http://culturaliteraturayclil.blogspot.com.es/?m=1
viernes, 31 de marzo de 2017
lunes, 13 de marzo de 2017
STORYTELLING - NARRATING
A GOOD STORY:
1. PLOT: interesting, catching. ORGANIZED
2. UNEXPECTED
3. CHARACTERS: appealing, mysterious, believable
4. SETTING: adjectives, details
5. REGISTER AND TONE: personal, close
1. PLOT: interesting, catching. ORGANIZED
2. UNEXPECTED
3. CHARACTERS: appealing, mysterious, believable
4. SETTING: adjectives, details
5. REGISTER AND TONE: personal, close
lunes, 27 de febrero de 2017
What Would You Do?
What Would You Do?
Introduction:
It's also a good way of looking at the concept of "playwriting" while acting or improvising. I'm sorry the term "playwriting" is used here, because as a playwright I object to the word's use in a pejorative sense, but in this case "playwriting" is a bad thing. It occurs when an actor consciously tries to push a story in a particular direction that is unnatural, rather than reacting naturally in character. Obviously in many improvisation settings, such as improv comedy, this can be a good thing, but for an actor in role it is dishonest. Because improv games are fun, I often have to remind people not to "try" to be funny when the point is to learn about character.
Introduction:
This is a fun game to play all by itself, but it can also be very useful for helping young actors learn to more fully inhabit their characters. It's incredibly simple on the surface, but it's not easy to do well.
Play the Game:
One actor plays at a time. The others can take turns "narrating."
The player chooses a character. This can be the character he is playing in a current production, or a character from literature or life. (Be careful though--don't let students choose characters they will be tempted to lampoon.)
The "narrator" (it should be the instructor at least at first) begins to narrate in second person simple events in a person's daily life. Start simple. "You get up in the morning, and it's a beautiful day. You make breakfast."
The player simply follows the instructions, but he reacts in character.
The "narrator" may begin to add some surprises. "You're walking down the street when a man bumps into you."
The player must react to whatever happens IN CHARACTER. In most situations Hamlet would react very differently than, say, Benjamin Franklin.
Narrator continues the story, adding more and more extreme details. "You come upon a dead body. It's your mother." "It's floating in midair."
Play stops when the instructor feels it has gone as far as it can or should.
Discussion:
I find this game a great jumping-off point for a discussion of the difference between acting and "indicating." I am frequently asked, when explaining the game, "So, I'm supposed to figure out what my character would do in each situation, and then do it?" I reply, "Not exactly. I don't want you to HAVE to figure anything out. If you are truly inhabiting your character, you will simply react."
It's also a good way of looking at the concept of "playwriting" while acting or improvising. I'm sorry the term "playwriting" is used here, because as a playwright I object to the word's use in a pejorative sense, but in this case "playwriting" is a bad thing. It occurs when an actor consciously tries to push a story in a particular direction that is unnatural, rather than reacting naturally in character. Obviously in many improvisation settings, such as improv comedy, this can be a good thing, but for an actor in role it is dishonest. Because improv games are fun, I often have to remind people not to "try" to be funny when the point is to learn about character.
Circle of Characters
This is a complicated but really fun game I invented with my advanced 7th & 8th grade class. It works with older kids and adults as well, but I wouldn't try it with much younger. It probably also wouldn't work very well with groups of more than eight or ten, unless you split them up and had one group play while the other was "audience." What makes it difficult is that players must maintain a character in an improvisational setting while at the same time carefully observing others' characters.
Back to top.
How to Play
Each person is given an index card (or any little slip of paper will do, as long as they are all pretty much the same) on which he or she writes the name of a famous person. (Alternatively, you could have them write the name of a literary figure, or the description of a made-up character--you can set any kind of limits or guidelines you like. I generally make them show me before passing each name--not because I think they'll write something "inappropriate," but because I think they'll name someone who won't be recognizable to the whole class. For instance, I have one student who seems to have spent all of his first ten years or so in front of the television, and is always naming obscure TV actors or MTV stars no one else knows.).
The leader collects the cards and redistributes them, so that no one receives his own. (Actually, to make the game work smoothly, it is necessary to do the distribution very carefully, but not to give away the method to the participants. I'll discuss that at the end.)
Each person reads the card given her and thinks about how to "become" that character.
The leader then names a scenario. For example: "A bunch of people are gathered together at a dinner party in honor of someone's birthday. They mingle for a while, and eventually all sit down to dine around this table here, which has precisely the right number of chairs." Or: The world is about to end, and these eight people are the only ones left alive. They have a spaceship which will carry them to another galaxy, but there is no guarantee that they will find a habitable planet there. They argue and go back and forth, but eventually decide to get in this rocket ship here, which has precisely the right number of seats, arranged in a circle, since it is a flying saucer." You can make up any scenario you want, but it must end with everyone sitting or standing in a circle. It works best if there is a prescribed physical place in the acting space for this circle, as in the examples above.
The object of the game is this: As the actors begin playing out the prescribed scenario improvisationally, each is also searching for the person who is playing the character he or she named. The idea is to end up sitting in a circle so that each person is sitting directly behind (or directly to the right of) the person who is doing that person's character. (This is why the cards must be distributed carefully.) The game is over once everyone is seated, and if the order is wrong at that point, then the team loses, so an actor who thinks someone else has made a mistake and is sitting in the wrong place must resist sitting herself until the problem has been resolved—but she must resist in character, and appropriately to the situation.
Once everyone is seated, everyone reveals their characters and it is clear whether the group has won or lost.
Back to top.
Pointers
Distributing the cards: Clearly this must be done carefully, or you may end up with several small circles instead of one big one. I suppose you could create a scenario that would allow this, but as the circles might be as small as two people (what if Bob gets Betty's character and Betty gets Bob's?) it is probably easier just to cook the distribution so that you ensure one single circle. There are lots of ways to do this. Since I know everyone's handwriting, I can recognize whose card is whose, and I just make sure that whoever gets the first card, it is that person's card I hand out second, and whoever gets that card, I hand their card out third, etc. This works, but of course it won't work if I TELL the class I'm doing it, because then everyone will be able to figure out by watching me who gets their card--it's the person I come to right after them! Probably a better way would be to arrange the order ahead of time and make a list—something like "Bob get's Betty's, Betty gets Allen's, Allen gets Marigold's, Marigold gets Eunice's, Eunice gets Arvide's, Arvide gets Bob's." If you are working from such a list (and you should make a new one for each time you play the game) you can hand the cards out in random order and still be ensured of a circle. It doesn't really matter HOW you do it--the point is to make sure you don't get any closed loops inside the circle. I mention the above two methods of ensuring this for those who (like me) tend to be math-impaired.
Scenarios: Below are some suggested scenarios, in addition to the two above. You will think of others.
Variations
As mentioned above, you can set any guidelines you like on the characters people may choose to write down. For example, in an English class you could have everyone write down a character from the current reading. In a History class you could have them choose historical figures you have been studying. An advanced acting class might be asked to write a single adjective or adverb--demented, loudly, frequently, etc.--which might generate some very interesting results, as well as pointing out how vague such words really are.
If you can trust your group not to be unnecessarily cruel, try this one: Have everyone write THEIR OWN NAME on their card. This way, you're looking for the person who is you! This can be extremely telling and fun for a group with the maturity to handle it!
Back to top.
How to Play
Each person is given an index card (or any little slip of paper will do, as long as they are all pretty much the same) on which he or she writes the name of a famous person. (Alternatively, you could have them write the name of a literary figure, or the description of a made-up character--you can set any kind of limits or guidelines you like. I generally make them show me before passing each name--not because I think they'll write something "inappropriate," but because I think they'll name someone who won't be recognizable to the whole class. For instance, I have one student who seems to have spent all of his first ten years or so in front of the television, and is always naming obscure TV actors or MTV stars no one else knows.).
The leader collects the cards and redistributes them, so that no one receives his own. (Actually, to make the game work smoothly, it is necessary to do the distribution very carefully, but not to give away the method to the participants. I'll discuss that at the end.)
Each person reads the card given her and thinks about how to "become" that character.
The leader then names a scenario. For example: "A bunch of people are gathered together at a dinner party in honor of someone's birthday. They mingle for a while, and eventually all sit down to dine around this table here, which has precisely the right number of chairs." Or: The world is about to end, and these eight people are the only ones left alive. They have a spaceship which will carry them to another galaxy, but there is no guarantee that they will find a habitable planet there. They argue and go back and forth, but eventually decide to get in this rocket ship here, which has precisely the right number of seats, arranged in a circle, since it is a flying saucer." You can make up any scenario you want, but it must end with everyone sitting or standing in a circle. It works best if there is a prescribed physical place in the acting space for this circle, as in the examples above.
The object of the game is this: As the actors begin playing out the prescribed scenario improvisationally, each is also searching for the person who is playing the character he or she named. The idea is to end up sitting in a circle so that each person is sitting directly behind (or directly to the right of) the person who is doing that person's character. (This is why the cards must be distributed carefully.) The game is over once everyone is seated, and if the order is wrong at that point, then the team loses, so an actor who thinks someone else has made a mistake and is sitting in the wrong place must resist sitting herself until the problem has been resolved—but she must resist in character, and appropriately to the situation.
Once everyone is seated, everyone reveals their characters and it is clear whether the group has won or lost.
Back to top.
Pointers
Distributing the cards: Clearly this must be done carefully, or you may end up with several small circles instead of one big one. I suppose you could create a scenario that would allow this, but as the circles might be as small as two people (what if Bob gets Betty's character and Betty gets Bob's?) it is probably easier just to cook the distribution so that you ensure one single circle. There are lots of ways to do this. Since I know everyone's handwriting, I can recognize whose card is whose, and I just make sure that whoever gets the first card, it is that person's card I hand out second, and whoever gets that card, I hand their card out third, etc. This works, but of course it won't work if I TELL the class I'm doing it, because then everyone will be able to figure out by watching me who gets their card--it's the person I come to right after them! Probably a better way would be to arrange the order ahead of time and make a list—something like "Bob get's Betty's, Betty gets Allen's, Allen gets Marigold's, Marigold gets Eunice's, Eunice gets Arvide's, Arvide gets Bob's." If you are working from such a list (and you should make a new one for each time you play the game) you can hand the cards out in random order and still be ensured of a circle. It doesn't really matter HOW you do it--the point is to make sure you don't get any closed loops inside the circle. I mention the above two methods of ensuring this for those who (like me) tend to be math-impaired.
Scenarios: Below are some suggested scenarios, in addition to the two above. You will think of others.
A group of people are at an amusement park, chatting while they wait for the carousel to stop. When it does, they each select an animal to ride and get on.Back to top.
A group of people has just discovered a huge treasure chest filled with gold. They may quarrel over it. As it grows dark, they decide they must guard it against theft, and the only sure way is to sleep in a circle around the chest.
A group of people are on a jury together. They have just been sent into the jury room to deliberate. They discuss the case in a haphazard way until the foreman persuades them that they should all sit down at the table.
Variations
As mentioned above, you can set any guidelines you like on the characters people may choose to write down. For example, in an English class you could have everyone write down a character from the current reading. In a History class you could have them choose historical figures you have been studying. An advanced acting class might be asked to write a single adjective or adverb--demented, loudly, frequently, etc.--which might generate some very interesting results, as well as pointing out how vague such words really are.
If you can trust your group not to be unnecessarily cruel, try this one: Have everyone write THEIR OWN NAME on their card. This way, you're looking for the person who is you! This can be extremely telling and fun for a group with the maturity to handle it!
Gibberish Sentences
Preparation
Before class, prepare some index cards--at least twice as many as there are students in your group--each with one simple sentence written on it. These should be sentences that are fairly elementary and important--basic communications. A complete list of the sentences in one of my decks of cards is at the bottom of this lesson.
Back to top.
Play the Game
Students sit in a semi-circle. One student volunteers to go to the front, and glances at the top card in the pile. (Sometimes I manipulate the deck so that the most advanced students get the hardest sentences.) The student's job is to communicate the precise meaning of the sentence as efficiently as possible without the use of spoken language. (Sometimes I say without making any sound, but usually I allow sounds as long as they are not words. The title of the game comes from the fact that I sometimes allow the students to speak "gibberish" as they gesture.) The student must imagine that he or she is a stranger in a new country and does not speak a word of the language.
Students raise their hands and try to guess the meaning of the sentence. I do not, of course, insist on exact words, but I am fairly picky about precise shades of meaning. (For example, if the card says, "I like your new haircut," I do not allow "Is that a new haircut?" but I do allow "Nice haircut!") Depending on the success of the class and the sophistication of the particular sentence, I may coach and hint--"you're close!" etc. After a minute or two if no one has guessed the student tells the class what his sentence was. If this happens I always ask the class for suggestions for how the student could have made the meaning clear.
I play the game until everyone has had a turn, or until time up.
Back to top.
Discussion
I don't ordinarily set aside time at the end of class for discussion, but I am constantly alert for the opportunity for analysis, discussion and critical thinking during the game. If a student is successful only after a long time, or with a lot of elaborate pantomiming, I open up a discussion about what might have been a more efficient way to convey the meaning. When someone comes up with a gesture that is a cliche--like the "check mark" in the air for "check, please!"--I applaud its efficiency but then discuss the way that gestures become universal clichés. This game allows for lots of connections and thought.
Back to top.
Sentences
Below are all the sentences from my deck of sentence cards (in no particular order):
I have a toothache.
I like your new haircut.
Where is the exit?
That is a very beautiful hat.
I've missed my bus.
Please don't shout.
Are you my mother?
Is this your hat?
Who's in charge here?
May I take your order?
My feet hurt.
I can't find my shoes.
Does the train stop here?
Stop, in the name of the law.
I'm thirsty.
It looks like rain.
What a beautiful day!
We're going to be late.
This food is spoiled.
Get off my lawn!
My head hurts.
Where is the telephone?
Do you have a pen?
Leave me alone!
I'm cold.
I'm hungry.
My leg is broken.
Have you seen my dog?
You mustn't smoke in here!
Mr. HIT
Stand in a circle. One person announces, "I am Mr. Hit!" Mr. Hit begins walking directly (but slowly, at first) towards another person in the circle, with his hands out in front of him like a zombie. If he touches (hits) the person, they are "out" and must leave the circle. The only way the intended victim can stop Mr. Hit is to call out the name of another person in the circle before any contact is made. No fair running away.
Once a name is called out, that person instantly becomes Mr. Hit and begins advancing on a victim. (He doesn't have to announce that he is Mr. Hit after the first time.) Again, the only way the victim can save himself is by calling out a name.
Continue play until all but two people have been eliminated. It gets harder and harder, because as people are "out" the fund of names grows smaller. You can't say the name of a person who is out--it must be someone who is still in the circle. It sounds easy, but it isn't. It is very difficult to think with Mr. Hit bearing down on you.
This is great, if frustrating, fun, and although, as I've said, I think it is great for any group, it is also hands down the most effective "name game" I know. Something about the sheer panic you feel when Mr. Hit is coming at you and you can't think of a name to say really makes those names stick in your head. Doesn't work with little kids.
Some groups find that they have to change the name of the game to "Mr. Tap" to avoid injury. You know your group best. There's really no reason to do more than lightly touch the victim.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)