Restoration Research File

Restoration Research File

English Civil War

The English Civil War (1642–1651) was a war between two English factions, the Roundheads and the Cavaliers. The Roundheads were led by Oliver Cromwell, their aim to install parliament to power over the monarch in England. The Cavaliers were led by King Charles I, they sought to preserve the monarchy's power in the realm. 

There were three periods of fighting that make up the war, the first ended when Charles I was defeated and captured by Parliamentary forces but the second began when, from prison, Charles managed to rally a new army with the Scots. The second ended, once again, with Charles I's defeat, this time however he was tried for treason and executed. The third was a result of the execution of Charles I, the Scottish forces regrouped and united and, led by Charles II they fought the Parliamentary forces again. Once again the Royalist forces were defeated and Charles II was sent into exile from England once more. 

There were a few causes of the war, King James I's rule caused a great rift between the relationship between the monarch and parliament. James firmly believed in The Divine Right of Kings, believing that God had appointed the monarch and no one could rule besides the monarch. This belief led to James suspending parliament for ten years, only to bring them back to discuss a marriage for his son to a Spanish princess. This proposition was looked at with distaste and didn't go ahead but hurt relations between monarchy and parliament. Charles' rule only caused more problems for the parliament, many unpopular opinions and, like his father, suspended parliament for eleven years. The war broke out when Charles went to arrest five of his critics within parliament, the last straw that started the civil war.

This doesn't directly affect Blunt. I'm saying he was neutral in the war, caring little for politics. He only really cares for himself and as such the political war wouldn't have affected him directly so he would have tried to avoid it. The others, Belvile, Frederick and Willmore are all Cavaliers banished for their political alignment but Blunt has just followed them for the enjoyment of it. He directly says "I thank my stars that I have more grace than to forfeit my estate by Cavaliering". This shows a distaste for those who put their politics ahead of themselves, a selfish and shallow attitude iconic of the fop. The audience of the time would have likely had their clear political views, the event being close in living memory. Seeing someone so clearly show a lack of care for the politics would potentially be humorous. Today, however, the audience may not even be familiar to the English Civil War and as such that humour would be lost.

The Interregnum

The Interregnum is the time in which the play is set. It's the time between the execution of Charles I and the restoration of Charles II to the throne. The rule passed through a few phases during the Interregnum. The longest form of rule in the time was Cromwell as Lord Protector. Cromwell enforced puritan values on the country and was almost as unpopular as his Charles, the King he executed to get there. Easter and Christmas were suppressed, and theatre and gambling were also banned. Some art forms such as opera were deemed as 'virtuous' however and allowed. The restrictive reign of Cromwell ended with his death in 1658 and led to Charles II's restoration to the throne in 1660.

This does have a lot of relevance to Blunt. He would have hated the restrictions placed on the country during the Interregnum. His lavish lifestyle would have been looked down on by the temperate Puritans. That would be one of the main reasons for leaving with the Cavaliers for Spain. Again, he has left not for his political views but instead for his own humour.

Charles II

Charles II was the King from 29th May 1630 to 6th February 1685, living long and having a similarly long rule. He was liked much more than he predecessors appreciating hedonism and lavish lifestyles above the restriction and temperance of the puritan rule prior. This appreciation of the material and luxury had Charles II known as the 'Merry Monarch'. He was restored to the throne following a political crisis caused by the death of Oliver Cromwell in 1658. The throne passed to James II upon his death in 1685.

The play was written after the return of Charles II to the throne. This could be taken in two ways depending on the reading of the play. It could be seen as a condemnation of the attitudes of the King and his loyal Cavaliers, deploring hedonism as something that causes men to do cruel things and has women abused. However the play could be shown as a celebration of hedonism, the men are bawdy and merry while the wiser, wittier women prove to be able to enjoy themselves as much as the men. Either way, the message of the play seems to be a reaction to the political beliefs and attitudes of Charles II.

Women on the Stage

Prior to December 1660, no woman had legally been allowed on the stage. Margaret Hughes appeared as 'Desdemona' and was the billed as 'the first woman that came to act on the stage'. However, illegally, a few women had performed in more underground theatres. Women on the stage was made legitimate by King Charles II, a king known for his love of the theatre.

Nell Gwynne (1650-1687) was one of the most famous of the early English actresses. She was also mistress to the King. Gwynne was know for 'good looks, a strong clear voice, and lively wit' which attracted the attention of Thomas Killigrew who taught her acting and provided her with work.

Two other early actresses of note: Elizabeth Barry (1658-1713) and Susanna Verbuggen/Mountfort (1667-1703). Barry had a long and successful career for the standards of the time, working in some of the biggest, most prestigious theatres in London. Barry was reported to be coached in acting by her lover John Wilmot, though there is only one source for this tale. Verbuggen was most known for her comedies, she was a very popular comedian, known mostly for her breeches roles. A breeches role being where an actress appeared in male clothing, often tight-fitting knee length trousers. These roles were a great novelty and were a great sensation because it allowed women to show more of their bodies on stage in comparison to traditional women's garb.

Blunt Character Study

Blunt Character Study

I play Edward Blunt in our production of The Rover. Though not specifically said, I take Blunt to be a man around the age of 28. He is a flamboyant man with a great deal of wealth. He adores his money, women, attention, clothes, and sword fighting; essentially anything that a wealthy gentleman of the time would enjoy but to a much more extravagant degree. Blunt is flamboyant, this stems from a need to be seen and a need for attention, just wanting to flaunt his wealth so that people would like and respect him. Blunt is incredibly shallow and not very smart, he seeks his base pleasures with little concern for how they will affect him. He blindly trusts Lucetta when she appears enamored with him, despite his friend's warnings. Blunt never earned his money, just inherited it. Given his ability to travel abroad and flaunt his wealth as he does he is very wealthy. It doesn't specify whether his parents are alive but I assume not for him to afford the level of decadence that he does. I imagine him as an only child, separated from much interaction beyond those poorer than him, suggesting how he learned to flaunt more. Blunt has traveled abroad with his friends, the cavaliers, however he is set aside from them as he had no clear allegiances in the Civil War and as such maintained his wealth and status. He says "I have more grace than to forfeit my estate by Cavaliering." This line alone shows his valuing money over political ideas. There is little to discuss in terms of Blunt's philosophies and opinions because he holds very little that don't regard his betterment. He has no passions besides himself, his own small desire to be noticed and respected. The depth he shows is when his illusion of respect, or possibly the respect he has for himself, is taken by Lucetta and he becomes a dangerous man. Once you strip away the pretense of Blunt, you are left with a desperate man, and a desperate man is presented as a dangerous man for any women in his reach.

Blunt's physicality is extravagant, his hands float and flick in order to best display his lace. He walks airily, mostly at his own pace and in his own way, not being affected by the movement of others. Blunt often walks almost as if on his tiptoes, if he is higher up then more people can see him. There is a bounce in his step both out of self satisfaction and because it draws extra attention straight to him. Many aspects of Blunt are linked closely to his outfit which is striking, over the top, a declaration of wealth; Blunt's outfit means a lot of things, his outfit almost bears more substance than himself and most of what can be said about Blunt is how he fits into his state of wealth and his ability to display it.

The space where Blunt is most comfortable is not a location so much as it is merely when he is wearing his clothes. Blunt is suggested to not be so attractive, he says when Lucetta is wooing him "I have beauties that my false glass at home did not discover". This could be taken as false modesty for the audience, I think Blunt would be unlikely to admit any true flaws, but the suggestion remains. As such he is allowed to hide his looks and his obnoxious personality behind lace and finery, his wealth provides the smoke screen that distracts from his lack of other positive qualities. Blunt does find a sense of ease in his lodgings when he doesn't have his full, lavish attire however the peace is short lived when Florinda and, after her, his friends burst in to find him in his state of undress. The revelation of his status forces him to face the humiliation, he first outbursts, threatening sword fights but then accepts the humility and swallows his pride. Sadly for the character when he re-enters the scene he is once again entirely focused on his appearance, supporting a new extravagant and flamboyant but silly outfit. No justice comes for his attempted rape of Florinda besides a gentle barrage of banter from his friends. As such he is never found to change, this is likely a wider commentary on the situation of women's rights and general safety during this time period. Blunt is never forced to pay for his actions, like Willmore isn't for his, purveying a sense of male freedom whilst abusing the rights of women.

Blunt's is a simple friend to Belvile and Frederick. I see the relationship as more one sided though, Blunt perceives them as his friends while they see him more as a piece of entertainment. They have him along to provide something to laugh at and little above that. There isn't a sense of resentment or distaste for Blunt, nothing as strong as that, just an ambivalence to his presence in their company. Willmore and Blunt however seem to become friends more quickly. While Blunt could never empathise with Belvile's emotional side, and he couldn't keep up with Frederick's wit, Blunt and Willmore have the same shallow aims. They both have a passion for women and fights. What led me to think that they have an improved relationship is that Blunt and Willmore are the ones to fight in front of Angelica's, they are walking together detached from their other companions. Blunt doesn't interact extensively with many other characters, other than Lucetta and Florinda. His relationship with Florinda is very simple, she gets near him when he is in his state of desperation and he almost rapes her, and possibly would if Frederick hadn't interrupted. With Lucetta, however, Blunt is completely enamoured until she cozens and robs him. Then his infatuation is replaced with a burning resentment that costs him all composure and sends him into a state of desperation.

Blunt's main objective appears to simply be hedonism. No greater purpose than enjoying life through drink, sex, and fighting. During this he must maintain his composure and style but otherwise he is driven by the base desires. More short term objectives are wooing Lucetta, and when that fails, "taking revenge on all women kind" while hiding what happened from his friends. In the way of Blunt's main objective and his lesser objective of wooing Lucetta is her deception and cozening. His enjoyment is stopped in his tracks thanks to her manipulation. What blocks Blunt fulfilling his last objective, hiding from his friends, however is simply their tenaciousness, once they learn of his misfortune they can't help but hunt him. Blunt's quest to fulfill his objectives is continuing, he fails most in the scope of the play but he is free to continue his search for enjoyment as the play ends and he most certainly will, having learned nothing and with no permanent development for his character. He shall go on being cozened one day and abusing women the next.

The fop is a comedy character at heart, in any play other than 'The Rover' Blunt would have been a laughable fool through and through. But 'The Rover' is more unique being written by a woman of the time. The fop, Blunt, loses his comic innocence and becomes an icon of patriarchy, he goes happily along, using and abusing women until one does the same to him. At which point he becomes dangerous, he has the power of any male figure and has a vendetta against women. The nature of the play as a comedy avoids tackling the darker subjects directly, instead gets close to them and passes them off as a joke. Blunt is a tool to highlight the lowered social position of women, showing that men of the time were dangerous to women. This fop has an edge that appears only briefly but is meant to echo into the rest of his character. There was always the potential for any man to have this power over women at that time in history, as innocent and foolish as they may seem.

Action Plan

Action Plan

Script Work

Firstly I will make sure to re-read the play, it's important to fully understand the story that you're trying to tell to the audience. The plot is very complicated in this play, there are a few cases of mistaken identity and many deceptions which add layers of complexity to the plot. I will pay particular attention to Blunt's sub-plot as this is the story I shall be telling the most. Any words in the play I am fully unfamiliar with I shall research and write their meaning in the script. This is fundamentally important because it's impossible to convey meaning if you don’t know what you're saying. Becoming familiar with how my character is written, how he speaks and how he acts will be important here. I shall particularly study how to use his “Sheartlikins” as the word is very unique and intrinsic to his character. Also learning the other characters and examining their relationship with Blunt, for example, how close he is to the banished cavaliers.

Research

It will be necessary for this play to work on understanding much more about the culture around when the play was written and set: the mid-late 17^th century. A focus on clothing and the forms of extravagance of the time will be very useful to playing Blunt, the fop. Also, as the play is based around the “Banished Cavaliers” it will be very helpful to learn about the English civil war. Research on language of the time also falls into this category, Blunt's extravagant idiolect providing no shortage of words and phrases to study. A look at how the wealthy people of the time would live would be helpful, along with how English people were seen abroad in those days as this is something touched on in the play.

Character Study

Key to the success of my performance is the development of my character. I shall explore the personality of Blunt, there is an obvious extravagance to him and he is the fop of the play, the comic fool-like character, however he has moments of clarity and intelligence that I shall have to discover as I read through and learn my scenes. I shall have to explore an appropriate background for Blunt, I shall piece together this from what he says of his past and extrapolate further based on his views, attitudes and personality. Just as I shall explore how other characters act around Blunt, I shall have to look at how Blunt acts around others, particularly the discrepancies between him around his friends and around Lucetta.

Rehearsals

The key rule to rehearsals is to be considerate that it is not only your time but twenty-odd other people's time as well. Being professional, keeping working even when you otherwise wouldn't, being respectful of those who are on stage working, these are all parts of being good in rehearsals. It falls into common sense and courtesy to the others in the group. Besides the courtesies it is also important to work with everyone well, keep communicating ideas to those in your scene, provide help where needed and respond to feedback given by others.

Lines

Keeping on top of lines is important, being able to rehearse without a script in hand is a freeing way to rehearse. You are no longer bound as being an actor and can fully explore the character. Of course Blunt doesn't walk about with a script in hand so nor should I. I hope to attempt to learn scenes as we go and keep brushing up on them as we continue forward.

Radio Blog

Radio Research

The Unbelievable Truth
The Unbelievable Truth is a Radio 4 quiz show hosted by David Mitchell. The premise is for the guests to present lectures that are entirely false besides a few hidden truths. Panellists earn points by spotting truths, smuggling truths past the other guests, and lose points by mistaking a lie for a truth. The show features new guests each week. This keeps the format fresh and encourages listeners to keep watching each week. The way panellists interrupt the lectures is by buzzing in. This method is well recognised and will be a familiar method to anyone watching, helping new listeners feel comfortable with the format. The points system adds to the comedy of the game. Many guests end on negative points due to guessing wrong about what is a truth. This is similar to the points system in QI where panellists frequently end with negative points. 

The Infinite Monkey Cage
The Infinite Monkey Cage is a factual comedy show hosted by Brian Cox and Robin Ince. Each episode focuses on a different scientific topic and a new range of guests including both comedians and scientists. As with The Unbelievable Truth the use of guests keeps the format fresh and interesting each week. The use of guests will also draw in new fans. If a fan of, for example, Dave Gorman (a repeat guest on the show) finds out he's going to be on it then they may tune in and become a regular listener. The balance between factual information and comedy keeps the program entertaining to a wider audience, both those interested in science and casual listeners looking for some entertainment. This format however may push away people who have a more in depth science knowledge or are seeking to seriously learn.

The Museum of Curiosity
The Museum of Curiosity is also a factual comedy show but it has a more niche selection of facts, less for learning and more for casual interest. John Lloyd hosts and every series features a new co-host, this co-host is always a comedian. Such co-hosts have included Bill Bailey, Dave Gorman, and Jimmy Carr. The show revolves around a series of guest 'adding' things to this fictional museum. Each guest talks about a unique and interesting topic/item to the two hosts. The use of this fictional museum is a very interesting technique, it allows the listener to imagine their own museum filled with fantastical curiosities as the exhibits cannot be limited by size or plausibility. Guests are often a mix of scientists, writers, comedians, even Dr. Buzz Aldrin, the astronaut, has appeared on the show. The familiar mix of scientists and comedians provides a light atmosphere to the show laden with complex and varied curiosities. If it were just cerebral geniuses then the show would be boring for a vast number of people, however if it were just comedians then the exhibits would have little depth and the show would be less interesting. The good balance creates a show that appeals to a much wider audience. The show maintains a casual, relaxed atmosphere and is little more that the five people talking about their subjects and making jokes, this familiar atmosphere can be welcoming for a listener. The atmosphere is created by John Lloyd's relaxed demeanour as the host and there is a feeling that he does genuinely want to be there and learn about what the guests have bought in.

The Archers
The Archers is a Radio 4 serial drama. The programme is set in the country and features a large cast of characters. The vast cast opens opportunities for the show to feature a wide range of issues and storylines. The show's timeslot of 6pm is to try and coincide with when dinner is being cooked in an average household so that the cook can listen to it during this. The primary demographic of the archers "is predominantly female (76%), white British (81%) and aged 40-59 (62%)" source. So this aiming at housewives appears effective. The show is very long running, like many soaps, its faithful audience sustaining it. 

Our Performance

We chose to perform a version of the radio show The Brothers Faversham by The Penny Dreadfuls. It is a period satire, each episode focusing on one son of the fictional Faversham family of the 1800s. We chose this because we thought it was very funny and it would allow us to show vocal diversity as it is designed for one performer to play multiple characters, most with exaggerated, silly voices. The original structure of the show is with five performers: the main three men (originally The Penny Dreadfuls: Humphrey Ker, David Reed and, Thom Tuck) who would play all of the characters except for one female character, Alexandra Faversham, the main character's mother (originally played by Ingrid Oliver); and a narrator (originally Miles Jupp). We asked for India's help to play Alexandra Faversham as to stick to the source material as much as possible, otherwise we assimilated the role of the narrator into that of one of our performers. We went for the use of many sound effects and music because they are featured in the original, however we chose to add and omit some as we saw fit for practicality and clarity. The episode we chose, we chose because it has the most happening within the first ten minutes (which was our time limit) and featured one of the widest range of characters that would allow us to show our vocal diversity. We started our rehearsing by listening to the original a few times together and from that dividing up the roles, each of us ended with at least three each. We chose each according to our strengths, for example, we chose Will for the narrator because he has the calmest, most even voice that we thought would fit a narrator well, he also got a drunk character as he can do the best drunk impression of the three of us. After I had copied out the script from a recording, we were able to start rehearsing, we simply read through the script as many times as we could, experimenting with our characters and getting familiar with the words. After a good number of run throughs we felt like we had what we wanted it to sound like and we went through the script together to add in sound effects. I copied the effects from the source but we added our own input to what sounds we thought necessary or otherwise. If I could have changed anything from our rehearsal period, I would have firstly, had more time to rehearse with India, she did very well in the recording however we only had one or two opportunities to explore the scenes together. Otherwise I would have just liked no time restriction because I believe we could have performed the entire episode with the time provided if there hadn't been a restriction on performance length. All in all, I really enjoyed the unit and the opportunity to explore a different method of performance and get to know both sides of it, both the acting and the production. 

Restoration Blogs

Restoration Blogs

Week 1

I'm very happy about being cast as Blunt. He was the character that I most wanted as the fop seemed like a very fun part to play. I like the idea of playing a foolish character that is the object of ridicule. I was also drawn to playing the fop because I was inspired by Aidan's presentation in 'The Country Wife' last year. His presentation affected me because I was surprised to see any depth to the ridiculous character. I had thought of him as a subject of comedy only and seeing him break down and remove his wig, a key symbol of the character's foppery and foolishness, engaged me in the character. My goal for Blunt at the moment is to create a character that is a hilarious symbol of ridicule but also have moments of seriousness beneath the foppish façade. I think the key moment for that in this play is the second attempted rape of Florinda. I am also very excited to be double cast with Jason, we spent a while together highlighting lines and discussing them and it seems like we will both be able to learn from each other's characterisations. I also feel like there wont be any sense of competition between us which will allow us both to fully explore the character to how we wish without any worry of us competing to have the 'better' Blunt.

We started by starting work on the prologue. I think it's quite a task having to open the play with the first line. As I learned in Panto it's very hard to meet a low energy line with a high energy one, as such it will be my job to get the ball rolling and offer a high energy line for the next person to pick up from. If I give a weak open to the play then it could have a rolling effect reducing the energy of the entire prologue. The effect is worse given many lines are continuations of the same sentence of the last line. We also started to block the staging of the prologue, with our entrances and the places where we stand. It's very difficult to be able to get to our positions in the current formation because we keep almost bumping into each other this slows us all down, creating a gridlock effect, and makes it look awkward. To solve this we need to work out the path that we have to take through people and try our best to stick to the timing of it each time.

We also started blocking my first scene however we ran out of time and I wasn't able to go through it. I was able to see Jason playing Blunt however and I really like his take on the character. His characterisation lends itself to his size. He acts like the biggest person in the room which is made more funny by how he is considerably shorter than Will, Rufus, and Matt. I feel like for my characterisation I shall have to focus on the foolishness as opposed to the bravado of Blunt, because of my height. Jason acts like the biggest person in the room and I act like the stupidest. I think my characterisation of Blunt 
will end up with only very subtle differences to Jason's but they will separate the two takes and, hopefully, work more according to who we are. I do have faith that Blunt will be a very fun character to explore, with both the foolish side, the cocky side, and the serious side.

Week 2

This week I was able to play in the first scene. Blunt, with Frederick, starts by teasing Belvile about his melancholy attitude. Blunt then goes on to lament how he and Frederick haven't got the skill with romance that Belvile appears to possess by his yearning for Florinda. He then discusses his taste for an honest woman over a courtesan because they aren't out just for his money. This line foreshadows his later deception by Lucetta who appears to be an honest woman in order to steal all of his money. Blunt then makes fun of Belvile and Frederick's loss of money and power through being Royalists, also condemning politics in the process. Then for a considerable amount of the scene he offers unimportant throwaway lines until Lucetta appears. He is surprised by her paying him the attention she does and says that he must be more attractive than his mirror at home tells him.

Blunt is the outsider of the group, he is one of their friends but Belvile and Frederick are much closer. When Willmore shows up he is still excluded because Willmore is old friends with the two cavaliers. I think there may be an aspect of them only liking Blunt for his wealth, he's the friend they don't really want tagging along but he does anyway. As such, I think in this scene, Blunt is trying to impress all three of them, and the way he goes about it is to act intelligent, important, and to flaunt his wealth. Of course Blunt is only so effective at the first two, he does appear a little obnoxious and flaunting his wealth only leads him to become a target of Lucetta. He doesn't appear too much of a fool at this point, he appears to have valid knowledge and opinions on politics. However he is fooled by Lucetta's advances, he thinks so highly of himself that he doesn't doubt her immediate infatuation with him.

We worked on the prologue again with our lines learned and I think it went very well, it had impact and form that I think would open the play well. When Adam gave us advice and guidance on it however he really made the prologue bounce out. He taught us about how to make our actions definite and boost the momentum of movement into our voice. This made the prologue really stick out and I think if we can keep improving on our clarity of speech, synergy with the lines and impact of each one it can really open the play with a great deal of power.

We also started work on Act 2 Scene 1 and Act 3 Scene 1, Blunt's next two scenes. Act 2 Scene 1 has Blunt gushing about the greatness of Lucetta, his foolishness breaks through more when he details how he traded one of his diamonds for a bracelet she gave him. This shows his obliviousness to how she is just there for his money and allows the audience to realise that he's going to be swindled adding a sense of dramatic irony to improve the humour. They then go on to discuss Angelica but Blunt maintains his low opinion of courtesans by choosing to have nothing to do with her because of her cost. The gentlemen then leave for a while and come back into a sword fight because Willmore stole a poster of Angelica. Act 3 Scene 1 has little for Blunt besides throwaway lines however he does get called to Lucetta's which sets up the next scene which revolves around Blunt and Lucetta.

Blunt is completely infatuated by Lucetta, given he has known her for less than a day, it can be inferred that he rarely has much luck with the ladies. He is completely enthralled by her to the point that he is talking of uprooting from England and moving here after one day. This is the part where I want to start really playing up Blunt's flamboyance and resultant foolishness. I think being aware of the dramatic irony for any line is very important, helping the audience be fully aware of how ignorant to Lucetta's designs Blunt is. Blunt unquestioningly charges into a sword fight alongside Willmore. I don't think this is due to sense of loyalty to his friends, or a sense of hurt honour that he is threatened, nothing noble at all. I want to play this as Blunt just loves swordplay and sees it as a noble practice that will make him seem gallant and honourable in front of everybody.

I think I'm making a good start into exploring Blunt's character. I'm starting to make specific choices with him and as I explore the further scenes and these scenes more, I think these choices will become more defined and I will start to explore the character much more.

Week 3

This week we did a scene more focused on Blunt. It's the scene where Blunt is tricked and robbed by Lucetta, Sancho and Philippo. I think the scene has a lot of potential for humour in it, Blunt's first line is an aside lamenting how he has no skill with talking to women which I think is very funny if it contrasts with his outside, calm and collected, smooth demeanour. Blunt seducing Lucetta is funny in itself, the scene is dripping with opportunities I just have to keep exploring it to find them with the aim of making it one of the funniest scenes in the play. The main opportunities for humour I think are, the dramatic irony that the audience knows he's being tricked but he doesn't, his apparent ineptitude with women, and the discrepancies between how he acts and how he acts in an aside.

That scene develops into Blunt's monologue, disgraced and left penniless in the street. He laments his foolishness, Lucetta's cruelty, and how his friends will react. I think there are opportunities for physical comedy here, starting out on the ground crawling, then sitting for some time and displaying Blunt's frustration with small outbursts of petty violence against the floor (this I got from Jason's interpretation, then standing up with a possible stagger. I need to explore this scene and work out key moments of emotion in the monologue to find a place for these physical and comical moments.

At the end of the week we had a workshop on stage combat involving rapiers with Adam. I thought this was a fantastic opportunity, it was very interesting to learn and I wish it could be a more regular thing. I am very excited to piece together a fight from these moves but I am unsure as to if we will remember the moves over the Easter break. Karen said in voice that I should take up some form of movement exercise like dance to gain some grace in my movement and develop my stage presence and range of skills. I think that some form of stage combat or fighting training would be a good way of doing this so I may even wish to continue it outside of college.

Over Easter I was looking at my lines and I was having trouble with where to put pauses and breaks in the line. Because of this I decided to separate each thought that Blunt has, I have put dashes where I think that Blunt has a new thought and this has helped to slow down my lines and give them more direction and purpose. I think it's much clearer as to what I'm saying, this is particularly important for a Restoration Comedy as it is hard to follow the immense amount of dialogue and the subtle changes in language as it is. I feel like this is something I shall do for any script I have in the future, it's very helpful for character and line delivery and I feel like it will have a very positive impact on my performance. 

Week 4

This week we did very little with Blunt. We tried to run through the play but we only got to Act 2 and only did two scene with Blunt in. I was still unsure on my lines but I think the thought breaks definitely helped. Running the few scenes we did, I felt like we were starting to sink more into the roles and the play, the scene felt more familiar and with a number of weeks left before the performance I am very confident with the amount we have left to do and the time we have left.

We attempted to create fight scenes using the skills we learnt from Adam but, as I feared, we had forgotten all but two of the moves. Trying to piece together a fight was nigh on impossible at that point but Sally showed us some stage combat videos from Lamda. This gave us the inspiration to create something ourselves and Jason and I got to work. Most of our moves are simple ones interjected with simplistic sword clashes that wouldn't be done with the thrusting swords like what we are using however it looks and sounds okay and without proper training that's all we can hope for. We worked out that the key element is speed, if it's quick then the audience barely knows what they're seeing but with the swords clashing, as such it will look like a real fight to an untrained eye. I hope we have a lot more time set aside to practice because otherwise we will definitely just forget what we did again and the more practice we get, the safer and better looking it becomes.

We did some short work with Sebastian, this involved simply standing around in the scene, listening, following orders, and delivering one/two lines. I have an idea on the characterisation of him but it's awfully simple and essentially a stock servant due to his unimportance in the play. I do plan however to put weight behind his lines and make him at least slightly memorable.

Week 5

This week we started work on the scene where Blunt attempts to rape Florinda. When I first read this scene I was very eager to find some serious dramatic depth with Blunt, showing a real dark side to his character. However we are being directed into making it funnier, losing the sinister edge to the scene. Our director told me to find the frantic desperation of Blunt in the scene. I can definitely see that as an aspect of the character in the scene however the sinister, darker edge is much more obvious for me. I find it hard to apply the humour to the scene as a whole but I’ll have to find a way. I think approaching every line like a false threat will help, if I present that Blunt is really bad at these threats and definitely won’t follow through with them. I do think that Blunt would follow through but I’ll need to find a reading where he wouldn't. I think that Jason find the humour in the scene much easier than I do, however I don't think he would be as comfortable with the sinister side. Despite the development of the feeling of the scene we didn't get too far into the actual blocking of it. We’re going to continue that next week.

We also tried a run through of Act 1 and 2. I think it went well for Act 1, there were very few, if any, scripts and the pace was good for just coming off book. We can definitely improve our pace, but it's a good start for moving forward. Otherwise, I think there could have been a greater sense of comradery between the lads, something I noticed in my scenes. I think this will improve as we become familiar with our lines and familiar with each other's characters on stage. Act 2 went less well, more scripts appeared and many more prompts were needed. The scenes suffered but they still went relatively smoothly. Overall, I think it was a good step in the right direction and we'll be off book soon enough.

Week 6

This week we continued with Blunt's scene with Florinda and Frederick. I feel like I'm getting closer to being able to play the rape scene humorous but I'm still finding it hard to see that side of the script. We managed to block the first half of the scene though and continue on to start and to finish the second. Our blocking is quite clever in that it can work for both the sinister side and the humorous. There are actions like the spin that can easily have little qualities like the brutality or the lack of commitment of the action. We have been directed to make the second half of the scene more like how I saw the first so that part came more natural to me. I don't like having the same side of Blunt throughout the whole play and lament the loss of my character's sinister side but I'll lose it for the director's vision.

We then blocked the last scene. This scene had very little to do with Blunt, only really providing a few comic interludes. The beginning of the scene has a frantic Blunt, afraid of his friends entering his home to see him in his state of undress. He is thinking what he says off the cuff, quickly and desperately to keep his friends outside. There is also a distinctive change between Blunt talking to his friends and the audience, the section includes many asides to add a lot of the humour to the scene, showing Blunt's desperation. I think a lot of the comedy available in this bit can be achieved with physical gags such and funny facial expressions. The rest of the scene, Blunt is very background, as the scene is set in his house I decided it would be within character for him to just sit down and watch the goings on, perhaps bored. Blunt then exits and re-enters later in the scene, dressed ridiculously and clearly annoyed about it. 

It was very good to finally finish the play. With only the epilogue left to block I'm quite excited to get the play finished and start going back over it. I think we have a lot of progress to make but plenty of time to do it. I am very confident that we can get the play in order by the time of the performance. I think there is still a lot of room to explore in many of the scenes, for me, I want to do a lot more with the Lucetta scene and the rape scene. I think those are the most interesting scenes for Blunt and I look forward to having other chances to go over them.

Week 7 & 8
These weeks we started to wrap everything up. We got costume done, we finished the epilogue on the day I was ill, and we started run-throughs. 

My costume for Blunt really helps me with the character and especially the posture. As soon as I put it on I find myself automatically falling into Blunt's posture, showing off the frills of the costume and straightening my back. This will be very beneficial for my performance, having my posture come more naturally. It also reinforces my idea of Blunt losing more of his fop-like persona when he loses his outfit. Blunt's posture revolves around showing off his finery, so I think that when he loses it he becomes more down to earth and human. He regains the original attitude when he is dressed in the Spanish habit at the end of the play, though he does not like it, it does give him something to flaunt. I will try and bring these ideas into the character but I don't see them lasting very long, as our director doesn't see it the same way.

The run throughs are getting smoother and I feel like as I'm starting to get more off book my performance is becoming more refined and how I would like it. There is a clear difference between the scenes where I have a script in hand and those where I don't. I feel like lines train and last much longer than they should, actions are forced and repeated a lot but without a scrip things become more natural and free. We all still have far to go to get off book fully but I do think it will be done after half-term.

We also blocked the epilogue, it bears little difference to the prologue and I wasn't actually there for the session where we blocked it so I'm waiting for an opportunity to see and try it properly.

All in all, the play is making good progress. The state of set and props is becoming slightly worrying but I have no bearing on props and I know the set can't be continued with until we have more wood. So there is little to do now but rehearse and prepare for the final show of our second year.

Jaques - Character Study

Jaques Character Study

In our work on As You Like It I play Jaques in act 3 scene 3. We are making our scenes contemporary, choosing a modern setting over a traditional one because of its increased relevance today. We chose to place the scene at a music festival, we thought it would fit the scene and would give us an opportunity to play our characters inebriated. My vision of Jaques is of a 25 year old man. He doesn't have any contact with his immediate family, choosing not to speak with his parents and being an only child. How I imagine Jaques looks is with long, straight, black hair and a thin figure. At the time of our scene he is in the middle of a field, at a festival. It is set in the present day, specifically, I imagine in late summer. I picture a modern Jaques wearing casual clothes, a plain black T-shirt, jeans, and because he is at a festival, walking boots. I don't see Jaques with any props though, I don't think an emotional attachment to an object fits the character.

Jaques is melancholy but seems to revel in it. He is cynical, always looking for the negatives; judgmental, but not to an unreasonable degree; and passive, never looking for positivity or trying to better anything. Jaques does, however, come across as very passionate about what makes him melancholy. The famous speech "All the world's a stage" shows a passion about these thoughts. He speaks about the futility of life but shows a stark fear of death with his last line "Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything." The repetition of "Sans" is what brings the sense of fear into it, it shows a side of Jaques valuing life that he is afraid of losing such thins as taste and sight. The speech also specifically deals with aging going through the "seven ages". This focus on aging may represent Jaques having a fear of growing old and by extension death. His melancholy attitude born out of this idea that life is just a cliche that is repeated by everyone is countered by his appreciation of the sensory satisfaction gained from life, that of taste and sight. Jaques passes judgment on other people, in my scene he is judging Touchstone. His first line in my scene is, referring to Touchstone, saying that "Knowledge ill inhabited is worse than Jove in a thatched house". This essentially means that he thinks Touchstone has knowledge but doesn't know how to use it. The line is an aside to the audience and he works to entertain them. This refers back to a sensationalist reading of Jaques, he tries to make the audience laugh because the feeling of laughter is a key component of life, it makes us feel good. His passivity involves him staying impartial and excluded from the action. This act of staying on the sidelines and avoiding being involved is his way of staying impartial, he can observe life better from outside it and feel melancholy about how it is because he is only watching it and not experiencing it.

Jaques doesn't have a specific space on the stage, I think he is comfortable anywhere. This comfort stems from seeing himself as an outsider. This is demonstrated when he barges in on Touchstone and Audrey's false wedding. This idea also links in with the speech "All the world's a stage" because all the world is his stage. Despite this, Jaques prefers to stay on the sidelines, observing the action as opposed to in the midst of it. Without a space of his own, with no props and no family, Jaques is not tied to the world in any way. Again he remains an outsider. This may be why he is melancholy, he has reached his age without anything to show for it. He was a lord but that was stripped of him and now all he has is his thoughts and contemplation. Like his lack of attachment to any object he lacks much attachment to other characters. The only characters he interacts with are those he takes interest in and Duke Senior. Jaques takes an interest in Touchstone in my scene, he finds his wooing of Audrey interesting. At first Jaques thinks that he is just a fool but he grows to discover that Touchstone is, in fact, more intelligent than he thought.

Jaques' super objective is to contemplate, to think. He wants to observe the world and all it has to offer, not experience it but just see it. He spends his time in quiet reflection doing this, occasionally interacting with what interests him such as Amiens, the "fool i'th forest". He often favours engaging with what he finds frivolous, foolish, or what he seeks to understand better. Studying frivolity and foolishness gives him satisfaction, it makes him feel smarter. He thinks that due to all of his reflection and observation he will never be as foolish. Jaques' objective in my scene is to understand Touchstone, he seems to accomplish this, he appears to learn Touchstone's motives with Audrey and leaves the scene wanting to 'council' him.

Jaques is a very interesting character. Shakespeare gives him a few monologues and some strong wit. Jaques is a friend to the audience, the one who directly converses with them about the scenes, offering them his jokes and insight. Shakespeare gives such a high place to a character so melancholy, cynical and with a low opinion of life when the rest of the play is about love. Perhaps Shakespeare wrote a kindred spirit, Shakespeare himself was always observing life, his plays are an observation of life. Jaques may be melancholy but his approach to life is honest and inquisitive. He studies and takes an interest in people. He is partly tragic in his fear of life and his final choice in the play to stay in the forest, alone, rejecting a return to society in favour of the freedom given by the forest.   

Shakespearean Language

Shakespeare employs many language techniques during his collected works. These techniques are ways of creating an effect within the writing to manipulate the reader into reacting in a certain way or feeling a certain thing. Some techniques are distinctly related to characters but others are more general. The play we are studying is As You Like It which is filled with many of these language features.

Verse is commonly employed within As You Like It. When a character speaks in poetry it is refereed to as verse. Many techniques are used in conjunction with verse but it can be used un-accompanied. It is generally used to determine formal speech, points that Shakespeare wanted to get across, and moments elevated thought or emotional reflection. A famous example of this is Jaques' speech starting "All the world's a stage..." The speech is written in verse to provide a clear structure to the thought process of the character. Where a line ends is where an actor should take a breath or continue with a new thought. The use of verse also sets it apart from the rest of the play, making the point sound more eloquent and well thought out. Because Jaques is speaking in verse here and is given a long monologue to discuss his point, the audience is made aware of the importance of the point. The character of Jaques is also developed during the speech, the verse shows us that the point he's making is important to him and that this is something he truly believes in. The speech is written in iambic pentameter, this means that each line has ten syllables with the stress put on alternating syllables, this is often describes as 'Dum Dee Dum Dee Dum'. The reason for this is that the rhythm that ten syllables creates is natural to English speech. It is iconic of Shakespeare's writing and also much poetry of the time because it creates a clear rhythm definite rhythm that makes the verse pleasing to listen to. By making the speech sound good, it makes it more memorable, without iambic pentameter it is questionable if it would have stood against time this long. 

Some of the lines in the speech employ the technique of enjambment, which means that the line of verse ends without punctuation such as in "Creeping like snail/ Unwilling to school". This effectively links the two lines and speeds up the pace of the speech. Caesura is used closely with enjambment, where enjambment is the continuation of pace past a line in verse, caesura is the continuation of a thought past a full stop. There is no literary indication of this, instead it is a standard practice for reading Shakespeare and to be added at the discretion of the reader or the actor. A thought is continued past the full stop effectively meaning that thoughts are dictated by lines instead of punctuation. It is a technique to make the script sound more like human speech because as people we don't talk conforming to standard punctuation rules, running on past full stops and ignoring the pauses where a comma should be. The use of caesura in this speech makes Jaques sound more passionate about what he's talking about. Where he runs over his sentences will be because he has this desire to get his point across and affect others, including the audience, with his insight. 

A half line opens the speech, the Duke says "Wherein we play in." and Jaques picks up the same line and starts his monologue with "All the world's a stage". The effect of this is that the monologue starts with a fast pace, by cutting into another line it speeds the pace of speech up. It also, again, speaks to the passion that Jaques holds on the subject that he is so eager to say it as to interject on another character's line. It can be used to show two characters in conflict, arguing fervently, cutting into one another's speech but still continuing the discourse with pace and rhythm. The other way it is used is to show two characters agreeing firmly on something to the point where they seem to share the same thought.

Rhyme is commonly used in conjunction with verse. Although it can appear outside of verse it is much more prominent within it. Rhymes are commonly where a word at the end of a line has the same end syllable as another line near it. Rhymes in both Shakespeare and generally are used to provide a pace, rhythm and tone. The positioning of a rhyme will help you discern how to read something. Rhymes can also be used to link two words together, juxtapose them to make the reader see something different. In this play, however, Shakespeare employs half rhymes, two words that end in a way that sounds similar, and internal rhymes, where two words in the same line rhyme, as well the more traditional way. An example of an internal is Jaques' line "Go thou with me and let me counsel thee." it appears as a solitary line of verse, surrounded by prose. The effect it creates is that it is a conclusion to that section in the play, the sound of the rhyme giving the audience a sense of satisfaction and an almost audible catharsis. The technique of ending a scene, or section, with a rhyme is common in Shakespeare's works. It is more commonly accomplished with a rhyming couplet: two lines one after the other with a rhyming word at the end of both. One example of a rhyming couplet is at the end of Act 1, Celia says "After my flight. Now go in we content/ To liberty, and not to banishment." They are often used to sum up the feeling of the scene, the action that the characters will next be taking and/or any important plot points. They serve mostly as a little summary that is nice to hear and clearly marks an end.

Prose is the other way Shakespeare formatted his texts. It's the the way most contemporary plays set out their text, margin to margin. Shakespeare's prose still contains a rhythm but it's not as easily accessed. Verse has rules and formatting that helps you read it how it way meant to be read but prose contains no such rules. Prose is said to be less naturalistic than verse and used more for the practicality of the play. Prose more often contains the humour, the jokes, the wordplay, matters that are more down to earth than the elevated form that verse takes. This format is also more closely linked to casual speech between characters. However, even though prose is more down to earth, it still contains language techniques, if not to a greater extent than verse does.

Repetition is simply a word that appears a number of times. One example of repetition is with Rosalind where she says "So was I when your highness took his dukedom,/ So was I when your highness banished him." Repetition is used to draw attention to a specific word, phrase, or even concept. In this quote it is used to show a sense of nothing changing, Rosalind is trying to say to the Duke 'nothing has changed here'. The phrase "your highness" is also repeated, this portrays a sense of reverence and almost fear as if she is trying to appease him and keep him happy. This also highlights her weakened position next to him and makes her out to be a victim or someone to be pitied. In the same section a sort of extension to repetition can be found. A lexis is a repetition of a group of words that evoke the same image, they're usually synonyms or they link into the same subject. In this section a lexis of status is used. Rosalind refers to the Duke as "your highness", "my lord", and as "my liege". These all work towards the same effect as the repetition of "your highness", they put Rosalind in a position of weakness whilst portraying the Duke as this symbol of fear and reverence.

Shakespeare likes roundabout ways of saying simple things and simple ways of saying complex things. One way in which he accomplishes this is through the use of paradoxes, antitheses, and oxymorons. A paradox is something that, even though it may seem simple, contains some form of circular logic that makes it impossible. An example of a paradox is where Rosalind says "I will marry you, if ever I marry woman, and I'll be married tomorrow". It seems to simply be saying that she'll be marrying them tomorrow but because she is truly a woman she can't marry a woman and as such could not marry her. The point of these is to add a layer of comedy to the audience. In this case it also serves to tell the audience one thing while telling another character another thing. However paradoxes are often used to show the conflict that complex emotions create. Antithesis are used often to show conflict in ideas, in this play there is an overarching antithesis of nature and society. The play utilities a 'Green World' technique, where the characters leave the confines of society and thus lose its restricting rules, in order to explore the genre of the pastoral comedy. This play is Shakespeare's way of satirising the popular opinion of the time that 'everything is better in the countryside' that arose from the popularity of the pastoral comedies. Individual antitheses can be used comically or dramatically but almost always are used to show an internal conflict of opinion in a character. Finally oxymorons are two words that are put together but mean mutually exclusive things. An example of an oxymoron is Jaques' line "A material fool". He is listening to Touchstone trying to woo Audrey and finding himself agreeing with some of Touchstone's words but wishes to maintain his sense of superiority. The internal conflict of pride and acknowledgement creates the oxymoron here. Oxymorons are often a double sided comment, they serve to demonstrate a complex nature to something. 

The sound of words are very important. The effect of how a word sounds can very subtly affect how something is read or where the focus or strength in a point is found. Alliteration highlights a string of words by them all starting with the same letter sound. Depending on the sound of the letters used it can have different meanings, sibilance, for example, the repetition of the 'S' sound at the start of a word can have a variety of different effects including creating suspicion, a sense of evil, or even calm and serenity. The use of words accompanying the sound is heavily influential but a strong list of plosive words with letters like 'B' or 'P' will have more impact and strength. Assonance is the repetition of a vowel sound, it works much in the way of alliteration practically. An example of assonance is Audrey's line "I am not fair, and therefore..." the 'air' in 'fair' and 'ere' in 'there' sounds long and pronounced. This creates the effect of extending the time it takes to complete the line and can have an effect. In this case it can be seen as to make Audrey seem less intelligent. Assonance is more an aid to the actors and readers to discern how a character is than for an audience to appreciate. Finally dissonance is the opposite of these two techniques, it is when words sound out of place and the sounds contrast with each other. The effect of it is to make the reader uncomfortable with what is being said. The contrast also highlights both words creating a divide between them.

Shakespeare's language is infinitely complex. People have dedicated their lives to uncovering every little trick that he employed. Many of his techniques are to help the actor, these language features are an actor's friend and if he can spot them then he is well on his way to being able to successfully perform Shakespeare.