, even the mighty gods of Ancient Greece. At least, we would like to believe so. This is perhaps a naive reading of the play, but the apparent playfulness and loveable characters made “Harmonia” a pleasure to read. It often toyed with and teetered on the edge of cheesy romance comedies of today, with the lovers being completely enthralled with one another after only having just met. This is especially clear in the end of the play where it is leading up to the “happily ever after moment” with the ‘unnamed’ characters, Cadmus and Harmonia. They are all dreaming of a place where everything is ‘sunshine and butterflies’ all the time; a fairy tale place. However, Dickens ensures that we do not become too wrapped up in the romance and utopia of the moment when Cadmus ends the play with “And we shall name the town Cadmea, after me”. After all of the heroism seen from Cadmus this extreme comedic moment brings the audience back to the reality that indeed this is only a play and perhaps love does not exactly always win, but it is certainly nice to imagine. And that is exactly what theatre is meant to do; let us dream.
I read for GLASS in our reading of “Harmonia”. I felt that glass was the quintessential bothersome younger servant of the play. GLASS is the daughter of FIREWOOD and WATER. She constantly throws in small one-liners to try and get people irritated. These remarks reminded me of the irritating younger sibling of families. However, often her remarks went unnoticed by the other characters, which added to the sense that often she herself goes unnoticed and so is the reason for her often scathing remarks. However, her humour is always with good intentions as she never conveys the idea that she desires to hurt anyone with her remarks. She is a character the audience loves to see as, due to her flighty nature, no one ever quite knows exactly what she will say.
For me Harmonia it is a story of freewill. The slaves prefer to take the risk of being chased out. For them a life of servility, it is not a good life. They have chosen to be themselves in the real world, with all that it may imply: wars, diseases,etc; intead of lying to themselves. It is also a rebellion against the “status quo” at the Olympus. It’s finally about love, understood it in a whole romantic sense.Love gives the illusion of a better life with peace and equity.
I read the character of Athena, she seemed to have a goal since the beginning of the play. She is politically very smart. She choses Cadmus and makes him following the cow. She defends the lovers pretending not to defend them because she wants the birth of Thebes.Do not forget she, in Greek mythology, is the goddess of civilization.
I think Bowl, Poseidon and Athena are seen and unseen. The are unseen when Cadmus and Harmonia enter into the kitchen and they talk and start to flirt, and become closer. When they are almost making love, the gods and Bowl show up suddenly, because that is a forbidden relationship.
I think at the beginning of the play there’s a conflict of power between BOWL, who rules the kitchen and BLOOD, who rules upstairs. Both of them dream of being like the gods and never ever die. However, BOWL and BLOOD secretly dream with their freedom and they do not hesitate in joining Cadmus and Harmonia at the end of the play, even if one day they will have to face the death.
Most of my summer reading has had something to do with consumerism, so it’s a topic that is in the front of my mind at the moment. As a result, the theme that struck me most in Harmonia is the tension between consumption and creation. One the one hand are the gods, who have it all, and by nature can never be satisfied. They are often callous, petty, and take pleasure in the suffering of others, simply because they desire entertainment. On the other hand, the mortals try to derive pleasure when they can, in fleeting moments, aware not only of their mortality, but their subservience to the gods. This mortality allows them the pleasure of idealism and excitement about creating a future for many generations from a bit of mud. The Utopia envisioned by the mortals is punctured by Cadmus’ last line, which hints at the fall we all know follows pride.
I read for Aphrodite, who suffers from a particular heartsickness. The goddess of love, she has been having an affair with Ares, the god of war for quite sometime (at least the lifetime of their daughter, Harmonia), much to the ire of her husband, Hephaestus. She is modest about her affair, though the entire household is aware of it, many of the gods do not. She suffers a great humiliation when her indiscretion is put on display by Hephaestus in front of the gods, especially Harmonia. She is hurt by Harmonia’s shame of her, and also deeply concerned that she is to blame for what she considers confusion in Harmonia’s love for Cadmus. She defends Harmonia in the trial by offering herself to Zeus (though it seems something she would also enjoy). She is passionate and governed by emotion, not reason. She is easily heartbroken.
2. From the perspective of the character you read for (Eris), what information did the text give you about this character?
Eris is a thrill seeking and mischiefous goddess. She is a trouble maker who constantly pits people against eachother (gods and mortals alike) for her own entertainment. In other words, she is cunning, manipulative, impatient, and a sore loser. She reminds me of a spoiled brat. The character’s lines showed a quick wit and sarcasm, as well as a keen desire to be deeply involved in gossip and scandal.
4. In reference to the unnamed, who are they and what is thier relationship to one another? (Describe one relationship).
The unnamed are the mortals involved in greek myths that are always present but rarely named. In “Harmonia” they are Bowl, Blood, Glass, Parent, Cloth, Firewood, and Water. These characters are the slaves of the gods. They exist to provide for the gods’ comfort, amusement, and pleasure. One family tree that exists within this group of the unnamed is that of Water, Firewood, and Glass. Water(M) and Firewood(F) are husband and wife and their offspring is Glass(F).
1. The question was ‘for you – what is the play about?’
Although I enjoyed the play immensely, I was not caught up in the love story at all. Which I feel was what the play was, on one level, supposed to be about. I saw HARMONIA as the groundwork, and explanation for the pieces that follow. It sets the scene, introduces the characters, and explains the origins of Cadmea. (The introduction of the story that is City of Wine if you will)
2. The question was ‘what did I learn about Athena from this play?’
The answer: – not much.
The play offers little character development on any of the characters, Athena included. I assume that this is, in part because of the style it is written in, and in part because it is, in essence, only chapter one of a seven-part story.
Athena is portrayed as:
-The most intelligent (by far) of the gods
-A mortal lover/sympathizer
-She seems morally driven by mortal ideas of right and wrong, and yet manipulates all of the gods, her father and king included, seemingly without remorse. She is also prone to just stand by and not interfere in many unjust activities. It is as if she has a technical understanding of mortal morality, and sometimes applies it to a situation, though without any emotional involvement.
-She thinks quite highly of herself and feels her judgement is always right
What I felt about Athena:
All of the other gods are remarkable idiots, (ranging from the mentality of children to that of the senile elderly) so in comparison Athena is brilliant. But as she is the goddess of wisdom, she is meant to be a highly intelligent being, and in this play comes off only as on par with the average mortal. Her machinations are obvious from quite early, and I was left feeling that if she were to try and pull a stunt like that on earth she would be found out embarrassingly early. It feels like a high-school graduate is manipulating a flock of grade school children. There are no surprises in her logic, nothing of the goddess about her.
1) While the characters within the play experience change in a number of pertinent ways, these changes are ethereal and sometimes dubious—when the main conflict is resolved and Harmonia and Cadmus are allowed to be together, the spectre of death is ever present in reminding them of their union’s impermance. The same can be said of The Unnamed, who seem to be accompanying the couple to the new city only to serve in the same roles they once did for the gods. The only permanent human condition the play posits is the eternal cycle of human folly.
Despite all his ordeals, our protagonist Cadmus is not humbled and does not seem to gain any greater knowledge through his experiences. His vanity is fingerposted when he states “Men will invoke my name for luck in love, for no-one, man or god will ever have as much as I,” and this condition has not been tempered by his journey. Throughout the course of the play he has gone from being a prince, to a slave, has found love, been given his freedom back, and none of these experiences holds any transformative power. The play ends ominously, with Cadmus, Harmonia and The Unnamed setting off to build a new utopian society, where they will most likely repeat the mistakes of the gods whom they abhor.
2) Ares, god of war, is represented in Harmonia with little deviation from his standard mythological persona. He is a chest-thumping war monger, violent, and apparently quite the sexual gymnast. The most interesting part in the play for the character is when Ares is caught in the web—it is the only time he is vulnerable within the piece, and unfortunately his character disappears as soon as he is released. Though he is one of the primary antagonists, his presence is mostly felt from off stage. I’m not sure if this adds subtlety to the play or misses the mark for providing a greater sense of conflict. He is a vital character, as Harmonia may not have fancied Cadmus if he were not such an antagonist to her father. He is also, seemingly, one of the primary antagonists for The Unnamed as well as the happy couple, and no change would come about without his imposing authority there to present a challenge. Thus, one should never underestimate the transformative power of evil.
Question #1: What was the play about, for me?
To me the play is about beginnings and endings, but only temporary endings, like a never ending circle that is at times run by fate but at the same time not limited to fate. By this I mean that by the end I felt like everything that happened had sort of been hinted at in the beginning. Such as Athena’s role in Cadmus’ fate, how he was asked to do something for her, which got him in trouble with Ares, which lead him to be a slave to Ares then meet the love of his life Harmonia, and eventually, after many ups and downs, sentenced to start a new town with her. Therefore, looking at it in the end I felt like, perhaps, that was what Athena had wanted to happen all along. However, how much in control could Athena have been? Could she really control them falling in love, and so on? So, again there’s this feeling that it was fated to happen but, at the same time, human beings are unpredictable and so many things could have happened to change that outcome. Leaving me with the question how much was up to fate? And is fate an issue in this play? In any case, beyond the fate issue, is my original feeling that this was a play about beginnings and never-ending endings. I feel that it is important how, as an audience member, there is a feeling of being introduced to the characters, of getting to know them but not completely. By the end I felt like I had had a window opened into the lives of these characters, I understood them a little but there was so much left unanswered and this intrigued me. Especially, in regards to the Gods because I love Greek mythology and feel like I know some of the main gods pretty well, but this play left me wondering how much I really knew. For example, in the case of Aphrodite who towards the end had real moments of compassion and selflessness towards her daughter, Harmonia. I had never really encountered that side of Aphrodite in the many myths I have read or seen, and that little bit of humanity really endeared me to her more and made me want to learn more. I think that is important, especially with the gods because their callousness and childlikeness can only get them so far and eventually something more needs to be shown if an audience is going to want to continue to watch them.
Question #2: For the character I read, what info did the text give me? Where was I confused?
I read the part of Firewood and was able to understand a few things from the script. First the facts: Firewood is female- a woman, not a girl. She’s married to Water and they have a child together, who I am pretty sure is Glass. Firewood is in charge of collecting and bringing in wood from outside in order to keep the fire inside always to Ares’ liking. However, I do not think that she tends to the fire because she made a comment to her daughter, Glass, about Glass having to tend the fire some days. As she is married, I believe that she is older than some of the other slaves. Also, in the way that she speaks she sounds more mature than many of the others, although what sounds like maturity could instead be a sense of acceptance to what they have to do as unnamed slaves and a desire to make the best of it. This sense of somewhat acceptance could also be because she is fortunate to have her husband and child with her, which makes her less alone in the house than the other unnamed. Although, this in no way means that she enjoys her work as there are several moments where she comments about her job and as a reader I could tell she found her job tiring and tedious, such as the line where she says “Always more wood” to Hephaestus. With that being said, she wants her daughter to be free from this life of serving the Gods. This love for her daughter and husband and fellow unnamed whom she considers friends, makes her brave at times where she needs to be. It also makes her inclined to readily give them advice and caution them when they are on the verge of stepping out of line. I also feel like she is less afraid of the Gods, as can be seen when she is the only one who will say Aphrodite’s name. She sees things that the other unnamed do not, or are not willing to admit, and she states it for all to hear, but not in an arrogant way but simply as a fact that all should know. In all, she seems warm and to the point and willing to fight, like her name implies.
For me, what is the play about?
The play expresses the fundamental human emotion that is love. Without the essential element that makes us mortals–our finite existence–love would be meaningless. Love is as important, if not more important, than life due to its fragility. Since it is intrinsically tied to existence, love is as fragile as life: Both can simply disappear at any moment without the slightest notice. This is indeed what makes our existence and love so precious. In spite of the infinitude that the gods experience in almost all respects, one thing they cannot truly experience is true love, since its true value and importance stems from its fragile and finite bond with our mortal existence.
Who is seen and unseen, where are they and what are they doing?
The gods have the ability to be seen or unseen to mortals and to other gods. They can also make mortals be unseen to other mortals and gods, such as when Bowl is talking and drinking with Athena, Eris and Poseidon and he cannot be seen by Cadmus and Harmonia.
Since the story takes place in a mythological time where gods and humans lived together, the gods needed a way to protect their privacy, and be able to see and observe without being seen. This is why they sometimes choose to be seen and sometimes unseen. When they choose to be unseen, they are usually talking or relaxing amongst themselves not wanting to be disturbed by mortals. On the other hand, when mortals say or do something which bothers or displeases the gods, they usually show themselves in order to interact with the mortals.
Who is one of the unNamed and what is his/her relationship?
Bowl, one of the unNamed, is a servant to Ares, the God of War. In the palace, he is the head of the kitchen staff. He delegates jobs to the other unNamed characters: stoking the fire, serving, preparing food, etc. Bowl’s job in the kitchen is equivalent to Blood’s job on the main floor. The relationship between Blood and Bowl is not a seemingly amicable one. Blood tries to control Bowl’s part of the house. This sense of entitlement on Blood’s part likely stems from the fact that Blood has a more glamorous job than Bowl. Because of the fact that he is a High Priest to Hera, Bowl is welcomed and respected by the gods who visit the palace and allowed to drink their nectar, an honour that is rarely, is ever, allowed to servants.
For you, what is the p[lay about?
For me, this play is about a search for freedom. For different characters this means different things. For the parents of Glass, it was written that freedom was being able to have a child and raise her. For Harmonia and Cadmus, freedom is the ability to love openly. As we see in the end section of the play, for all of the unNamed, freedom is the right to live in a truly democratic and open society on which the foundations of the world that we live in today are rooted where there is a sense of commonality, safety, equality, peace, and happiness.
“Harmonia” is about the meeting of two people who eventually fall in love due cannot be together due to the fact that they have one extremely big difference between them. Harmonia is a goddess and Cadmus is a mortal. After a brief trial Harmonia is turned into a mortal and is given the liberty of being with Cadmus. I was given the impression that Harmonia was in fact no completely content with this decision she has made. She didn’t realize the power she was about to loose until she lost it. Harmonia suddenly seemed to regret her decision. She was faced with death which was something she never had to face before. This play reminded me of many modern day romantic comedies and also Romeo and Juliet.
I was playing Harmonia and the things I retained from her character were that she is the grand daughter of Zeus and the daughter of Aphrodite and Ares. She is someone very bold and courage to have done what she did going against the gods to be with Cadmus. I found it to me be extremely ironic that she is the goddess of harmony who disturbed the regular everyday routine for her love.
Responses to Harmonia:
Q# 2) From the perspective of your character, what were you able to learn about that character?
R# 2) With Harmonia, the first play of Ned Dickens’ Theban play series, I read from the perspective of Water, one of the Unnamed. Water is a male character, a part of the reworked Greek chorus cast, and servant in the palace of the god Ares; in the play, however, the character of Water is barely revealed through his short, intermittent lines and actually seems to be more of a “filler” character without a strong presence. As his name might suggest, Water serves to fill the cracks in the Unnameds’ dialogue to ensure a steady interaction, but the character himself does not present any definite form. In regards to his function within the setting, Water is the servant responsible for the divine nectar, a drink exclusive to the gods. Page 26, following onto page 27, reads:
(BOWL scoops up several bottles of Nectar in the rush. GLASS watches this exchange carefully.)
WATER
I will bring those.
It is my job.
Water’s position is also relayed upon his first entrance onto the stage, which reads: “Enter BOWL and WATER, who carries Nectar” (10). Besides his task as servant Water is generally a non-descript character, except for a few slight incidences where Water appears to possess some qualities of wisdom. When Blood is complaining about the gods’ voracious appetites and laments, “What hope for us when they are so?” (51), Water responds, “A little more perhaps” (51), as he recognizes the gods’ current fixation on food places the Unnamed away from their attention and thus their potential ire.
Q#4) Who are the Unnamed and what are some of the relationships between them?
R#4) The Unnamed in Harmonia are the servants of Ares, the god of war, who join together to build a town with Cadmus and Harmonia; however, there exists previous ties between the Unnamed. One immediate relation lies with Water, Firewood, and Glass who appear to be a family. Water is most likely Glass’ father, while Firewood is her mother and wife to Water. Some of these details are revealed towards the beginning of the play when Water commands Glass to follow Bowl’s orders and she objects with “But father-” (11); additionally, when Firewood later enters with Hephaestus in disguise, Glass greets her as “mother” and Water says, “Greetings, my love” (18); immediately after, Firewood reprimands Glass with “Daughter, respect” (23); and finally, near the end of the play, Firewood confirms her marriage to Water when she asks him, “Come, husband, friend” (112).
Welcome to the first “documentation” blog post from SFU! A few of us from several of the participating schools have taken on the task of recording our schools’ processes, and keeping the wider City of Wine community up to date on our work, questions, challenges, and discoveries, and so here’s where you can look to find the latest on where SFU is at with Harmonia. I hope to post here regularly, along with my classmates, and we all look forward to hearing feedback and questions about our work and ideas from all of you out there, and to getting news about your own processes.
As an introduction, we’re now about halfway through our fall term Playmaking class, which is an annual course dedicated to research and exploration for the spring mainstage production (in this case, Harmonia). Many of us in the class first encountered Harmonia in our summer intensive class this past May and June, which brought dance, music, film, visual art, and theatre students together to explore Harmonia’s challenges and to use those challenges as a basis for creating interdisciplinary work and compositions. This semester’s playmaking class involves a more specific focus on the story of Harmonia itself, and an exploration of Harmonia’s relationship with the other plays in the cycle (we’ve read five of the seven so far). We’re also developing a common studio vocabulary for ourselves using Viewpoints techniques and singing – this vocabulary works as the kicking-off point for a lot of the composition work we do in our explorations.
So far, one big idea that we’ve been working with is collective creation of a character. We’re really interested in what happens when several people take on a character, rather than the usual solo exploration. We began by each taking on one god character and one unnamed character (there are about 30 of us in the class, so 3 – 5 people per character), and writing a short monologue for each (monologues to be posted either here or on the facebook page this week). We then took these monologues into Viewpoints improvisation – each group made up of everyone who was working on the same character – to see what we could discover about each character using multiple actors. This was quite an unusual luxury – seeing a character interact with him or herself, before the usual process of seeing a character interact with other characters. This work was an interesting way of literally exploring the characters’ different facets, of physically manifesting the fact that characters never have just one side. It was possible to see how different and even completely opposite impulses from the various actors could actually be coming from the same source, and how rich the characters became because of these kinds of contradictions. And as an actor, it doesn’t really allow you room to become possessive about a character – rather, it’s an opportunity to give away all you have, and to take what is useful or what intrigues you from others. (It seems to me that there’s a connection here as well between this work and the community of the unnamed in the plays, where everything is shared, even their stories.) And we felt that this kind of exploration is especially useful given the larger context of the City of Wine cycle itself, where many actors over the course of the cycle are going to be playing the same character. Just think how much each different portrayal will add to its counterparts, and to our understanding(s) of the character as a whole.
It’s true, as Leora said recently on the Laius page – there’s no motivation like a little nationwide publicity!
The remainder of the Harmonia playmaking class, which I last wrote about in October, was spent in delving deeper into the play itself. After focusing largely on character, in particular the idea of collective creation of a character, we moved into composition work on selected scenes of the play, drawing on the Viewpoints and singing vocabulary we had been developing. In tackling these scenes the same way we had the characters – often working on multiple versions of the same moment – we began to get as rich an understanding of the play as of the people in it. Because the format of the class meant we didn’t have to limit ourselves to a single interpretation, all possibilities, even the really out-there ones, were free to be on the table. (I like working this way because it presents the challenge of seeing how many elements of all these great choices can be present in any one moment. In other words, how can discoveries we make help us to continue to widen rather than narrow the play’s scope? Can we say yes to one choice without having to say no to another?)
The class ended in early December with auditions and casting – we came back from the holidays as a performing ensemble of twelve actors and two musicians. We are now a little over a week into our rehearsal process, working with a new draft of the script, and so far have been continuing in the same explorational spirit as the playmaking class. Our major focus has been on physicality – creating a large and wide-ranging physical vocabulary for each character to draw from (seven of our performers are playing two characters each, a god and an unnamed, and so have been developing two different vocabularies). We’ve done a variety of exercises (mainly Viewpoints-oriented or –inspired) to help us in this, ranging from creating character actions using tempo, duration, and topography; to creating a physical score in response to images we chose for our characters; to creating shapes to express different tensions such as beauty/grotesque, liberty/boundaries, innocence/experience, desire/repulsion. (It was interesting to place these tensions, which I think of as very much of the body of the character, alongside Leora’s great opposition list on the Laius page, which seems to be more about the tensions of the world. I wonder what could happen when world tensions find their way into the body, and vice versa?)
We’ve then incorporated the physical vocabulary that’s resulted from these exercises into other work, specifically into brief self-written character monologues, and into Viewpoints improvisation. The Viewpoints work has been especially interesting – we’ve been working with encounters between only two or three characters at a time to get a stronger sense of the individual relationships at work in the play. Isolating the encounters like this not only makes it easier to notice new elements (such as the sense of vulnerability in the relationship between Harmonia and Aphrodite, or the feeling of disorientation as well as joy in Cadmus and Harmonia’s first meeting), but also reminds us that that clarity of relationship needs to be maintained even when there are many other characters on stage.
Our other focus this week has been music, both vocal work and instruments – like the Laius group, the ensemble will be responsible for the sound in the show. Our music director and composer James has set many of the play’s lines to music, which we’ve begun learning this week, and our other musician and instrument-inventor Aaron has been introducing us to the instruments he’s created for this world (photos will hopefully follow, as they’re really too fantastic to describe). But the physical element isn’t absent here – rhythm patterns and exercises, breath work, and bringing character bodies to singing and playing the instruments are all a part of creating sound.
And so, with a solid week of physical, vocal, and instrumental research behind us, we turn this week to the script itself. Stay tuned!
It’s Lauren here from SFU, playing Harmonia’s Athena. I’m currently enjoying researching a fascinating goddess and thought I’d share some of my questions.
So. Athena. A fully-armed virgin goddess who loves taking part in the affairs of men. Bright-eyed Athena. Virgin goddess. Sounds very unflawed. Very austere. And yet…does this mean Athena is completely devoid of any physical desire whatsoever? What then is her compulsion to meddle in Cadmus’ affairs? Is her saving of Cadmus and Harmonia a desire for what is right and good or a desire not to have her original plans for the city of Cadmea thwarted by Ares? (and what ARE those original plans anyways?)
On a physical note, I’m looking for some kind of weakness in Athena to convey physically as a contrast to her strength and self-control. I usually find characters more compelling when they AREN’T completely mentally and physically balanced. And I think it’s there in the words and now I’m looking for it in the body.
So that’s what I’m up to at the moment. How about the you? I’m really curious to know how it’s going with the rest of the cycle. Don’t keep us in the dark!
Also…I didn’t mean to write “the you” in the last paragraph. I think I either meant to say just “you” or “the rest of you”.
Sigh. This is why we proofread.
I hesitate to offer a direct answer to your question (says he as if he has one). I think you’re right, it’s “in the words”, where else would it be? I do think you’re on the right track. None of these Olympians are anywhere near perfect Perhaps if you look into PENTHEUS to see where her relationship with Harmonia goes….? (That’s an idea not a coded hint)
Two more weeks of rehearsal have now passed since my last post (where is the time going??), and in that time we’ve worked our way steadily through the entire play. The process has been very open so far – we haven’t been setting any blocking as such, but rather have been working with our good old friends, the Viewpoints, to explore each scene. Our method was to run each scene or section several times while doing open viewpoints/movement improvisation, and see what possibilities presented themselves in terms of shape, spatial relationship, etc. Essentially, we’ve been approaching the play with an abstract rather than a more literal sensibility, but still working for the same clarity of relationship and situation you’d find in naturalistic work. This method has given us expressive and dynamic scenes full of movement and shape that we can now start to structure and transform in a way that fits the play.
Transformation has been an important theme in other ways as well. Our assistant director Natalie has been working with the seven two-character performers on their transformations from god to unnamed and vice versa. It’s been important to spend a lot of time on this because not only do these character switches occur quite frequently, there’s also not often time for the actors to leave the stage as one character and re-enter as another. This means the transformation has to be very clear in the shape and gesture work of the actors. They will be helped out, though, by their costumes – our costume designer Mariko is working with the idea of transformation in her designs. We had our first design presentation from her last week, which was very exciting. Her plan is to use earth magnets to create costumes that can be simply and quickly transformed. A couple of mock-ups she has already made are an half-apron for the character of Bowl, which is lengthened after a quick pull on the magnets to a sumo-style smock, and a full apron for Firewood, whose bottom half is flipped around from the front to the back to create a kind of peacock-tail for Hera. We’re now using these costumes in rehearsal, and will be working on ways to incorporate the changing of the costume into the bigger movement/shape of the character change – in other words, not trying to hide the practical act of moving a costume piece around, but making it a visible and important part of the transformation.
The transformations of unnamed to god and vice versa are really coming along; in large part to the vocabulary kugler and I have created with the ensemble that consists of shape, tempo, spatial relationship, levels, duration, topography and repetition. Each performer has worked to organize a specific physical code for him or her that makes the transformation logical. For example, working with lines (shape) and a fast tempo when playing an unnamed and then transitioning to curves (shape) and a sustained tempo when playing a god. Topography has been especially useful in determining a character’s floor pattern for his or her entrances/exits.
I have also been working on developing the relationships between characters, including those that are not verbally explicit in terms of having a solitary scene but integral to the dramatic structure and context of the story, i.e.- Zeus and Hera.
A big question I am currently playing with is how a physical score can highlight the rhythm[s] already present in the text.
(Dear readers: please imagine this entry was posted on February 8, as was my original intention. Sigh.)
Once again, over the past two weeks of rehearsal, we’ve worked our way once more through the play – this time concentrating more on setting repeatable blocking, and also on integrating the vocal and instrument work we’ve so far been working on separately. It was interesting to note how the process and our energy shifted as this new phase of rehearsal began. Because the first few weeks were so open and we were free to really experiment with our choices, it was something of a surprise to start working towards a repeatable structure, and for the first few rehearsals of this second workthrough it felt like we were much less willing to take risks and work abstractly. I’m not sure why this happens – is it the feeling that now we’re “doing a play” whereas before we were “doing an exercise”? Does it have to be an either/or situation?
One section that was particularly challenging in this respect was the trial scene – it’s a long and dense part of the play, and for our initial workthrough of it the scene felt quite flat and static and we were having trouble finding drive and intent. But we hit on a great strategy to work through this rough patch – we developed about 7 or 8 tableaux for various key moments of the scene, and then worked on transitioning between them, first just finding the movement with no text, and then layering in the text. This was very helpful because it gave us a variety of stage pictures, and out of the movement from one picture to the next came a lot more intent and energy. It also helped us start thinking about how to establish the gods, from the very beginning, as beings of power. The stakes and energy in this scene will come in part from believing that, whatever their goofiness, pettiness, or attitudes of benign indifference or mild interest, any of these gods could crush Cadmus and Harmonia into dust in an instant and without a second thought. And that tension is one thing that will make the gods interesting to watch throughout the play.
Challenges aside, we did get much more comfortable over the course of these two weeks with keeping our choices open and strong even as repeatability became more important. And the integration of sound helped with this as well. We did a lot of quite specific instrumental work with the kitchen scenes at the beginning of the play – we’re working with rhythm patterns played on some of the instruments as the “kitchen tasks” that the unnamed do. This has meant a lot of concentration in order to play in a specific meter while talking…but we’re getting there! We’re also developing a kind of instrumental theme or soundtrack for each god character and incorporating it, to various degrees, during scenes the gods appear in. It’s interesting to see the show coming together so much based on sound – especially because we have very little in the way of set or props (besides the instruments themselves), the sound is a big part of creating the world of this play.
(Dear readers: please imagine that this entry was posted on February 15, as was my original intention. Double sigh.)
We moved into the theatre on Monday (up till now, we’ve been working in our studio space), which, as always, was a bit of a jar – our theatre space is really big and full of crazy orange seating from the 60s, and it takes a lot of energy to fill up. But after a couple of days of working in it we’re getting more comfortable, as stage spacing issues are clarified and traffic flow in our “backstage” area works itself out. A thing to still be worked on, though, is figuring out the volume balance for scenes where instruments and text are happening at the same time (and there are a lot of these!).
On Wednesday and Thursday we had Rob Kitsos, a professor in the dance department, come in and work with us. It was very helpful at this point to have someone new in the room – we’re all getting to that point of being too close to the work, so it was good to have someone else take a look and offer feedback, especially someone from a different background and with a different perspective. Rob was very interested in clarifying some of the formal elements of our movement and stage pictures, and it was a lot of fun to return to some of the more abstract work of early in the rehearsal period. Also, it was very interesting to see how much clarity these formal choices brought to moments of the show that were muddy or confusing. Clarity of movement, even in a purely formal/abstract way, can clarify intent, too – it doesn’t always have to be the other way around.
Saturday and Sunday we did full runs for the first time (wahoo!). It felt quite strange at first to put the show all together – because we’ve been working them separately for so long, acts one and two feel very different from each other, and so to put them together made for a very different experience from our work up to this point. But I know that that will change as we get more used to working the show as a single unit, and to finding throughlines that carry the characters and the story through the entire play rather than just one act at a time. Steven Hill, one of our theatre professors, came to Sunday’s run, and again, it was very helpful to have feedback from someone new. He had some interesting ideas about the mortal body vs. the god body which we’ve started to play around with.
(Ha ha! This one is actually a real-time post!)
Runs, runs, and more runs this week! And each time, more things start clicking into place. The feeling of disjointedness between the two acts has been cleared up, and we’re starting to relax, find the flow of the piece, and enjoy ourselves. We had our tech weekend this weekend which, while long, is always exciting – somehow, I always find that lighting brings a real sense of cohesiveness to a piece, as well as the feeling that things are “actually happening!”. We have a preview show tonight (for some of the first year acting classes), and then official opening tomorrow, and we’re really ready for the feedback and energy that only an audience can provide. Yay!
Congratulations to all on team Harmonia on their opening tomorrow, from all of us at Studio 58. Break legs and Knock ‘em dead. We look forward to seeing the show on Saturday.
I must say that this whole process is going by so quickly, I never want it to end. I look forward to rehearsal and shows everyday (it gives me a reason to be nymph;)and get away with it)
I must say one of the most incredible things about this whole process is being able to read all the seven plays and when we go to Toronto I can not wait to see them on the stage. I know Toronto is still a couple months from now, but I can’t wait!