Session Four: Week 7

Tuesday  

After our warm up today, the group decided to move right into Act I Scene ii and make sure we really got it. We discussed the need for a “rehearsal schedule” moving forward, as our deadline to cast the play in December is getting closer, and we have a lot of work to do to make sure we understand the story and characters. We broke down the scene bit by bit together, and then we put it on its feet.

Almost immediately, one of the women, who is newer to the group, leaned over to me. “Why is she (the woman playing Petruchio) pointing at the door? Grumio can’t be confused if she’s being so obvious about it.” I stopped the action so that this woman could give that very constructive note and encouraged everyone to do the same if they had feedback. More people entered the scene, and this same woman whispered to me again, “It don’t look right.” I asked her what would make it look better, and she responded, “It just don’t look like a conversation. They shouldn’t stand like that.”

“Do you see in your head how they should be standing?” I asked. She nodded. I called another hold and encouraged her to go ahead and direct the scene, which she did. This was a really exciting moment, as this woman spends a good deal of time talking herself down (I can’t read, I shouldn’t be on stage, etc.), but here we seem to have stumbled upon a strength – and that is being able to identify how actors’ physicality affects our ability to tell this story. She’s got director’s instincts (not to mention the fact that she CAN read and is great on stage!). The group encouraged her to continue giving direction in a constructive manner, as not everyone has this ability. I’m hopeful that she will gain confidence in more areas than just this, as she’s now feeling empowered to give feedback from this perspective and knows that it will be appreciated and honored.

Another participant showed a great affinity for Grumio, as she consistently and hilariously “threw shade” throughout the scene after her “ear wringing” from Petruchio. “I LIKE this guy,” she laughed. We were all thrilled to see her connect in that way.

We seem to have a good grip on Act I Scene ii now and will move forward now, hopefully efficiently enough to meet the casting deadline we set for ourselves.

Thursday

We began work today on Act II Scene I. We read it through without stopping, then went back to break down and analyze it. The women have some great insight into the characters already.

The first thing the group wanted to discuss was Petruchio’s and Kate’s instant chemistry. They interpret Kate as being very intelligent, and feeling that finally she’s met someone who can keep up with her. “Some people who are incredibly intelligent have no social skills,” said one woman. In terms of their behavior, one woman said, “Maybe they’re both shrews that need taming.” They see Petruchio as being potentially just as rough as Kate in terms of his behavior. One woman introduced the idea that Kate’s shrewish behavior is a defense mechanism to protect herself because she’s so intelligent. Likewise, several of the women believe that, on one hand, Kate behaves the way she does to protect Bianca from marrying the wrong man, and, on the other hand, that she may be resentful of her little sister getting more romantic interest than her. One woman talked about her discomfort knowing she was being pitied by relatives at her younger sister’s wedding.

At this point, many of the women had left because of mandatory scheduling conflicts, and those of us who were still there decided to explore the beginning of the scene with Kate, Bianca, and Baptista, leaving the meat of the scene to explore with a larger number of people. This dynamic is proving to be one to which many of us can relate. Some of the women feel that the “abuse” from Kate to Bianca is playful, while others do not. We all feel that Baptista is a “big powerful presence” that changes that dynamic when he enters. But, as one woman said, “He loves the crap out of Kate.”

We began a brief exploration of the scene between Petruchio and Kate, which we determined needs a lot of movement. We’re all looking forward to exploring it more!

Session Four: Week 6

Tuesday  

Written by Jamie

This week we had a movie night at rehearsal, and watched Shakespeare Behind Bars, a Hank Rogerson documentary following Curt Tofteland - founder of the program- during a nine month rehearsal period for The Tempest in Luther Luckett Correction Center, Lagrange Kentucky.

Some of the women had viewed the documentary a few years earlier during our program. Veterans were energized, however, at the repeated viewing. I believe it gave the newcomers a more solidified idea of what they can expect in the coming months.

My first impressions of the documentary were of envy over the level of talent demonstrated by the inmates at Luther Luckett. Their commitment is evident, and their dedication is obvious as scenes depict prisoners folding laundry, murmuring memorized lines. I have no doubt in my mind that the women in our program are just as dedicated - so it was insightful to see the other side of the page, as I of course cannot watch the women as they go about their lives in the prison, reciting lines and running scenes. I was also impressed with Curt’s direction - he seemed more like a strict theatre performance professor than any drama therapist I’ve ever seen - no kid gloves, he shouted his dissatisfaction from off-stage whilst inmates rehearsed scenes. “Not good enough! I don’t believe you!” In reaction, the inmates pushed themselves, delivering some of the more committed and intensely personal performances I’ve ever seen.

Most of the men in the documentary had been involved in it for years, developing a solid brotherhood. It wasn’t without its share of negative dynamic, as you would find in any community, but it was obvious that the program had really helped the inmates bond in an environment that other programs offered in this Correction Center may not have been able to provide.

Overall, the film implemented camaraderie in the act of showing us how programs such as ours have been so successful in the past. Curt’s achievement within his program, the dedication of the men he worked with - sparked ambition within the women that I hadn’t seen since our first Romeo and Juliet performance. I have a feeling we are going to have a very impressive year.

Thursday

Written by Frannie

Before we began today, one of the newer members of our group excitedly shared that she has brought our Ring exercise – the creation of ensemble and safe environment – into another group. She said that, while some of the women in that group thought it was weird (and, I mean, it is a little weird), by and large they loved it and will continue doing it each time they meet. This is one of those “ripple effect” moments we talk about when we list the benefits of a program like SIP – for this woman, the Ring is not a Shakespeare or theatre specific exercise, and now there is whole other group of women at WHV who have embraced and are benefiting from the use of something we’ve explored in our group.

We delved further into our discussion about the Shakespeare Behind Bars documentary that the group viewed on Tuesday. Reactions to it were mixed, and I was touched by the level of honesty with which people voiced their opinions. The veterans in the group who performed The Tempest in 2013 seemed somewhat focused on how many of their lines they remembered, and they had a lot of fun “speaking along” with the men in the documentary. Most of them viewed the film in 2012 and had a new perspective on it – they are still hoping that our group will rise to the level of commitment evident in SBB, and they are still working on ways to help that happen. Other women in the group were inspired by the men in the film, saying, “If they can do it, so can we.” Everyone was impressed by the caliber of the performances and excited that we do some of the same exercises in our group that they do in theirs.

At least one woman in our group, however, found the film sad. She focused in on Rick, a young man in the film with a long sentence, as someone very much like her friends growing up. She was saddened that he went to the hole during filming rather than completing the program.

After talking for awhile, we played a couple of games and started our work on Act I Scene ii. And then, I don’t remember exactly how, but somehow our work led us into a deeply honest conversation in which several of the women bravely shared of their past, present, and trepidations about the future, and the rest of us gave them whatever support we could. There is a moment in the SBB documentary in which one of the men says (paraphrased) that he doesn’t want to be judged only on the worst thing he’s ever done. Our pasts are part of who we are, but they don’t need to define us. We must find ways of moving forward.

It was an intense conversation, but the women who shared seemed at least somewhat relieved to have shared so honestly and to have received not judgment, but support from our circle. We ended with an exercise intended to “uplift” each other, to leave that negative energy behind and go on with our days feeling at least a little better. It’s days like these that, while we may not do as much with the text, we strengthen each other and our ensemble through openness and unequivocal support. This may be the most raw it’s ever gotten in our group, perhaps encouraged by the uncompromising honesty of the men in the film. I am personally very appreciative of and humbled by the strength that the women in our group showed today.

Session Four: Week 5

Tuesday We were thrilled to welcome several new members to the group today. We spent some time on “orientation” and introductions, including our “interviews” which turned into sort of an improv game. We found that we were somewhat focused on the “safe environment” part of our guidelines, so we segued from there into some exercises from Theatre of the Oppressed.

The first couple of exercises were brief, and the group was able to get what they needed out of them quickly. These had to do with feeding off of each other’s energy and staying focused on a goal. They also served to be great ice breakers, as they were high energy exercises that resulted in a lot of smiles and laughter.

We then moved into the Blind Cars exercise, which is a perennial favorite in this program. In this exercise, one person is the “blind car,” who keeps her eyes closed as she is “driven” by her partner with only the touch of a hand. As generally happens when we do this exercise, some people were more respectful of the rules than others; some took better care of their partners than others (which led to some “traffic jams” and “fender benders”). The exercise has so much to do with trust and vulnerability, and those are things that can be hard to come by in a prison setting (and perhaps in many of the women’s lives prior to incarceration). We found parallels in our work. “I don’t trust anyone here with my life,” said one woman emphatically, and we talked about how we don’t necessarily need to have that level of trust in one another, but we do need to be able to trust each other enough to be vulnerable creatively and to take risks in our program. Another woman, who was being “driven” through the aisles in the house, said she simply couldn’t keep her eyes closed and her hands down the whole time because she couldn’t stop thinking about all of the chairs she might crash into. I asked her if it was mistrust of her partner that led to this fear. “No, it’s not her,” she said, “It’s just that those chairs are there, and I can’t get them out of my mind.”

The parallel here, of course, is that the chairs will always be there, whatever they are to each individual – stage fright, fear of expressing opinions, fear of taking risks and being judged, fear of reading aloud – but if we can trust “the driver” – in this case, the rest of the ensemble – we can relax enough to be confident that no one is going to let us collide with those obstacles. No one in our group will “fail,” because we will not let that happen. We will support each other through our fears and come out stronger. This seemed to resonate with the women in the group. We will likely revisit this exercise a little down the road and see how it goes then.

With the time we had left, the women who have been with the group since last month decided to put the first scene of the play on its feet and see what the “newbies” got out of it. Despite the fact that we had not discussed the staging, our staged reading was strong enough that the new members got the gist of the scene, including some details about the relationships in it. This was really encouraging for all of us because it means we’ve already got this scene to a place where it’s accessible, and we know we can communicate the basics of what’s going on just by improvising with scripts in our hands.

Thursday

When we were checking in today, one of the women mentioned a personal issue she’s been having. Since our policy now is that any issues that are brought into the group will be discussed/supported by the entire group, I asked her if she wanted to discuss it further or leave it at the door. She wanted to share and get input from the others so we spent some time talking. It was a very constructive and supportive conversation; we listened to everything she had to say, and many of the women offered advice based on their own experiences. We didn’t stop talking until she felt like she was in a better place, and we all assured her that she has our support.

We did our warm up, and then the group decided to spend the entire time today on Shakespeare. We read through Act I Scene I again, and then I asked, “How do you see this scene happening on stage? If you were directing it, what would you do?”

The first interpretation was offered by one of our “veterans”, who said, “I think Tranio might be gay. I don’t know why I see him that way, it’s just a feeling I have. I think he’s in love with Lucentio.” We discussed how this might not be off the mark, and that it would add complexity to a character whose objective throughout the play is to hook Lucentio up with Bianca. Another member was adamant that Tranio is NOT gay; that the two are “blood brothers” and “homies.” Another woman said she saw Tranio as “part wing man, part let’s-go-do-this.” This led to a discussion about the many ways we can interpret the text, and how we need to resist the urge to make permanent judgments about characters at this point in the process – we want to explore any idea that is brought to the table, so long as it’s rooted in the text.

We decided to see how it would work on its feet with some set staging. The same veteran referred to earlier clearly had a vision of how the scene would look, so we invited her to direct it. We then worked through it, establishing to whom each person is talking, how we establish relationships straight away with our staging, and what our physicality says about us. The women who read already have a very strong handle on all of this, and we were cracking up at some of the readings, especially from Gremio and Hortensio.

We’ve spent a lot of time on this scene now, so I think we’ll be ready to move forward next week.

Session Four: Week 4

After Tuesday’s session was canceled due to circumstances not within our control, the group was back and raring to go on Thursday. Several of them said they had been very upset to miss a meeting, and we briefly discussed the need to stay flexible and not focus on being upset or frustrated when we hit road bumps like that – they are par for the course, out of our control, and we do better when we focus on moving forward no matter what. We checked in with one another and welcomed a new member to the group. After our warm up, we played a circle came in which clear communication, both physical and verbal, is key. Some of us found the game challenging due to physical inhibitions. We facilitators encouraged everyone to loosen up, take up more space physically, be big, and be ready to go by not locking our knees and keeping our hands/arms open. This can be very, very challenging, and not just in a prison setting: society teaches us not to take up too much space, to be quiet, and it is often unnerving for “beginning actors” to let go of those constraints. But when we do, it’s liberating. The game began to work much better.

We returned, then, to the ABC improv game we learned last week. Notable moments included one pair who allowed their scene to become real and serious (we find ourselves trying to make each other laugh more often than not). Another pair found themselves stymied in their scene, searching for responses to one another and becoming frustrated. Rather than encouraging that frustration or scoffing, the ensemble jumped in, shouting out the next letter of the alphabet, and, when necessary, suggesting the next line of the scene. One of the women onstage said she had felt stupid, and that she wasn’t as good at the game as the rest of the group. We reminded her of how supportive the ensemble had been, and that we are all learning from and with each other. We encouraged her to focus on her scene partner rather than on what she might feel is expected of her next time. It was a really wonderful few minutes as the women all came together to “save” the two on stage who were struggling, and they remained supportive after the scene was over.

We returned, then, to the first scene of the play. We read through it again, since it’s been a week, and then we began to break it down bit by bit. The group continues to work together to suss out the meaning in the more archaic language. Several of them keep comparing the play to its film adaptation Ten Things I Hate About You, and one of the women who was in the group last year cautioned them not to stifle their creativity by looking at the original text so much through the lens of someone else’s adaptation. She mentioned how beneficial it was to delay our viewing of the 1967 Romeo and Juliet last year until we had a firm grasp on our interpretation of the story; we were then able to pick and choose what we wanted to “borrow” from that film, and to have critical discussions about cuts made in it with which we didn’t necessarily agree. She reminded the group that this is our version of this play, and if we only think of Kat as Julia Stiles in the movie, we won’t have as much freedom to tell our own truth. She mentioned how, when we began work on Romeo and Juliet, she had a previous interpretation of Juliet that made her dislike the character; but watching the woman who was cast in that role do her own thing with it gave her increased empathy for Juliet.

We found that we were also making a lot of judgment calls about the characters based on just these few pages, and that Kat’s actions as opposed to Bianca’s, and the mens’ treatment of the women just in this first scene, are already leading to heated conversations and multiple interpretations. It’s going to be a very enlightening process as we delve deeper and further into the play, and I have a feeling we’ll be debating aspects of it right through to the end of this session.

Session Four: Week 3

Tuesday

Today after our warm up, the group decided it was time to play some improv games. We began with “Freeze,” in which people improvise scenes in pairs, and those of us in the audience tag them out when we have an idea for a new scene. This was a riot, as this is a very creative group and most of them are not afraid to act silly, which is a key component of this game (at least the way we play it!). More than that, though they instinctively said “yes, and…” nearly all the time, without having been told that that is a major rule of improvisation. It bodes very well for their ability to work well as a flexible ensemble as we work through our play. We also played a game for quick thinking that proved just as much fun.

Following this, we dove into Shrew. We began with the first part of the first scene, in which we are introduced to Lucentio and Tranio. After a read through and a text analysis (all we had time for), the group has come up with this much so far:

• Lucentio has been playing in the little leagues, and now he’s in the big leagues. He’s excited to study in Padua. He thinks highly of himself, but can’t back it up (we’ll be exploring that for sure). He’s a virgin.
   
• Tranio is not only his servant but his dear friend. Opinions are divided on whether he is smarter or “dumber” than Lucentio, and I’m guessing that further exploration of the play will lead to a united ensemble decision there.

We also came up with several interpretations of what Tranio means when he says:

Only, good master, while we do admire

This virtue and this moral discipline,

Let's be no stoics nor no stocks, I pray;

Balk logic with acquaintance that you have

And practice rhetoric in your common talk;

Music and poesy use to quicken you;

The mathematics and the metaphysics,

Fall to them as you find your stomach serves you;

No profit grows where is no pleasure ta'en:

In brief, sir, study what you most affect.

One woman thinks this means, “You learn to survive, like you eat to survive.” Another thinks it means, “Go with your gut.” And another hears, “Learn as much as you can stomach.” I don’t believe that any of these interpretations are “wrong.” Any of them could work for whomever ends up playing this character.

Thursday

During warm ups today, one of the women requested some tongue twisters. She was in Session 1, and she pointed out that everyone will have an easier time with the language if we warm up our mouths at the beginning of each meeting. She’s absolutely right – I’ve been waiting for someone to bring this up – so we’re adding this to our routine each day. We played a couple of warm up games to build focus and ensemble as well.

We then decided to do some improv. We began with “ABC,” in which two people improvise a scene in which each line begins with the next letter of the alphabet. This is normally a pretty challenging game, not just in a prison setting, but for most groups, but this ensemble took to it beautifully. They refused to give up, grinding their way through even the more difficult scenes from A to Z. We identified the things we need to work on: focus (keeping the scene going while keeping the alphabet in our heads), taking care of each other by finishing sentences, and making sure relationships and conflicts are clear – that last bit enables us to have an easier time coming up with our lines.

The last pair to play had the most “success,” leading a couple of the women to say that those two were “the best” or “naturals.” Not necessarily, said Sarah. “We make each other better,” she said, by learning from each other’s mistakes. We welcome mistakes in our group – we welcome “failure” because that’s how we learn to be successful as a group.

One of the women who has been in the group before then requested a game called “Dr. Know It All,” in which a “three-headed genius” answers questions one word at a time. It’s quite a challenging game, and, though some of the groups had a good time with it, those who are newer to the group had a hard time – we may have jumped the gun a bit. Although we facilitators do not desire to lead the group, just to act as guides and resources, it’s possible that we need to lead the improve in a more structured manner in the future to help avoid similar frustrations. Of course, this is a decision that will be made with ensemble input.

With our last bit of time, we read the next part of the first scene of our play. Though we didn’t have time for a detailed analysis, the women were able to quickly and ably sum up the gist of the scene just from that one reading. This play will likely prove to be less of a slog for them than the past two we’ve worked (The Tempest, Romeo and Juliet) because, by and large, the language is much more straightforward. It will be a nice change of pace for us!