To: "Puptcrit" <puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:49:18 +0000 Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Adapting Grimm's Fairy Tales... So here is the problem I have: two hands! LOL seriously though, I am dying to do Cinderella but two sisters, one stepmother and Cindy...I'd have to take off my shoes...Nancy Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: The Independent Eye <eye-AT-independenteye.org> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:33:04 To: <puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org> Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Adapting Grimm's Fairy Tales... I'll chime in to add a few scripting comments. Temptation is to write a book on it, but no time tonight. So I'll try to be deliberately disorganized and limit it all to a few points just drawn from my personal approach. + What to start with? Anything & everything. For me, I go on two paths simultaneously. On the first, I'm carrying a notebook & sketchpad, and scribbling down every idea, character concept, dialogue fragment, or image that comes floating into the head: everything. On the other track, I'm trying to pursue a disciplined process. Usually that has to do with a plot outline, though sometimes it's deepening the characters that stem from the original story. Going back and forth between undisciplined scribble and focused structure works for me, maybe for you. + For me, I know I'm cooking when I actually start plotting. The story is what happens; the plot is the way the incidents are ordered and told. For example, the basic story incidents of Cinderella are obvious, but we could depict them in many ways. Off the top of the head: (a) A narrator introduces her and each of the characters in the household, and then they lay into her with their insane demands. Suddenly, the king's messenger appears with the ball invitation, and everything moves into double speed, including their abuse. The door slams, she's exhausted, sits in the corner and goes to sleep. She dreams the whole ball, meeting the prince, the sudden departure (maybe as a puppet show within the puppet show), and wakes again in the ashes as they come home. She's crushed, realizing it was only a dream. But suddenly the king's messenger appears with the slipper, and she's proclaimed princess: her dream transcends reality. Narrator then tells us that the stepsisters tried to dream themselves a prince, but got stuck with smelly old monsters. Now, I won't argue for that as a stroke of genius, and it modifies the original but I think stays with the essence. It also makes it more unified than if we were to include scenes with the lonesome prince, his dad, the sisters at the ball, etc. That might be good or bad, depending. Or: (b) It starts with the Sisters' preparation for the ball, with Cinderella as abused servant. In response to her longing to go to the ball, they jokingly offer up the fantasy that her fairy godmother will appear, she'll go elegantly, the prince will fall in love with her, then at the stroke of midnight she'll turn back into a charwoman. The fairy-tale parody cuts to the bone, and they go. Cinderella's dead mother appears to her. She's terrified, but even more appalled when told she must go to the ball. The major point of conflict: to overcome her certainty of failure & humiliation. The mother weaves a spell of belief so deep that her beauty is manifest at last. The ball swirls in, and the house is suddenly the palace. She's dancing with the prince. At the moment they kiss, the Sisters shriek, Cinderella loses control of her fantasy, reverts to her rags, and the court swirls back into chaos. She's left with her sisters standing over her, screaming at her. Suddenly, the prince appears with the slipper she's lost: he hasn't noticed the change and still sees her innate beauty. He holds out the slipper One sister grabs it, tries to put it on, but it's red-hot; the other grabs it, but it's freezing. Cinderella dons it, they walk away arm in arm as the sisters patch their wounds and debate how much they'll have to pay for a cleaning lady. + Egad, sorry, I got carried away there - I've never been remotely interested in that story, and suddenly I started to get involved. Obvious point is, many ways to order the incidents and give weight to one or the other. And of course it's affected by the style of puppet, your expected audience, and how many hands you've got. With the above scenarios, they could be visually elaborate or bare-bones; they could have profuse dialogue or minimal. I try to work out a one-page scenario of the action, i.e. what the audience is going to see, before any coherent writing proceeds, though I'll probably have a ton of little dialogue snatches by then, most of which will fall by the wayside. + Dialogue: Yes, I agree that puppetry's visual and that most shows could stand a *lot* of pruning. But it's a tool like any other: it works if it's good. The most common problem is that people write dialogue that's for the page, not for the mouth, and the one thing that'll make the most difference is if you write out loud. Take the general outline of a scene and a little dictation device, and improvise a short dialogue. Go back, take a different line to start with, and do it again. Then sit down and transcribe what works. That's the starting point. Then do some writing to make it more interesting, or more distinctly in the characters' voices, or get in necessary content, but keep going back to speaking it aloud. Try different phrasings to see if you can get it more concise (even if your character is a windbag). Play with it, say it in ways that are deliberately bad & bloated, then try to reduce the whole scene to ten words, and then allow what you really need to come back. There's a particular style in a lot of fairytale adaptation that's a kind of self-conscious stiltedness that's as bad as self-conscious slanginess. And of course, as has been said, each character has his/her own "voice." Try actually to embody & evolve the facial structure and the gestural pattern of the character as you create his dialogue - it'll strengthen the sense that his dialogue style is dictated by his musculature, his breath, his rhythm of thinking. (And as you're working, start listening to every real-life dialogue you hear or overhear to attune to the extraordinary ways human beings put sentences together - remember Sarah Palin? She was painful because she's so typical.). And then: At some point the puppets join in this creative process. They need to have their own say in creating the dialogue. A hand puppet may require a different speech rhythm than a different style. Puppet dialogue, above all, has to be "gestural" - fitting the primary stress impulses to what the puppet can do physically, and where he needs to breathe. Like a live actor, the puppet can push out and express energy, or he can draw the audience's energy into his world. If he's all push-out, it becomes hyperactive and desperate. Where's the in-draw? With all this talk about trying different stuff and improvising, I don't mean to suggest improvisation as a technique in performance. Some people do that brilliantly, most don't. I think for any given line of dialogue, there *is* a best phrasing and a less-best phrasing. But that's often achieved through the developmental process of improvisation. Oh God, it's late, I'm starting to wheeze from the bronchitis that hit me the second performance of RASH ACTS this past weekend. I'll send this off without reading back thru whatever I've written. Elizabeth & I are going to be presenting a workshop on dialogue at the Atlanta festival, so it's much on my mind. But this post itself is a good example of the fact that brevity takes a lot longer than prolixity. Peace & joy- Conrad _______________________________________________ List address: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org Admin interface: http://lists.puptcrit.org/mailman/listinfo/puptcrit Archives: http://www.driftline.org _______________________________________________ List address: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org Admin interface: http://lists.puptcrit.org/mailman/listinfo/puptcrit Archives: http://www.driftline.org
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005