A few fun links: Here are some Japanese fifth graders performing joruri (with a chorus of chanters). In the embedded video below, you can see some good footage of a bunraku performance (though since I don't read Japanese, I can't tell who is doing the performing, or where, or what the play is):
How did today's exercise in performing The Love Suicides at Amijima change how you understand the play? What observations do you have about the dramatic power of puppets, the role of the chanter, or the expressive power of gesture and body language?
Deadline: Wednesday (2/9), start of class.
8 comments:
The fact that they play is preformed by puppets completely changed my opinion of the play. I first veiwed it as serious, but I could not help but laugh when the class was trying to preform the play. Watching the video displayed changed my opinion again. The pupets used were very detailed and it is apparent that a lot of work goes into prepairing them. It is also a lot of work for the people controling the puppets. The chanter has one of the most important jobs. The chanter must be able to change their voice and have the proper tone is their voice.
Something that impressed me on Monday is just how much body language the torso and shoulders can "speak." One advantage of real puppets (over the human puppets we used in class on Monday) is that when the puppeteers move the hands and the head, the lightweight body of the puppet follows. Our puppets and puppeteers did their best on Monday with head and hand movements, but the heavy (and largely immobile) upper bodies of real people made those gestures less expressive than the movements of authentic puppets.
Still--you guys did a great job!
I noticed that I was following the "puppet"s motions more then I was following the dictation of the reader. The puppet's performance greatly effected the mood of the piece. Those who were more comical significantly lightened the narration of the piece and, as said before, made the overall view more humorous then tragic. I think that with actual puppets it would be easier to convey their interpretations of the piece. Personally, it seemed a bit awkward trying to control something that is not only bigger then you but has a mind of it's own. With the puppets, you are in control.
What I found the most interesting about observing our attempts on Monday as well as the online videos of puppet plays is how much easier it is to get into it as an audience member than I would expect. During the class groups' performances I realized that I rarely looked at the chanter, even though I knew that was where the actual voice was coming from, but looked at the "puppet" instead. Th same is true of this video, along with my surprise that I don't find the puppeteers distracting at all. The puppets are so beautiful that you can really see them as actual characters rather than just puppets.
While watching everyone performed, I learned that it was probably easier using humans as puppets since they can still show expression. While watching the video, I saw that since the puppets have no emotion, its up to the chanter to bring these characters to live. The tones they use, the way their body moves allows the audience to get the gist of what the story is about and what to feel at each moment of the play. Also since the people who control the puppet are in charge of one limb, the puppets can have a greater range of movement, than real life actors. They also are able to give more exaggerated movements. Also using puppets allows you to focus more on the story, since there is not a bunch of unnecessary background characters that distract from the main focus of the story.
Today's exercise showed me how everything goes together, if the voice does not match the gestures and movement then it doesn't fit. It was interesting to see each groups way of showing the actions for the words. Most groups only had one other person to dictate the movement of the person(puppet), but I can still identify with the level of difficulty and precision its takes to make everything run smoothly. Understanding why they have individuals that come to the shows only to observe the way that things work on stage is better understood because each job takes careful movements to make the characters come to life. I think the person with the most importance is the chanter, for the simple reason that they set the standard of the play. If they read without emphasizes or does not play each part correctly, it leaves the readers a bit off and the actors to pick up the slack.
I definitely agree that the voice and puppets syncing up is key to a good performance. If, in a role played by a human or in a regular conversation, the body gestures didn't match up with the lines/dialogue, the performance would be confusing and not very easy to follow. Bodily gestures allow us to add emphasis to what we say, and can add new elements to what we say (a thumbs up coupled with a "good job" can make a big difference, and the air quote gesture is rarely used with a serious tone).
One advantage the puppets had over our human versions was the exaggeration of the movements. These movements allow the puppeteer to really emphasize what they're saying, or just entertain the audience during a longer monologue or song. Not only that, but more serious topics (like the love suicides in our play) can be handled a little more easily emotionally.
I suppose one advantage we had over their puppets was the ability to make facial expressions. The puppets in the video, while incredibly detailed, can't really change their faces, so it falls to the body to make up for that lack of expression. That's one area where real live humans can really make a difference (one facial expression can change the entire meaning of what you're saying, or be a reaction in and of itself).
While watching our improvised performances Monday, I was thinking about how presenting characters “artificially” differs from using “real” actors. I have a background in theater and had known masks, puppets and such were somehow supposed to make a story more universal. Though I understood the idea intellectually, I did not understand emotionally until I saw Blue Man Group in Chicago. For those of you who don’t know, the five actors in Blue Man Group wear a mask of sorts; they paint themselves from top to bottom in bright blue. They are indistinguishable from each other and become “everyman.” By the end of the performance I saw, the audience felt a kinship so strong that, with urging from the narrator and blue men, we willingly covered each other with toilet paper so thick it felt like a blanket. Maybe on the deepest level, we’re all the same under the blue paint. I imagine Bunraku performances can achieve the same kind of kinship in an audience who has adjusted to the form.
As I watched in class Monday, I also thought about what KW said regarding audiences admiring the puppetry. I probably shouldn’t admit this given I’m attending UIUC, but I’m not a sports fan in terms of the game. I am a sports fan in terms of watching athletes beautifully execute what they have trained so hard to do. I’m sure I’d be just as enthralled watching the puppeteers.
Post a Comment