Low Hanging Fruit- Q & A

Q & A- There are a lot of questions for directors. Some of these are questions you ask yourself as you read the script. Some are questions from actors. Some are questions for research, to broaden one's understanding of the play.

Sometimes, the questions are interviews that help to market the play :-)

Here is a Q & A session for Low Hanging Fruit by Robin Bradford.

 

What is Low Hanging Fruit about in your own words?

Low Hanging Fruit tells the story of four ex-military women, broken and damaged by their experiences, who find ways to survive and cope on the streets through their friendship. Their bond is challenged when they are joined by a young teen runaway. For me, the real story is not only the shameful abandonment of the women who have served our country, but also the power of friendship to support and sometimes heal us, even when we are badly broken.

 

What was the most surprising discovery you made about female veterans during your research and work on Low Hanging Fruit?

There have been so many surprises in the research on female veterans. I was surprised to learn that female veterans are the fastest growing segment of the homeless population. I was shocked to learn of the statistics on Military Sexual Trauma (MST). MST is sexual assault or sexual harassment experienced during a person’s military service. The Veteran Administration’s own statistics, from screening questions asked of every veteran seeking health care, reports 1 in 4 women respond with “yes” when asked if they have experienced MST. Often, the sexual trauma is inflicted by another service officer, frequently a superior. As Alice says in the play, “You get sent to places like Iraq, Afghanistan, places that ain’t safe. At least we should’ve been safe in the green zone! But we got to fight there too, and that ain’t right.” Too true- it ain’t right.

Is there a part of the story you relate to or feel strongly about and why?

I identify strongly with the bond formed among the four women. There is power in friendship that grows out of shared experience. All four of these women have seen combat. They have a shared emotional vocabulary, and in creating their own bulwark in the urban combat zone, they have lived a new shared history of struggle. To a lesser degree, I have had that deep friendship and support with other women. You get to know one another, you know what will make your friend laugh, what will make her fall apart, how to help her pull it together. With just a glance, you can ask for an assist or a save from your own trials.

Another strong connection is the recognition that while we can support one another, each of us comes to healing in our own time, on our own terms.

Or not.

Before working on this play, what was your level of awareness of the hardships many women veterans face?

I have to confess that I didn’t know much about the additional challenges faced by women veterans. Of course, there has been plenty of news coverage of the many failures of our support systems for our veterans. Like most of us, I generalized these news reports and had the stereotypical male soldier in mind. However, I did not realize the extraordinary impact on our service women and their families of military service. Because military service has been overwhelmingly male, the system for serving veterans is built on a male model, with little allowance for women’s different needs. Add to this that women are more often single parents, women veterans have even more challenges when deployed, and when returning. It’s been eye-opening, to say the least.

 

What do you intend for the audience to take away with them after attending a performance Low Hanging Fruit?

I want the audience to have a greater awareness of the problems faced by female veterans. Through our performance, and also through the post-show panels, I hope that the audience will recognize that there is a need, that there is work to be done. The homeless are often nearly invisible to those of us in more advantaged lives; female homeless veterans, even more so. I also hope that the message comes across that healing is possible, and, through our performances and the engagement programs we’ve developed, that each individual in that audience can do something to help that healing.

 

What are your thoughts on working with a cast of both professional and student actors? Do you have a rehearsal anecdote to share on the subject?

I love working with both professional and student actors. I think it’s a great opportunity for both the professionals and the students! The professionals bring a great work ethic, tremendous focus and discipline. All these are great models for the students to see and emulate.

The students bring great vitality, and a fresh perspective. It’s wonderful to see those “ahah!” moments of discovery and get excited again about the magic that is the theater process!

Directing and mentoring/teaching seem a great pairing to me. As a director, I am a collaborator. I work to create an atmosphere of creative freedom, and forge an ensemble with strong connections and sharing among the actors. The root of “educate” is “to draw out, to bring out, to lead forth”- to draw out the student’s understanding, to encourage the student to make connections. In the best cases, to guide the student to find their own path, their own understanding.

Much the same can be said of directing.

Take note: That's what I'm giving*

I actually enjoy giving director's notes to the cast.

During much of the rehearsal period, as a director, you are breaking the play down into scenes, into moments. I am very vocal during this period, jumping to my feet YES! or ACK! Stop! Do it again- think about where you just were! What do you want?

Later on, however, we have to put it all back together, establish continuity, rhythm, pace, the long arcs of the characters and of the play itself. We can't stop. We run through, all the way through the scene, the act, finally the entire play.

While I, like most directors, take notes.

Sometimes, because the hour is late and actors (and I) have to go home, I type up the notes and email them to the actors after I've returned home. I don't like to do this because A) actors may not understand a specific note, B) actors may not read the notes and C) I like to give notes.

I like to give notes. I do. I make eye contact. I make jokes. I exaggerate, exhort, and expound. I prance and I posture, I prod and I praise.

From time to time, I may have to shush the actors who are starting side conversations. After all, for many years, the actors with whom I have worked have been teens.

Still, all in all, I have fun giving notes, and the actors have fun receiving the notes.

Here are some of the key ingredients for good note-giving:

• Make eye contact. Make sure the actors are listening.
• EVERY actor should receive a comment. Each actor should know that they are important, and that their work is (literally) noted.
• Use humor. I use a lot of humor at my own expense... I tease and challenge them to be bigger, bolder, more energized than this "old lady"
• Catch them doing something right; be specific about when it happened, and what it was. Comments like "you're great" or "good job" might feel good for a moment, but they don't tell the actor where they are succeeding or how to build on that success. A comment like: "I could really see you focus on the other character on your line 'Not now, darling''" tells the actor what is working and when.
• Be specific about what you want the actor to change. Comments such as "That's no good" or "I didn't like that" again do not give the actor any useful information. A comment like "When you enter in scene two, try rushing straight to the couch- remember what just happened to the character before you entered" gives the actor useful information about what needs work in the scene, and a suggestion for a new approach.
• I try to give both the "director's reason" and the "actor's reason" for a direction. For instance, in the above example, I might remind the actor that the actor's reason- the character's reason- for rushing in is that the character is escaping from an uncomfortable encounter in the other room; while I will admit that my "director's reason" for asking you to rush in and cross to the couch is that the scene needs more energy, and I need you out of the doorway!
• Be a believer. Believe in the play, believe in your actors, believe in theater magic. Keep cheering, keep watching, noting, and sharing what you see. Eventually, it all comes together- how? It's a mystery!

*This is a re-post that I re-read and re-felt today. FINAL DRESS TECH TONIGHT

Everybody ought to have a stage manager.

Stage managers are awesome. A good stage manager is beyond price. No kidding.

I really didn't realize this back when I was a young actor. I focused on the director. I focused on the other actors. I worked on my inner reality.

I heard the stage manager. I called back, "Thanks, 10!" when I heard the announcement "Ten minutes to places!"

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't rude. I wasn't one of those actors who thinks the stage managers or other techies are unworthy of notice. Not at all! I've always been an ensemble gal, so I felt keenly that every single person involved was part of our team.

However, as a young actor, who had not directed, or designed, or run lights, or plotted sound- I had NO CLUE. I was ignorant.

Now, having been blessed several times with good stage managers (and blighted a few times with poor ones), I cannot sing their praises loudly enough.

Stage managers are superheroes.

They have super powers- like super hearing. A stage manager will overhear an actor muttering about fumbling and stumbling during a scene transition, and suddenly there is glow tape on the problematic corner or an additional blue light backstage.

They have stamina and unbelievable endurance. They are with the production from the first production meeting or read through on to closing night.

They are masters of multi-tasking. They are monitoring lines from the actors, cues for the lights and the sound, tracking the props.

They are flexible and adaptable beyond belief, working with last minute blocking changes from directors or finding solutions to scenic or costume change fails during last tech rehearsals or even (Heaven FORBID) during performance.

I've directed for many years now, and I've designed, and I've crewed. I am no longer without a clue.

I know.

All praise to you, stage managers. You are the glue that keeps a production together through the battering of tech and the wear and tear of performance.

As the old joke goes:
- How many stage managers does it take to change a ligh-
DONE!

I'm positive

I've been working diligently at phrasing my direction in a positive manner.

This is much harder than one might think. What we notice first, almost always, is what is not working. The tremendous temptation is to say: "Don't ______"


Don't push.

Don't drop the end of the line.

Don't rush.

In directing-- in fact, in any guiding/teaching/parenting/whatever-- what NOT to do is not especially useful information. Even if the actor (student/child/whatever) wants to follow the suggestion, what they have is what to DON'T. I haven't given the actor what to DO.


While always reminding my actor that these are suggestions or guides, I try to give more positive information:

Relax. Allow yourself to search to find the right words.


Lift the end of your line.


Take your time; allow the action to unfold.


Here's a tip shared with me by another director: Use "and" instead of "but". As soon as we hear the word "but," we stop listening because we're anticipating criticism. We are fearful of being judged; we shut down. Hearing the word "and," on the other hand, we anticipate addition, building, growth.


This:


I like the way you focus on the exchange between Fred and Mary, but try to interrupt them sooner with your line.


Or this:


I like the way you focus on the exchange between Fred and Mary, and if you interrupt them sooner with your line, it will intensify that tension.


Which would you prefer to hear?

Ask and Answer

Wouldn’t you like to know?

What would you like to know about theater or directing? I’m renewing my commitment to my blog and to my theater writing. I’d love to have your help.

What topics are the highest priority to you? What questions do you have? What answers do you have? What dilemmas? Discussions? Insights? Inspirations?

Either email me or post on my professional page. I look forward to your rants, raves, trials, triumphs, greatest moments, worst moments, your fears, your jeers, your cheers.

Some topics I’ve tackled and/or I’ve been thinking about:

Art vs. Commerce

Audience: check here or here

Auditions

Awards

Casting: check here

Choosing Scripts: check here

Comedy

Community building

Competition vs. Collaboration

Criticism

Directing

Director’s concept

Ensemble

Feedback

Funding: check here

Giving Notes: check here

Hell week

Playwriting: check here

Scheduling: check here

Set building

Shakespeare

Stanislavski

Teaching and directing: check here

Theater magic: check this, or this one, or this by Beth, or Beth again

Youth artists: check here

... what else should we be thinking about?

building ensemble, building community

I have founded two successful youth theater troupes. Now that I have retired from both, I can look back on what was accomplished.

Both the troupes were successful. Both went through phases of growth and development, sometimes exhilarating and sometimes frustrating. There were challenges that led to growth, and challenges that led to breakups and break downs. There were opportunities that were seized and opportunities that were missed.

Both troupes were successful in financial terms: while I was actively operating the troupes, every production finished in the black. We ultimately grew to a point that we were able to pay guest artists, and then directors.

We served hundreds of young people in learning more about the art of theater by doing the art of theater.

We served thousands of young people by bringing live theater- performed *well* by young artists- to audiences in schools, camps, libraries and parks over two decades. I firmly believe we have helped develop the audience and the participants for live theater for the next generation.

What I am most proud of is the ensemble of artists we created, and the community that we built.

In our best years, members of our troupe learned through experience that the whole of the production is greater than the sum of each of our individual efforts; that our best work makes the work of our co-creators better, that their work makes our own work better, and that by giving generously to the other artists on stage and backstage, we enrich ourselves and our audience.

We shared pot-luck marathon tech rehearsals and late night after-glows. We created a community by building on shared experiences.

In our community, we shared marriages, divorces, illnesses, deaths, births, graduations.

Perhaps one day I will be a part of building another such ensemble. Whether or not this happens in the future, our shared past has made me a richer and wiser woman. Thanks to all of you.

Conversations about ensemble

The troupe that I founded and from which I have retired is changing and evolving. I was flattered to recently be asked a question about the changes being contemplated by the group.
****
The question was:

A question has arisen as the troupe has been trying to standardize some of its policies and to plan for its growth.  It was suggested that the troupe become a two-tiered organization, having a level for beginning actors and another for advanced, more experienced actors.  With this set up, the troupe would be offering open auditions twice a year, with all being cast.  The third show would be an invitation-only audition with no casting guarantees.

I (this board member wrote) am not convinced that the suggested two-tiered approach is representative of our mission.  To me, having two-tiers contrasts with our ensemble approach and sets up competition instead of encouraging mentoring.  Also, we stress the importance of theater for all teens and how it can benefit them, and I feel that by limiting it to "talented" teens, even only for one show, that we are not fully living up to this mission.

****
The board member requested my input as founder, as one there when the mission was originally crafted.

I responded:

This issue has been brought up from time to time; as you note, it is a thorny issue. In past years, we had tossed around ideas of invitation only shows; having limits to how many were *in* the troupe, period - so, a membership cap, with guaranteed casting once you were "in"; having an educational track open to all with advancement to the troupe following; and Travel Troupe as a solution.

When we first formed the organization, it was seen as a spin off of the (younger) 4-H performing arts club I'd founded, which we imagined might be a sort of "feeder" troupe (all very informal- don't tell 4-H on us!). The 4-H club was where younger actors, and newer actors, could explore without pressure. The new troupe was where the "serious" actors went.

Well, that didn't work out past the "first generation"; partly due to my time constraints, and partly due to the changing group dynamics, the 4-H club became less and less active- what vital parent support we had had shifted to the new teen troupe.

In the early years, in a very real way, Travel Troupe was the elite troupe. It was started by invitation with longer time members and presented quality shows for a few years.

Something else- on a couple of occasions - one being Zoo Story- one of the troupe asked for a specific project, which the board approved and sponsored. This was youth initiated and formally requested. So, that is one route: a core group of artists find a project they would like to do, and ask the board to approve and sponsor it.

An interesting note to me is that the intermittent pressure and/or calls for an "elite" squad always seemed to come from those (or the parents of those) who had been "newbies" recently, felt that they had "arrived", and were now looking down on the "newbies". The call *never* came from folks like my son A, like MD, like DH or AG, long-timers who had experienced the magic of successful ensemble.

So, having said all that: You are looking at a core dilemma for theater. Collaboration vs. competition. A (I believe - false!) dichotomy between ensemble and excellence.

This is what I believe: there are many, many organizations that force actors to compete to participate. There are few that work to build ensemble.

I believe that ensemble *can be* a path to excellence. However, there is a requirement that in order to build ensemble, you have to spend time- not one show but several shows, not one season but many seasons. If you are in it for the long haul, you know your time and your role will come. You look at the success of the season and the troupe.

It may be that there is no longer a large enough "core" of artists who have been working and have experienced making the whole greater than the sum of the parts. It does take continuity.

I do not have answers for the evolving organization; as has been noted many times, the organization is changing and evolving to what it will be from what it has been. I hope my comments, such as they are, may be of some assistance.