Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 08:35:43 -0400
To: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org
Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Nightingale in Toronto: Lepage and Curry


I just looked at the Michael Curry interview again and did some
exploring of Julie Taymor interviews on youtube.  What I get from them
is that they utilize puppetry  almost always use as an adjuct to the
"Dancer" "Singer" or "Actor"  They both speak of splitting the
attention of the view between the two.  They both,it seems, favor the
"other" and are using the puppet as an icon representing the thing
that we are to associate the actor, dancer or singer with.  This is
evident in the level of  manipulation they strive toward or don't
strive for.  I find both artist's work astounding and yet I don't
necessarily find their puppetry astounding with a few acceptions.
Sitting through Lion King I was constantly taken with how wooden some
of the manipulation was.  I see these moments as lost opportunties.
Figures that could be multijointed are often rendered into worn
sculpture and never makes it to the point of doing what a puppet could
do best.  That is reserved for the actor dancer or singer.  In the end
they manage to astound, like in the parade of animals at the beginning
of Lion King, but then you must ask yourself how much of it is the
actual puppetry?  There 30 some odd extraordinary dancers, singers, an
orchestra. lighting, Pride rock rising out of the stage and a  portion
of the African exhibit from the Metropolitan museum swinging around on
poles.  It is beautiful and moving but not because of the puppetry
really.  They are producing human theater with puppets more as props
and sculptures.  That is fine and I will buy a ticket to Spider man
and would love to see this Nightingale piece, but it is not
extraordinary puppetry in my opinion. Compagnie La Pendue from
Herbeys, France performing Poli Degaine - "Punchy Draw" at our
national festival are utilizing every last drop of what a puppet can
do within the scope of hand puppetry.  And they are two puppeteers and
a little booth with simple glove puppets. That is some bad ass
puppetry.  Actors, singers, and dancers need not apply to their
company I'd imagine.
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Preston Foerder <preston-AT-pfpuppetry.com> wrote:
> When they don't exist in the same person (and sometimes when they do), I've
> always found that there is a power struggle between the puppet builder and
> puppet performer (who I would call the puppeteer but this will probably also
> get me in trouble). =A0Many times as a performer, I've been given puppets with
> blocks built into them to keep the puppet from doing motions the puppet
> builder doesn't think it should do. =A0As a performer, of course, the first
> thing you do is rip these things out so that you can have the freedom to
> manipulate the puppet as you would like. Curry, as the puppet builder, seems
> to believe that the way he has built the puppets makes it impossible for
> them to give a bad performance. =A0I hope he's right but I doubt it.
>
> As a director, if I'm training a non-puppeteer in puppetry, I would rather
> have someone with a movement background, i.e. mime, dance, etc., than
> someone with primarily an acting background as I have found that many actors
> have a hard time taking the character out of themselves and placing into an
> outside object. Generally what you get, as has been mentioned before, is
> someone doing a lot of acting with a puppet at the end of their arm doing
> nothing. I would rather have someone who is primarily a puppeteer which
> necessitates a knowledge of movement, voice, and acting skills. I don't know
> what someone who is exclusively a singer can bring to a puppet other than a
> nice singing voice.
>
> Preston
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: puptcrit-bounces-AT-puptcrit.org [mailto:puptcrit-bounces-AT-puptcrit.org]
> On Behalf Of Christopher Hudert
> Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 12:55 PM
> To: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org
> Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Nightingale in Toronto: Lepage and Curry
>
>> I'd be curious to read some of Taymor and Curry's thoughts on not using
>> puppeteers, if anyone knows where I might find them. I do remember
>> reading
>> that Taymor first trained in mime under Lecoq, and so perhaps comes to
>> puppetry seeing it as a means to experiment with human movement and
>> body,
>> rather than focusing on the puppet itself.
>
> I've been trying to resist getting drawn into this thread, and I don't
> want to take sides, especially the "other" side BUT...
>
> Though I don't fully agree with the reluctance to hire puppeteers, I do
> understand it to a large degree.
>
> The thought does occur to me that part of this reluctance for Taymor
> and Curry may be more in the lack of diverse performing training that
> we puppeteers have (particularly in America). Too often we come to the
> table from the angle of the object/puppet with little training or
> experience in the many other disciplines of performance. How many of us
> have taken the time to study dance, movement, mime, magic, acting,
> voice, singing, etc., etc., etc. in order to be a better puppeteer?
> Many actors, on the other hand, continue taking classes to increase
> their craft. We puppeteers (and I am including myself in this) often
> trend towards the classes in the creation of the tool (puppet). Even if
> you review the archives of this list I believe you will see the bulk of
> the conversation is toward materials, methods of building, and
> performance review and few (if any) mentions of what great acting class
> or instructor someone has discovered.
>
> But even if Taymor, Curry, and others hire non-puppeteers and teach
> them to manipulate puppets, aren't they training them to be puppeteers?
> Aren't they then increasing our ranks, and infusing it with a new
> bloodline? A bit of bio-diversity is not a bad thing, me thinks.
> Perhaps some of the protests (though unspoken) are more that they
> didn't hire "us/me" and that "I" didn't get a shot at this juicy plum
> than it is the lack of hiring puppeteers. I understand the argument
> that perhaps if they hired a puppeteer the manipulation of the puppet
> would be better, but that is coming from students of the object/puppet.
> If you look at it from the school of performance/theater (where
> Taymore, Curry, and some others are probably coming from) it is more
> important that the acting/story be the stronger element. And I don't
> otherwise hear a chorus of complaint when new puppeteers join our
> ranks. Why is that?
>
> There is also the aspect of the difficulty of training out bad (or at
> least bad for what is desired) puppeteer habits in order to train in
> the desired ones. It's often easier to start with a clean slate than to
> try to wipe an old slate clean. Or at least in my experience.
>
> I find I would probably side with Taymore, Curry, and others 6 or 7 out
> of 10 times. But then I come to puppetry from "the other side"
> (acting/story) so maybe that has something to do with it.
>
>
>
> I suspect I just hit the hornet's nest with a rock. I better run and
> jump in the lake. I'm sure people are going to tell me to do that (or
> worse) anyway.
>
> Christopher
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org
Admin interface: http://lists.puptcrit.org/mailman/listinfo/puptcrit
Archives: http://www.driftline.org