Skype Discussion: 17/04/2018 - Inquiry Themes aid the Artefact

I have been roughly planning and brainstorming ideas for my artefact. In today's Skype with fellow current module threes, the essence of the artefact became clearer. It has to display the account of the inquiry. This means it is not about my findings but about the process.
Themes that stayed with me through my inquiry, or emerged from it, can inform my artefact.

In line with my audio-visual artefact, I am going to start associating the themes formed within my inquiry to influence what I choose to portray in the "silent self-tapes". I have chosen to keep them silent to avoid the trap of relaying verbally the process of my inquiry. Instead, I want the self-tapes to convey a bigger picture of my inquiry and to use visuals effectively.

Self-tapes are a forum that is highly recognisable to people within my practice. Therefore, this lent to my decision to create self-tapes as my artefact.

‘The Artefact’

Yesterday I attended the campus session in Middlesex university. There was a mix of module 1, 2 and 3s who attended the session. This proved useful when we began to form a ‘Glossary’ with words and phrases common within the BAPP and MAPP modules.

The Artefact can be described quite simply as ‘a thing’. Instead of leaving me confused about this mysterious concept - I left the campus session with a reassured sense of what it is I am expected to do
regarding the artefact. It is a thing that represents what it is I have found or discovered on the journey of my inquiry.

Post analysis I began to see clearly what my artefact ought to be, according to me and how to portray what I have found to my community of practice. I have used the practice of self-taping and referred to it throughout my inquiry. Therefore, it seemed fit to use a self-tape of me as my artefact. I began to sketch and jot down some plans for this in my notebook.

Different Entities Interlinking

Over the past while I have been working on my critical review for module 3. Things have been chopped and changed to give the initial structure of my first draft. What I find interesting is that every time I go back to look over what I've written - I find correlations between the literature and data collection analysis. There are many factors within my inquiry that influence or underline each other. More and more I am finding that there are few strict "separate sections" within my critical review. Instead I have found it helpful to tie in views and research stemming from different sources in order to reach a resounding theme or further questions. I am quickly coming around to the idea of using literature to underline or compare with data collection and my own experiences.

Another aspect of the inquiry which is becoming clearer is that we are not solving the world's problems in 6 weeks. As I am gathering information and analysing it; I have benefited from the small realisations along the learning curve. Anything that is relevant and helpful to me in my professional practice is significant in my eyes.

I may not be solving the world's problems; but I am learning how I may progress as an actor within my professional practice.

Typecasting and "Stock Characters"

Actress Ingrid Bergman

A debate which I have been having throughout my study is that of "typecasting":
"Is typecasting essential for the casting process & for actors to be aware of theirs... Or is it a faulty society that is leading us all to believe we have to 'fit in a box', and typecasting we see on screen is fueling these impressions within society?"

Typecasting combines a wide range of "stock characters" within the screen and theatre world and which we, as actors and audiences, are exposed to. Stock characters were originally outlined by commedia dell'arte (an early form of Italian professional theatre popular in Europe from 16th - 18th century). I studied the technique and various characters included in commedia dell'arte during my training at drama school.  Some of these characters (although there are more) include:

• Zanni - the "clown" - the comedy character

• Pantalone - the older, wealthy man

• Il Dottare - "doctor" - the male Head of the Household

• Columbina - the perky maid / servant (generally female)

• Il Capitano - the "loner", an older man boasting of having once been a "captain" although doubtful he ever had that title

• Innamorati - the "lovers" - young, beautiful romantics. Of a high class status - also known as the "innocent"

 These are brief descriptions of the most basic of characters. It is important to note that all of the above characters have strong character traits - including appearance, physical stance and status which solidify their role within performances. They have stood the test of time. Since the 16th century - through means of theatre right through to screen and TV series - we have seen clear examples of these stock characters. Buddy the Elf played by Will Ferrell in the movie Elf is a perfect example of a modern day Zanni. Dimitri Godman (Aleksey Serebvakov) head of the powerful Godman family in the TV series McMafia is a current Pantalone. Actress Martine McCutcheon plays a strikingly apt Columbina character as Natalie in Love Actually (right down to her East-End London accent in the movie). MacKenzie Mauzy and Billy Magnussen's representations of Rapunzel and Rapunzel's Prince in Disney's 2014 Into the Woods are matched as present day Innamorati.
These are only a few examples of which I could go on and on... (Feel free to comment any correlations you have made between 16th - 18th century stock characters and modern day TV & film characters.) It just cements the notion that we can't seem to escape the idea of stock characters within screen writing.

Furthermore, I read a really interesting view on typecasting from the Golden Age director Michael Curtiz (Casablanca, Mildred Pierce).

"It was Mr. Curtiz who spoke to me about the idea of typecasting. I knew it was the way, but I hadn't understood how difficult it would be to fight it. He explained I couldn't go totally against the way audiences saw me without wrecking my career." (Bergman, quoted by Chandler 2007 p.83)

This piece of advice / opinion shared with Bergman from the well-respected Curtiz was perhaps shattering for her as an actress. Her response was initially "No, no, no, no, no, no." and she admits she was "thinking how she could get around it" (Bergman, quoted by Chandler, 2007 p.83). But how could a young, undeniably attractive actress like Bergman, who fit so perfectly in the role of an Innamorati, get away with passing as a stock character such as Il Captinao (a character of lower status)? Even if you take gender out of the equation and make the stock characters gender-neutral - they still possess innate character and physical traits which, on paper, suit only a certain type of actor.
Furthermore, Curtiz goes on to explain:

"Ingrid, you are beautiful... They [the audience] do not want to see you play a girl with a harelip... Your audience wants to see you, to recognize you, to see you looking beautiful, wearing beautiful clothes, dresses, and accessories they would like to wear. They like to see you on screen in parts in which they recognize you. In other words, you have to play Ingrid Bergman. This will not tax you too much, it will make your audience happy, and it will make a big career."

If we are going by Curtiz' opinion - society want typecasting (at least in the Golden Age they did - and I'm still not sure have we progressed as a society that much since then). They want to see actors placed in the box they expect to see them in. If that was the recipe for a successful actor at that time - why wouldn't she play into her typecast in order to be acknowledged as a great actress? Even though she evidently struggled with the concept of typecast as she believed her creativity and capability as an actress should not be inhibited by typecast. In my lifetime as an actress -  I would love to play a variety of exciting and testing roles. Whether or not typecast will allow me to do this is another thing...
Now, for me, the question is the following:
Is the acting industry playing into the hands of what society wants; or is society falling into the trap of viewing what they see on screen / on stage as "the norm"? Either way, it appears to me that typecasting continues to happen over and over again. I don't know whether to view this as a good or bad thing or simply just a factor within the acting industry, cemented by a history of stock characters - neither good nor bad.

Whatever the fact of the matter is: it certainly appears that, for a lot of people, "Typecasting is everything." (Curtiz, quoted by Chandler, 2007 p. 83)


Chandler, Charlotte (2007) Ingrid (Ingrid Bergman, A Personal Biography), Applause Theatre & Cinema Books
Rudlin, John (1994) Commedia Dell-Arte: An Actor's Handbook, Routledge

Director Michael Curtiz' views on the idea of "typecasting" (Bergman, quoted by Chandler, 2007 p.83)



Reflect, Report, Respond & Role of a Researcher

Perhaps the essential part of my study that I seem to forget is the learning part. Learning is very much part of the study process. Towards the end of our Inquiry journey, we have to write up our inquiry experiences - a critical reflection including literature reviews.
I am now aiming to view this as a 'Reflective Report'. This means documenting what I have processed during my period of study, which includes my learning and the experience.
As well as this, I have learnt it is key to report my response to the data I have collected. My response is the vital part within the report. Cross-referencing data collected with literature and my experiences will also add to the tiered levels of my learning.

Student Voice Meeting

My role as a researcher has been consolidated by my tutors - I need to find meaning and my interpretation of the literature. Literature and observations I make need to be meaningful in my practice - as a researcher, I need to be able to link and correlate.

Why should your physical appearance inhibit you from having a sense of humour?

Elizabeth Banks, Actress

Can you tell if this lady is funny or not solely from her photograph?
I can't.
So why do people find it acceptable to state that pretty women cannot play funny roles? An article I read recently which quoted comments from Nikki Finke appalled me. After actress Julie Bowen won her second Emmy (in 2012), Nikki Finke's backlash was:


"Only women who grew up ugly and stayed ugly, or through plastic surgery became beautiful, can pull off sitcoms or standups. Bowen wasn't a comedienne just like Brooke Shields wasn't and a zillion more. Because it's all about emotional pain and humiliation and rising above both by making people laugh with you instead of at you. So stop casting beautiful actresses when you should be giving ugly women a chance." (Finke, 2012)


I am going to dissect this statement...
Firstly, are beautiful women exempt from feeling 'emotional pain' or 'humiliation'? I think not. I believe human beings, of every kind, experience humiliation within their lifetime. Peoples' appearances do not exclude them from feeling human emotion. Furthermore, Elizabeth Banks says, while humiliation can be funny, “it is not a state of being reserved solely for the ugly, whatever that means to Nikki Finke.”


In regards to 'stop casting beautiful actresses' in comedic roles and 'giving ugly women a chance' - casting comedic roles should be entirely down to the actresses' comedic and acting skills and not how 'beautiful' or 'ugly' they are. Of course, there is the issue of character breakdown - and part of that is physical. There are factors that limit the casting type of actresses up for a role.
However, it is utterly outrageous to make a statement as blunt as 'stop casting beautiful actresses' in comedic roles.


If that comment was reversed - 'So stop casting ugly actresses when you should be giving beautiful women a chance' - there would have been an uproar in counter attacks. So why is it somehow acceptable to slander 'beautiful' actresses? Can they somehow cope better with the attack because of their 'good looks'?


My commedia dell'arte teacher in drama school is one of funniest people I have come across - and she also happens to be a highly attractive lady. The two aspects, appearance and funniness, have no correlation. Since I was a kid I have wanted to make people laugh. It is the simplest of things. It's not an experience or talent specific to an 'ugly' or 'beautiful' person (whatever the line is between those primitive generalisations...)


“Wouldn’t it be great if older, more experienced women like Ms. Finke were kinder to her fellow females in the entertainment business?” Banks retaliated.




http://ew.com/article/2012/09/27/elizabeth-banks-women-funny/

Human Nature - The Theory of how we are Judged

Yesterday I set out to gather together all of the previous research and 'quote-collecting' I have done during my literature study. I wrote them all down collectively in my reflective journal. This gave me clarification of where I am going with my inquiry - in other words, it helped to theorise my inquiry.
My topic of 'appearance within the acting industry' is heavily surrounding the theories of human nature - culture, historical epoch, textuality, class, ethnicity, sex, gender, age, degree of social power.(Lopston, 2006). From this stems my study of what we deem as 'popular', 'correct' or 'good'. My research led me to an article by journalist Martha Gill - "Should we be judging people by their looks?" in which she alludes to the possibility of phrenology (a 19th Century theory that the contours of the skull are a guide to an individual's mental faculties and character traits). Judging someone by their appearance is an ethical issue as it verges on the edge of being deemed as discrimination. Equally, when reviewers comment on actors' appearances it may be damaging to the actors' confidence as they may take 'appearance' comments as a lack of acting talent. Below is a quote regarding actress Vivien Leigh's performance in the film "Dark Journey".
"Vivien photographed exquisitely, a fact that no reviewer could overlook. But vanity was not one of her character traits, and she despised the idea that she was being commended only for her beauty" (Edwards, 1977 p.57)
I am collecting first hand experiences documented in distinguished actors' biographies. These help me to identify with the acting industry and to draw links or differences with other peoples' experiences. My inquiry and analysis will be framed with educated articles from industry professionals i.e. Joseph Pearlman's concise article on the subject of what makes a "winning" self tape.
These will be added to as I progress with my literature studies and find more relevant information as well as aspects which my topic of interest may need to touch on.

https://www.newstatesman.com/science/2013/11/should-we-be-judging-people-their-looks

https://www.britannica.com/topic/phrenology

https://www.backstage.com/advice-for-actors/backstage-experts/10-tips-winning-taped-audition/