Season Seven: Week 8

Tuesday

 

Tonight we welcomed in a number of new and returning ensemble members. It felt so good to have those familiar faces back in the room, and it was so exciting to start to work with our new participants.

We began with a fun name game and then circled up to ask our traditional three questions:

What brings you to Shakespeare?
What do you hope to get out of this experience?
What is the gift that you bring?

Those of us who’ve answered before took part again along with the new and returning members. There are so many of us right now that it took a while, but it was great to hear from people and to learn more about where they’re coming from. Some common themes were:

  • A desire to try something new.
  • Gaining confidence and knowledge.
  • A space that doesn't feel like prison.
  • The bonding that happens in the ensemble.

One woman who joined the group in September went particularly in depth about what brings her to our ensemble. "I started Shakespeare to try something new - I don't want to go back to the old things. It's brought me out a lot. I’m 33 and been cooking meth for 13 years. This is a big part of my life, and I wanna be somebody. I want to know what I like. I wanna stand out, and not as a meth cook or a dope fiend. I want to shine."

An ensemble member who is now in her third year responded to the first question by sighing sarcastically, shaking her head, and saying, "I don't know why I'm back. I try and quit every week." Everyone laughed. She told the story of how she was signed up for Shakespeare initially by mistake but showed up anyway. That was when we were toying with the idea of holding auditions, and she showed up ready to perform - but she was the only one who did. Several of us egged her on to do the hilarious impression she did for us that first day. It was just as funny as ever.

With the time we had left, some ensemble members requested that we play an improv game that we’ve played in the past. I’ve honestly never felt comfortable playing this one – it has some very real potential triggers – but group after group has agreed unanimously that they were okay with it.

Tonight, however, a few people left rather than play. Those who stayed had a lot of fun, but I felt conflicted to say the least. I pulled aside the ensemble member who’s been in the group the longest and asked what she thought. She agreed with me that the game should probably be retired to avoid making people uncomfortable. I’m going to try to figure out a solution that will strike a balance between the folks who love the game and those who don’t even want to be in the room while it’s being played.

Even though the night ended in a way that was not ideal, it really was a great meeting. All of our ensemble members are there to do positive work, and I’m very excited to get everyone all caught up and continue our exploration of the play.
 

Friday

 

It was cold and rainy all day, continuing into the evening. As a result, there were a number of absences and early departures. Even so, we got some good work done.

We first caught up the new members in the room on the play’s plot, characters, and themes. We then read and discussed Act IV scene ii, in which Lady Macduff and her son (and everyone else in the castle, off stage) are massacred.

Things really were off. I had been at Parnall that afternoon, where things felt the same way, so I think this was due, at least in part, to the weather. Our conversation about the scene didn’t go too far in depth.

There was some disagreement about the tone of the conversation between mother and child – how compassionate vs. how contentious should it be? There was also a question about whether the murderer in this scene is the same one who killed Banquo. We don’t know – that’s something we’ll explore.

There was also a lot of discussion about who this messenger (who warns Lady Macduff of trouble coming) is and where he comes from. Some of us think he lives at Macduff’s castle and simply got ahead of the people coming to kill everyone. Others think it’s the Third Murderer from an earlier scene. And others think the messenger is actually one of the witches. That led to a brief discussion about how we’ll need to compromise as an ensemble in our concept of the balance between the supernatural and the psychological – it’s going to affect casting quite a bit.

At this point, we seemed to hit a bit of a wall. One ensemble member suggested a new word game that she could teach us. It was really fun and definitely lightened the mood.

It seemed that there were going to be a number of absences next Tuesday, including those of facilitators, so the ensemble voted to cancel our meeting that day. We’ll pick back up again next Friday.

Season Seven: Week 7

Tuesday

Written by Frannie.

We spent our entire time tonight exploring Act III scene iv, in which the ghost of Banquo visits a banquet hosted by the Macbeths. We read through it, made sure everyone was on the same page in terms of plot, and then the discussion began.

“Is he drunk?” one woman asked about Macbeth, right off the bat. “Sometimes when we’re drunk, we say too much. I know I did.” We mused briefly that he certainly could be drunk, and then the conversation veered away from that and to a focus on the ghost – is it a hallucination or actually there?

“The ghost could be there to say, ‘I know what you did,’” said one woman. A woman with the other view suggested that if the ghost were a hallucination, it could be the manifestation of Macbeth’s guilt. And then another woman who feels that the ghost is real said, “Maybe the ghost followed the First Murderer back to who sent him – so he knows. He didn’t know it was Macbeth, but now he does.”

And how about the way in which Macbeth reacts, real ghost or not? “Macbeth isn’t the rock he portrays himself as. Without Lady Macbeth, he’s nothing. She’s his spine,” said one woman. “He opened up the door to the lords by showing another side of him – whether he subconsciously wanted to get caught or not,” said another.

This looped us back around to the question of whether or not Macbeth is drunk. “If he were sober, he’d cover better,” said one woman. Several people built on each other’s ideas, putting forward the idea that this drunkenness could be the result of hard drinking driven by guilt and/or sleeplessness, and that this results in “word vomit” in the scene.

We also wondered about whether or not the lords notice the murderer. One thinks so because of the blood on his face. And that made us begin to ponder what this scene might look like, staged. So we decided to stage it.

For the first time, we broke up our circle to use the stage traditionally, with those of us not in the scene sitting in the house. The ensemble placed a long table center stage and pulled six chairs up to it. Five of them sat in those chairs to play the lords.

The scene began. The actors felt their way through it, making interesting discoveries even as they stumbled. There is one ensemble member who came into the group last fall extremely reticent, anxious, and lacking confidence, and when we discovered how incredible her directing instincts are she began participating more, even playing multiple roles in the performances. She has been pretty quiet so far this season, and I noticed how intently she was watching the scene unfold.

I sat beside her and quietly asked, “What do you see? Does this need any fixes?” She nodded, her eyes still on the stage. “What would you fix? I’ll write it all down.” She began to tell me her thoughts, and the more I agreed with her, the faster those thoughts came out. They ranged from altering the placement of the table to create more playing space, to playing with the dynamic between the ghost and Macbeth, to noting the things about the scene that did work well.

We applauded when the scene concluded. The actors agreed that it had felt pretty good but that it could have gone better. I asked how the others felt, and a few put forward some ideas (I didn’t write them down because by that point I had given my notepad to the woman for whom I’d been taking notes). There was a lull, and I said, “[NAME] has some ideas.” Those who were in the group last year eagerly asked her what those were. She looked at me. I smiled and said, “And I think this will work better if you go on stage and show them the physical stuff.” She grinned sheepishly, got to her feet, and went up on stage.

As soon as she rose, she began talking through her thoughts with the rest of the ensemble. She has a really remarkable ability to give constructive criticism in a way that is honest without being harsh, and she tempers it with praise, so no one has ever resisted anything she’s suggested or been defensive – they have always at least tried her ideas. As she talked, I began moving chairs as she suggested but didn’t direct what was going on at all. In fact, all of the facilitators sat back and said nothing aside from affirmative responses and a few questions. The group came together and figured out what they wanted to do without direction from us.

As we prepared to run the scene again, the “director” moved to hand my notepad and pen to me. “Go ahead and keep it,” I said. “The great thing about taking notes as you go is that you don’t have to remember anything, so you can stay in the moment.”

As the scene progressed, I looked over at her. She was leaning forward in her seat, completely focused, and by the end of the scene she had taken a full page of notes. And yet, as the others shared their reactions and ideas, she hung back, listening to them, glancing at her notes, waiting. Again there was a lull, and I gestured to her that this would be a good time to share. She picked through her notes, skipping the ones that had already been mentioned and making decisions about which notes she actually wanted to give – the same way a professional director would. Everyone again listened intently. She has absolutely no ego about this; her insight and excellent instincts boost her confidence without making her arrogant. I just love watching and listening to her in this role.

As we left, she handed the notepad and pen back to me. I asked her if she had liked taking notes, and she said that she had. I assured her that I would always have an extra notepad and pen with me if she wants to keep doing it. She pointed at the notepad and said, “I took notes on what everyone said, too, just like you always do. I didn’t want you not to have that written down!”

So here are her notes on that second discussion:

•    One woman suggested that Macbeth and Lady use more of the stage and come closer to the audience.
•    Another woman suggested that the lords interact with Macbeth, not just with each other.
•    Another said Lady has to be the wife, so she helps the lords leave and then cares for Macbeth – there’s a “switch” that turns on and off.
•    One ensemble member said that Lady is irritated with Macbeth, but she really realizes that he needs to be cared for.
•    A woman who is unabashed about her somewhat radical political views said, reaching for the word she wanted, that Macbeth and Lady are “comrades.” [She looked at me (Frannie) and grinned. I said, “Oh, comrades, huh? Noted.” She said, “Shut up, Frannie! Shut up!”] She went on to explain that they are in this together, and maybe it makes Lady love him more.
•    Another woman said that maybe Lady makes for an angrier person.

This last woman continued to list ideas she had for interpreting the scene as Lady. She looked at me. I teased, “So… what you’re saying is, you want to play Lady Macbeth the next time we do this scene?” “Yes!” a number of ensemble members shouted. She grinned, shaking her head.

We decided to explore this scene again on Friday if we feel like it, and, if not, to come back to it later.

This was pretty much the ideal way in which our ensemble can work. It was a total team effort, with leadership spread among a number of people. Things never got heated; everyone listened to each other and problem solved together. And the facilitators gave hardly any input; in fact, I’m not sure we gave any significant input at all. This is a huge step toward empowerment, which is our number one objective: my voice is heard; my ideas are valued; I am a vital member of a team; others support me when I need it; I have good instincts; I don’t need someone telling me what to do or think.

Good, good stuff.

 

Friday

Written by Kyle.

When we got in on Friday, Frannie had to leave almost right away to meet with women on our waiting list who were interested in joining, and, in a few cases, re-joining the group. We started off the evening with our traditional warm-up and ring exercise. One of the women wanted to do Chekhov's six-directions exercise, and another volunteered to lead. It was great the way they just jumped in accommodate each other- it seemed so routine. Afterward, we recapped the banquet scene and then picked up where we had left off on Act III, scene v.

One woman commented on the subtlety of the scene with the two lords; that they keep dancing around this idea that Macbeth is implicated in all of the murders, but they dare not say it. Toward the end of the scene, though, they grow explicitly mutinous. “At first I thought they were just talking crap about Macbeth, but now I know they are actually talking about rebellion,” said one woman.

When we got to Act III, scene vi, one ensemble member said that she had memorized all of the First Witch’s lines and was eager to show them off. I shuddered a little and tried to reiterate that the Hecate scenes were most likely inserted after Shakespeare had died, and in no way move the dramatic tension or plot forward. She had memorized the lines, though, and someone else had clearly rehearsed the Hecate speeches for tonight. I did an internal face-palm, swallowed it deep down, and said, “Great! Let’s see what you’ve got!” They did great!

Afterward, we moved on to Act IV, scene i - the famous “Double double, toil and trouble” scene, in which the witches give Macbeth enigmatic clues about his future. It was hot in the room, and many ensemble members did not want to get the scene up on its feet right away. A few of the readers were very well-rehearsed in their reading. That always catches me off guard – most of the time, they are so nonchalant about volunteering, and then BAM! They’ve rehearsed and have been secretly counting the seconds to when they get to read their scene. I don’t know what they do when someone else jumps in – it must happen – but so far, no fireworks.

We read the scene once through. Many of the women commented on Macbeth’s ability to just buy into the false sense of security offered by the witches. There were several different theories as to why this was. One woman said that she thought he was so desperate that he set himself up for failure: “Kinda like the way you go to that certain friend who is going to co-sign your B.S.” Others honed in on the fact that they thought it was the witches who were being intentionally deceitful. It sparked a really rich debate about whether the witches were an extension of Macbeth’s evil, acting as facilitators to a temptation already inside of him; or if Macbeth was no more than a puppet attached to the strings of their power. We then put the scene on its feet and realized just how many parts there were to make it work. The scene always takes on a life of its own, and tonight was no different. I floated that the Hecate musical number could be a group rendition of the dance from the iconic Michael Jackson “Thriller” music video. This idea was met with mixed reactions.

At the end of the scene, it was wonderful to see the women’s imaginations so fired up. Ideas of how to stage the scene came too quickly to write down. Building a big cauldron, playing the scene in front of the curtain with the apparitions stepping through the break, how we could use costumes to make the Banquo line of kings work; these were some of the many rapid-fire ideas that came from the ensemble all at once. It was a beautiful thing to behold. The ensemble is really jazzed about this play; they keep on surprising me with memorization, rehearsing parts, staking their claims to coveted roles, elaborate conspiracy theories about the secret identities of the witches, etc. This play is really churning their creativity in a way that others could not. Othello’s gritty realism makes it so much more painful, and Richard III’s over the top bloodlust can make him a charismatic hero his own tragi-comedy; but it’s the supernatural elements of Macbeth that fire the imaginations of the ensemble in a way that is truly unique. I can’t wait to see what they come up with!

Season Seven: Week 6

Tuesday

We decided last Friday to spend some time exploring parts of the play that interest us on our feet, and a few people came in tonight with ideas of things to work! We began with Act V scene i, the ubiquitous sleepwalking scene with Lady Macbeth. The woman reading Lady pulled two others in to play the Gentlewoman and the Doctor, and they did not hold back. The woman playing the Gentlewoman was super sassy! We loved it. The woman reading Lady clearly understood what she was doing intellectually, although she rushed through her lines. Even so, we got a lot out of the scene.

One woman said, “Her paranoia and everything she’s done is coming back up in her sleep.” Then someone brought up the letter she references – what could it be? The ensemble came up with some great ideas:

•    Her confession
•    A list of people who’ve been killed
•    A letter placing blame on Macbeth
•    A letter to Lady Macduff
•    A suicide note
•    The rantings of a person who’s going crazy
•    A letter to Macbeth, who is off at war

We wanted to see this scene again, and the woman reading Lady said it was difficult for her to slow down and be spontaneous with the book in her hand. I offered to do a drop-in exercise with her in which I would stay right behind her and softly say her lines a bit at a time for her to repeat with her own interpretation. This worked very well – although I couldn’t really absorb what she was doing because I was focused on giving her what I could, the rest of the ensemble thought she had gone much deeper and loved it.

Unfortunately I was so taken by the following that I didn’t write anything specific, but at this point one woman gave the Gentlewoman some fabulous constructive criticism. It began with something great she’d done, moved gently into something she could do better, explained how she could work toward that and assured her that it would come with more rehearsal, and ended by emphasizing again how great the reading had been. It was truly masterful, and I took a moment to thank her and draw the ensemble’s attention to what she had just said. That’s exactly how to do it!

When we had first circled up to read, I’d asked two long time members to sit next to me. “Aw, man,” said one, “If I sit next to you, I’m really gonna have to behave.” I smiled and said, “Why do you think I want you to sit here?” We have a longstanding rapport that allows me to poke good-natured fun at her frequent side conversations, bursts of vocal enthusiasm, and goofiness. She was talking quite a bit to the woman next to her, and, suddenly inspired, I wrote out a “sign” for her on a piece of paper that said, “I AM A CHATTERBOX.” I handed it to her, and she laughed and held it up. She held it for the rest of our meeting, other than one moment when she handed it to Kyle, and I made her a sign that said, “I AM STILL A CHATTERBOX.” This led to a lot of silliness that, in turn, led to me making signs for everyone, most of which had nothing to do with anything. We need that sometimes!

We proceeded to Act III scene ii, in which Lady and Macbeth discuss his paranoia, their cover-up, and Macbeth’s plot against Banquo (about which he is vague). “Maybe she’s trying to get him to kill Banquo and Fleance,” said one woman.

We continued to ponder the scene and the characters’ motivations. “It’s easier to kill someone and move on than to leave someone wounded… They might come after you,” said one woman. Another woman mused that the scene reminded her of when she committed her crime: “You feel like everybody knows. That’s probably what they’re both feeling.”

The conversation moved to what hesitation, if any, persists in this scene. “Who do you think he feels worse about killing – Duncan or Banquo?” asked one woman. And then Macbeth doesn’t tell Lady about the specifics of his plan. “Maybe he doesn’t trust her conscience – to not be able to fulfill the ruse,” said one participant. “They keep going back and forth,” said another. “It was Lady Macbeth trying to talk him into doing the killing, and now it’s Macbeth trying to put her off.”

“She’s opened a Pandora’s box in a way,” said one woman. Another agreed, saying, “The dynamic has shifted. In the first scene they were like ‘this’ [she crossed two fingers], and now their passion for each other has gone into their crime… It’s like they’re co-defendants. You associate them with the worst possible time in your life.”

“Maybe his mind shifted,” said another woman. “I feel like she degraded him when she placed the swords for him… Now he’s like, ‘I don’t need you. I can do this by myself.’” Another woman disagreed a bit: “He’s keeping her innocent of the knowledge. Is he being condescending or endearing?” Kyle built on that, saying that there were, at first, many emasculating lines from Lady Macbeth, and now Macbeth’s lines have a lot of machismo. Another woman sighed, saying, “It’s really hard to enjoy anything that you ill-got.”

At this point, I noticed that one of the ensemble members was sitting alone in the house, clearly upset. I asked if I could sit with her and spent some time just listening – she was having a very, very rough time. I cannot imagine having a lengthy or life sentence and the strength it takes to survive that; to have the prison be your entire world either for many years or until you die. It did not seem to help her much in that moment to have me there, but I hope that at least she can take with her that someone truly cares about what she’s going through. She left in order not to cry in front of the others any more. Absolutely no one would have judged her, and no one remarked on her leaving, either, although we all saw it and shared looks of concern.

When I returned to the circle, they had read through Banquo’s murder and Fleance’s escape and were deep in conversation about the Third Murderer. Where had he come from? Some think his presence is a result of Macbeth’s paranoia – that he’s been sent to check on the other Murderers. Others think he’s actually a witch. I’m sure we’ll be exploring this further!


Friday

One of the first people to arrive this evening was the ensemble member who’d been so upset on Tuesday. She seemed a bit lighter and made eye contact with me immediately. I asked her how she was doing, and she said with a little smile that she was doing better. I’m so glad. She made eye contact with me many times throughout the evening, still with that little smile, so maybe the time I spent with her on Tuesday did make a difference. Even a small one. I hope so.

We continued to explore scenes on their feet. We didn’t make any linear progress in our reading of the play, but the kind of in-depth work we did was just as valuable, if not more so.

We began with Act I scene vii, in which Macbeth worries about killing Duncan and Lady comes in to convince him to do it. The women who read it have been in the ensemble for just over a year, and they are very confident with the language and inventive with staging. Our Macbeth was, as usual, exciting to watch and listen to – her delivery is always clear and measured. Lady was incredibly interesting, as her interpretation of the character is that she is soft-spoken and “cute” with an underlying darkness and drive. “I loved how you got in her face,” said one woman to Lady. I asked Macbeth what it felt like for her. “I’m getting more into it every time I do it,” she said.

A new ensemble member asked if there was a way to ensure that more people got to read these scenes. I suggested that we revisit an approach that we liked last year – that of tagging people in and out of scenes rather than having entire scenes run with the same cast. Everyone liked that idea, so we’ll return to it soon.

But for tonight we decided to stick with what we were doing. I coached the actors a bit to give some examples of how their approach could evolve. I suggested that Lady slow down and try out different tactics, and that she let the audience in on her frustration with her husband. I asked Macbeth to lower her center so she would be more grounded and suggested that she place a rollercoaster inside her to give her greater uneasiness.

This resulted in a much deeper and more nuanced reading. We definitely saw Lady’s frustration and struggle to find the right approach, and Macbeth sank deep into the language and anxiety, becoming much more convincing. We were all really impressed, but these women want to take it even further. We talked some basic acting techniques to give them some ideas and will revisit the scene at some point.

Two more women volunteered to read the same scene. Their approach was quite different: Lady was aggressive and bold, and Macbeth did not come out of his guilt, even at the end of the scene. “It felt like we were being co-defendants,” said Lady (she observed this same thing on Tuesday). She said they had that rapport, that they were confidants, and that that had influenced her interpretation. “How would I feel if I were doing this with my best friend and partner?”

She then said that the situation reminded her of her crime, so we talked a bit about how we as actors can draw on those kinds of experiences while keeping ourselves safe from further trauma. It’s important that we be able to “go there” with this play, but there is a risk of going too far. I explained a bit about Stanislavsky’s “magic as if,” which is the approach we’ll need to take. They are ready and willing to give it a try.

We also talked a bit about the different approaches of each pair. While one Lady was scary because of her aggression, the other was unsettling because of how quiet and gentle she was. Neither approach is wrong.

As we circled up to raise our Ring and depart, one woman asked if she could check in since she’d arrived late. She told us that she’s facing some challenges with her family. She is very upset about the situation. The woman with whom I’d spoken last week about her emerging leadership said, “Do you want a woosh?” That’s something we do with one person in the middle of the circle, and we all engage in a full-body uplifting gesture while saying, “Woosh!” It has a way of making things people feel even just a bit better. We wooshed her, and then we wooshed a few others who needed it. Afterward, I pulled the woman who’d suggested the exercise aside and said, “That’s what I’m talking about!” She said, “Oh, you mean what we talked about last week?” I affirmed it. She smiled.

Season Seven: Week 5

Tuesday

We moved on from the Porter into the rest of Act II scene iii tonight. In this scene, the murder of Duncan is discovered, Macbeth kills the guards, and Malcolm and Donalbain flee. As we finished reading, one woman said, “Hey, there’s three again!” calling our attention to Macbeth having now killed three people.

The conversation focused on interpreting Macbeth’s and Lady’s actions. “He’s actually thinking for himself and not just doing what his wife tells him to,” said one woman. “Maybe killing Duncan triggered something for him,” said another. “Maybe he liked [the thrill of getting away with something].” I suggested that maybe he wasn’t thinking clearly, still traumatized from murdering Duncan. “Maybe he is thinking clearly,” mused the first woman. “It makes sense to kill them so they can’t expose him… Why didn’t Lady Macbeth think of this?”

We pondered her actions in this scene; having some sort of fainting spell as Macbeth finishes his description of killing the guards. “I think she’s trying to distract them and shut Macbeth up,” said one woman. Another woman had a different interpretation: “Maybe she is like, ‘Oh my god, what did you just do?’” These were not the only interpretations, but they were the most popular. I reminded the group again that there are multiple ways of interpreting just about every aspect of this play. We decided to keep reading.

Act II Scene iv was a breeze – everyone got right away that Macduff is suspicious of Macbeth rather than the brothers. One woman pointed out that three crazy things happened over night, and another called attention to the Old Man’s referencing “threescore” years. We are really on top of these threes! Matt mentioned that sometimes this scene is staged in such a way that the Old Man is actually one of the witches, and most people were excited by that idea. I wouldn’t be surprised if it ends up in our performance.

We began reading Act III scene i and got caught up in talking about Banquo’s monologue.

The first thing we noted was something we hadn’t noticed: that Macbeth now has three titles. There’s our number again. And then we started trying to dissect Banquo’s words.

“He wants what’s coming to him. He’s gonna chill,” said one woman. “He doesn’t know what to do… Maybe Macbeth was involved, but he doesn’t know specifically how,” said another. She continued, “Maybe he thinks it happened the way it was supposed to happen.”

“I don’t know,” said the first woman. “If my friend came to his house and just showed up dead, I’d be pretty suspicious.” Kyle mused that perhaps Banquo was having similar thoughts to Macbeth and just didn’t give in to temptation. This woman was impatient with the whole thing. She said emphatically that Macbeth should have killed Banquo right away. “Why let your competition survive? If you’re gonna do it, just do it. Don’t think about it…. If you want your position, you’re supposed to insulate your position.”

A few people brought up the friendship between Banquo and Macbeth, but some were skeptical. “I don’t think he’s his homeboy,” said one woman. “I think they’re cordial – they were friends, but now it’s about kingship. Everybody is out for each other… I feel like everyone’s out for himself. I don’t think anyone’s really friends.” Another woman agreed, saying, “They have the same drive. They both want something… I’m gonna stick around and kinda leech on.” The first woman jumped back in: “Right now I’ll listen to what you want ‘cause you’re the king. But someday I’m gonna get in.”

We circled back to the witches’ prophecies. I knew in my gut that one of the women who’s been in the group for three years was going to draw a parallel between them and Loki – I just knew it; she finds a parallel with Loki every year. And then she did. “I KNEW you were going to bring up Loki!” I said, and we all laughed. She then emphasized again that Macbeth should have killed Banquo right off the bat, and that that’s what she would have done. She paused. “I’m kinda scared talking about this stuff. I’m realizing things about myself that I never knew before. Things I would do…” That led to revisiting the idea that thoughts don’t necessarily translate to actions, but that, when Macbeth’s do, it’s the result of focusing on the positive in the prophecies and disregarding the negative (a theme that keeps coming up for us).

One person mentioned that perhaps Macbeth thought the prophecy was about to be fulfilled by Duncan visiting his castle. The woman referenced above (she was on a roll) said, “If you put yourself in these situations, you’re gonna do it.” As an example, she brought up that if you’re thinking about cheating on your significant other but really don’t want to act on it, you won’t go out to dinner with the other person or sit on the couch with them. She brought up cookies as well, saying that if you keep them in the cupboard you probably won’t eat them all, but if you put them on the table next to you, you probably will.

“But he didn’t set it up,” Kyle said. “He didn’t invite him over.” We talked about that for a minute. “Well, okay,” I pondered aloud. “So if the situation just comes up, does that make you any less culpable? Does what comes before the action change the quality of the action?” There was no clear answer.

“What a man thinks genuinely, he does. Usually,” said this same woman. Matt then asked if maybe Macbeth says no to Lady Macbeth initially in a way that leaves space for her to push him to do it. Many of us recognized that from our own lives. “When I’m arguing with [my ex-husband], and he’s going on and on and on, and I just say, ‘Okay,’ he changes his mind,” said one woman. We talked about how universal that is and wondered what it says about the couple’s relationship. Has Lady always made the decisions, or is this the first time? We’re divided on that.


Friday

Tonight began with one of our new members pulling me aside. She’s left early a few times and has sometimes been rather quiet, and, while she enjoys Shakespeare and feels that she’s getting a lot out of it, she didn’t want to disrespect the facilitators or the other inmates, or to take up a spot that could be filled by someone else, so she was thinking about leaving the group. I listened and then said, “Thank you for sharing that with me. I’m not going to try to talk you into anything, but can I share my perspective with you?” She nodded. I said that there have been people in the group over the years who have definitely been disruptive and disrespectful – some so much so that they had to be removed from the group. “But that’s not you,” I said. “It’s okay to leave if you’re upset. You’re being respectful when you do that – you’re making sure that whatever you’re dealing with doesn’t create drama for everyone else.” She hadn’t thought of it that way. She said that she’s also considering joining a different group in January that would conflict with ours. I let her know that, from my perspective, she’s welcome to stay and make the decision later. She thanked me for saying all of that and said she would still like to speak to the ensemble to make sure they knew how she felt, and so they could decide whether or not she could stay. She had to step away but said she’d come back shortly.

We continued with Act III scene i, at first focusing on Macbeth’s soliloquy regarding the need to have Banquo killed. One woman said that she thought the sudden plotting showed a lack of fore-thought. I asked if perhaps Macbeth was exhibiting signs of paranoia. One woman believes this is a manifestation of the evil presence that’s settled on the castle. Another woman spoke up, challenging me: “I don’t think it’s paranoia. I think it’s logical to be threatened by his mere existence.” She’s got a great point.

The woman who’d spoken to me before we began then came back. We waited for an opening, and then I nodded to her. She shared with the group what she’d shared with me. “So… I leave it up to you whether I should stay or go,” she said. Immediately, six women said, “Stay!” A number of them then shared reasons why she hasn’t been a disruption or disrespectful, why they wanted her to stay, why she should stay for herself, and they welcomed her to make her decision about the other program closer to when it will begin. “If you’re getting something out of this, you should stay as long as you want,” said one woman. The woman who’d been thinking about leaving thanked everyone, said she had to go just then, but that she’d see us on Tuesday.

We then returned to the play and read through Macbeth’s interactions with the Murderers. One woman who was in the ensemble last year said, “I’m sorry, but I just keep seeing parallels with him and Richard.” We said that she shouldn’t be sorry! It’s great. We talked about how a big difference between Macbeth and Richard III is that Macbeth has some compunctions about killing people. Or at least he does at first.

“He was all upset about killing somebody, and now he’s a gangster,” said one woman. “He’s trying to convince himself [not to murder Banquo] – he doesn’t really want to do it,” said someone else. “But now he’s keeping his hands clean,” said another woman. “’You make up your mind about this,’ [he says to the Murderers] – so he can keep a clear conscience.”

“Wait,” said another woman. “Isn’t he doing to them what Lady Macbeth was doing to him in the beginning?” Most of us hadn’t thought of that, but she’s absolutely right. She also thinks he’s starting to lose it.

We then read and talked about Macbeth’s interaction with Lady Macbeth in Act III scene ii. “Now he’s this crazed, psychotic killer, and she’s the one trying to calm him down!” said one woman. “She created a monster!” said another.

We decided that, for Tuesday’s meeting, everyone would choose a piece of the play that they’re interested in exploring on its feet. But then one new member asked if we could put Act III scene i on its feet, saying, “I learn better when I see it or do it.” She offered her scene partners some advice about trying to follow the stage directions, and I encouraged them to take it slow and try to connect with one another.

The woman who read Macbeth has been in the group for a couple of years, and she’s always thrown herself into whatever she’s done with a lot of showmanship, but something about this scene really clicked for her. We were totally drawn in from the first moments of her soliloquy. She absolutely nailed the language and clearly connected with the emotion of the scene. When she finished, we erupted in applause and praise. I actually threw my book on the floor and said, “[Name]! What just happened?!” Another woman said, “You were really feeling it, huh?”

She smiled, a little embarrassed but clearly pleased. “I don’t know… I wasn’t really feeling it until the dogs… I really connected with that for some reason. Like, he’s not different than any other dog. He’s just a f**king dog.”

“You had it before then,” another woman said immediately. “Yeah,” I said, “I guess we were feeling it before you were feeling it. Your work was so solid, your grasp of the language was so powerful… You’ve worked really hard at that over the years, and it shows. You drew us all right in.”

“I guess I can relate to Macbeth,” she said. “I’ve been stabbed in the back trying to do the most for everyone… And I’ve got a vindictive way of thinking.” She described some of the – admittedly creative – ways in which she’s gotten back at people in her life. “I don’t do well with people trying to screw me over or take advantage of the people I care about.”

“So you really connect with this character,” someone said. “Yeah…” she paused. “If it weren’t so many lines, I would maybe consider it.”

“Do it!!!” a bunch of us exclaimed. “You guys,” she said jokingly, “I quit every day.” But we all encouraged her to explore this further. “Don’t shut any doors because you think you can’t do it,” I said. “Remember that we’ve always been able to cut everyone’s lines down to the point that they’re comfortable. If you feel a connection to this character, don’t make any bones about it. Go for it. Even if you’re not cast, take the time to explore in rehearsal.” Everyone agreed. “If you’re connecting with this character, there’s a reason,” I said. “Sometimes the character chooses you.”

As we circled up for our final Ring exercise, she said quietly to me that this just isn’t something she’d considered before. “Well, I’ve actually been wanting to talk with you about this,” I said. “Can we chat for a minute before we leave?”

We stood apart a bit as everyone left. I said again that she shouldn’t count herself out for this part – that I think she’s ready for it. “Really?” she said. “Absolutely,” I replied. “You’ve grown so much over the past two years, and you could totally handle this now.” She asked what I meant. “Well, during Othello, you were really nervous, right?” She nodded. “Kind of wishy washy? You weren’t sure you’d follow through. We weren’t sure you’d follow through! But you did. You showed up for every performance, and you proved to all of us that you could do it. And then last year, you became a leader in the group.”

She was shocked that I’d described her as a leader. “Are you kidding?” I said. “I can’t tell you how many times I wrote in my notes about you encouraging others, uplifting them, comforting them, and being the first one to jump in when people needed it. You saved a couple of very nervous actors in a scene when they were forgetting their lines, and you were right there when one of them started crying back stage. Not only that, but you’re a team player. You were totally willing to cut your lines on the fly if it looked like we were running out of time, and then you taped one of your monologues inside your hat so you’d have it there if we did have time.” She smiled. “So you’re a team player and a leader,” I said, “And that’s really important in a major role like this. And, yeah, you joke about quitting every day. But the point is that you never do. You always come back. And you know what it takes to want to quit and keep coming back. We need anchor members in those roles. And you’re an anchor member. And a really good actor!”

She had completely lit up by then and seemed more eager to explore the possibility of playing Macbeth. “It just feels so good to say those lines,” she said. She talked about trauma from her childhood that is difficult for her to deal with, along with the challenges of her life behind bars. She described feeling a sense of catharsis through playing the character. “That’s great, and it’s a really common thing,” I said, “It can feel really, really good. And if you end up cast in a role like this, we can keep that going while keeping you safe from experiencing any more trauma. You just need to think about whether or not you’re comfortable with that. I’m confident that we can keep you safe, but I’m not you – I can’t make that decision.”

“You get me, though,” she said quickly. “I can open up to you more than I can to most people. Really, to anyone. You get me right here,” she said, tapping her forehead. “You’ve really helped me.”

“That is such an honor,” I said. “Thank you for sharing that with me. I’m so happy that I’ve been able to help. You do really great work in here. I love being a part of it.”

She left, assuring me that she’d continue to mull this over. I truly have been hoping that this would be the year when she’d dive into a role that has more guts. I’ve got all my fingers crossed that it happens for her if she’s ready.

Season Seven: Week 4

Written by Frannie


Tuesday

Tonight began with an ensemble member who is about to go home stopping by to return her books and say goodbye. She said that Shakespeare was the best part of her time in prison, that she felt that she’d grown because of it, and she thanked me. And I thanked her! We talked a bit about the kind of progress she made last year, and it is clear that her work in Shakespeare has made a difference. We’ll miss her, but it’s very exciting that she’s going home. We wish her the best of luck!

We had a check-in that was remarkable for its level of honesty this early in the season. One ensemble member brought in a couple of poems that she’s been working on and wanted to share with us. They were honest, vulnerable, and beautiful. We thanked her for sharing, and I encouraged the rest of the ensemble to bring in any writing or other art that they want to share any time.

We began with a very silly circle game that involves chanting and dancing. People were hesitant at first but got really into it once a few of us had danced. There was absolutely no judgment – we were laughing with, not at, each other. I hope we’ll play it again some time!

We moved into one of my favorite Theatre of the Oppressed exercises: Blind Cars. In this exercise, one person “drives” another, who closes her eyes and works to trust the driver and follow non-verbal commands. It tends to be fun and terrifying at the same time, as the driver has a lot of responsibility, and the car is very vulnerable. There is always a mix of feelings about whether it’s more comfortable to be the car or the driver. It builds trust within the ensemble while simultaneously helping us learn about our own vulnerabilities and the importance of both supporting and leaning on each other in our work.

Kyle then led an acting exercise in which we stood in a circle and took turns stepping in, saying, “I am here,” and then stepping back out. We did this with no prompt and then attempting to be neutral. This led to an animated discussion about authenticity vs. bravado vs. the definition of neutrality. It got a little heated; I think this is because it’s a deceptively simple exercise that is actually kind of advanced, acting-wise. I’m not sure we were ready for it as an ensemble, but it’ll be interesting to see what happens if we return to it later in the season.

We then played the question game, in which we sit in a circle and ask questions of the person next to us, but nobody answers – the goal is to take the question in and then ask a question either to the next person in the circle or back to the person who just asked. It takes quick thinking and focus – if you take too long or ask a question that’s already been asked, you’re out! We often get out because we start laughing and can’t stop. It’s a really fun game.

Tonight’s themes were trust, leadership, vulnerability, and focus. We did great with all four. It was a really fun night.

 

Friday

We spent tonight working through Act II Scene iii, which is all about the Porter. The language is pretty complicated, so it took us awhile!

One of the women likened the Porter’s situation to that of a gate officer at the prison – opening and closing gates, and the monotony of that. That insight led us into how that kind of boredom with his job plays into the Porter’s drunkenness (or being hungover – opinions are mixed on which it is). We remarked at how long the knocking goes on before he opens the door. “Why he ain’t open the door yet?” mused one woman. “He’s forgetting [because he’s drunk or hung over]. He’s conversating, and he’s forgetting.”

The conversation began to take another shape. “It makes me wonder why, considering what’s going on inside the castle, he’s referencing the gates of hell,” said one person. I asked her to dig a little deeper – why had she said that? “Already creepy stuff is happening,” she said. “An evil presence has descended on this castle, and everyone’s affected.”

A new ensemble member who has improv experience but has been intimidated by the language – she did not graduate from high school and has been convinced that she couldn’t handle it – was gently nudged by several people to give this monologue a try because she’s got such great comic timing. She did, and we were totally wowed. Her instincts were amazing – not only did she work with the language and punctuation perfectly, but the way she emphasized certain words, played up antithesis, and varied the pitch and tone of her voice was breathtaking coming from someone who hasn’t been trained. Her first try was better than many trained professionals I’ve seen perform. Holy moly.

I asked her how it felt. “Once I got into it a little bit more, it was easier,” she said. “I have to remember to pace myself and catch my breath. I actually enjoyed it… I thought I was gonna be a lot more nervous.” I am so, so excited about this development. I can’t wait to see where she goes from here.

We then talked about whether the Porter knows about what Macbeth and Lady are up to, which is honestly something I’ve never considered before. “Maybe Lady Macbeth got him drunk, too,” suggested one woman. “Yeah,” replied another. “Then he wouldn’t be believed if he saw anything.” Others think he’s simply oblivious and possibly an alcoholic who is generally this drunk. Or perhaps he just got drunk this evening independently of Lady’s plot.

This led us into some ideas of how the scene could be staged. One woman suggested that he could be lying on the steps that lead from the house to the stage through the preceding scene between Macbeth and Lady. Another suggested he might overhear them while hiding. Still others played with ideas of how this might work with the Porter out in the house, in the aisles, with the auditorium doors being the gates, or maybe planting the actor in the audience and starting the monologue from there.

And that led us to begin talking about how this character might be costumed. Some toyed with the idea of his having fallen asleep in the gate house and being in his pajamas – maybe a robe, slippers, and stocking cap. Others don’t feel that he would be in pajamas because this is his job. I wondered whether a combination would be funny – as if he had begun to change his clothes and passed out in the middle of the process. Most people also feel that he should still be holding a bottle, which we’ve been able to manage in past plays by using an empty root beer bottle.

I’ve asked everyone to keep an eye on the recurrence of the number three (and multiples of three) in this play, and one woman noticed it in this scene. “There are three sets of people he talks about coming to hell,” she said, “And it’s 3 a.m. More threes!”

We talked through the casting process a bit – it’s a little complicated for those who’ve never done it before. Our method is for each person to choose at least three characters she’d be comfortable playing, and then we explore scenes on their feet until everyone’s had a chance to explore all of her choices. I put together a ballot with each character and a list of women interested in playing each, we run scenes in a circle as a casual “audition,” and then each person votes anonymously. I serve as the tie-breaker if necessary, and then we have our cast.

It was a really great night. We are rolling right along and beginning to gel as an ensemble. Progress!