Stage | guardian.co.uk: There's a story about the famous actor Ralph Richardson, who, during a preview for a new play, stopped mid-scene, turned to the audience and demanded: "Is there a doctor in the house?" When a member of the audience stood up, Richardson supposedly said: "Doctor, isn't this play awful?"
24 comments:
I am quite intrigued by this article- it reminds me of the show the Producers, sometimes it is more difficult to create something bad with the intention of creating something bad than the opposite, it goes against instinct, and when trying to be bad one actually might be doing something funny and marvelous. I'm also curious what "bad theater" is supposed to mean. I feel that having grounds that state "this theater is going to be bad", a disclaimer for a worst case scenerio, one is automatically butting themselves in a not so bad situation- they have a precursor that just allows them to do whatever they want. There are a lot of companies that take risks, but don't necessarily warn an audience that there show might be bad, different, that's why some people love or hate shows. I feel that having this bad theater notion in place can make for some not so bad theater- I'd be interested to see the relation between catching one of these shows and actually seeing how my opinion of it is affected by the "bad theater" idea it might be playing for.
I don't think that anyone ever intends for their art to be bad. There is comedy, which sometimes stems from a mockery of that which is generally perceived to be bad by theatergoers, and there is that which was supposed to be good.
That being said, there is a lesson to be learned rom the latter. Both in the light that it is important to take risks and that it is important to learn what not to do. If there was no wrong, there would not be a right. And, especially in art, this right is constantly being tested and changed. So it is only through experimentation that one is able to find a good medium between pushing the limit and taking it somewhere where it is not well received.
I completely agree with Natalie! The Producers! We just watched the movie version of the musical the other night and I always find the idea hilarious that anyone would want to produce bad theatre. I also agree with Kassondra and I don't think that anyone tries to produce bad art/theatre. Again, theatre IS about taking risks, and without risks, theatre would not happen. I do not think there is such thing a 100% bad production. I believe that there is something to learn from every piece of theatre, every poor production of Hamlet, and every great production of All My Sons. I think that theatre, no matter what, all has something to offer...whether it be DO THIS and NOT THAT or something like "never set All My Sons in Canada..." Productions always offer something.
"The Producers" is exactly what I was thinking of as well! I also watched it the other night (with Nate), and it definitely popped into my head while reading this article. The magic of a flop, and how hard it is to come by a truly awful play, is part of what makes theatre so intriguing. And the same applies to life in general. There are those truly awful days when everything seems stacked against you and you just can't win, but most of the time a day is filled with both good and bad, a nice balance that keeps you going on a steady equilibrium. But these drastically bad days serve a purpose: they make us appreciate the truly wonderful days even more, and they teach us a lesson because we naturally want to avoid having awful experiences twice. So plays are like life - the bad teaches us to appreciate the good and how to make the good happen more often.
"The Producers" is exactly what I was thinking of as well! I also watched it the other night (with Nate), and it definitely popped into my head while reading this article. The magic of a flop, and how hard it is to come by a truly awful play, is part of what makes theatre so intriguing. And the same applies to life in general. There are those truly awful days when everything seems stacked against you and you just can't win, but most of the time a day is filled with both good and bad, a nice balance that keeps you going on a steady equilibrium. But these drastically bad days serve a purpose: they make us appreciate the truly wonderful days even more, and they teach us a lesson because we naturally want to avoid having awful experiences twice. So plays are like life - the bad teaches us to appreciate the good and how to make the good happen more often.
I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of failing to succeed, and love the idea of trying and seeing what happens when you push yourself to actually make bad theater; by which criteria would you judge it then? By how good it is, or how good it is at being bad? Kind of a funny thought. I also like the point the article made about the fact that people working on a show often think it's going to be so perfect, when it's that attitude that can easily lead to failure. Overall, failure and acknowledging it is always such an interesting concept regardless of how it's put together.
Absolutely. Especially in an educational environment, the importance of "go big or go home" is crucial. There's a safety net. We aren't even doing this with ticket prices yet. Risky and problematic productions lead to two outputs - a good educational experience in how to deal with a unique production, and (or) an interesting product. We all should take advantage of the safety of school to experiment. Now is the time to do the really terrible idea to see if it works. Or learn why it doesn't.
If you can't acknowledge your failures, you won't learn anything.
Risk is absolutely necessary if a show is to make headway in the theatre world. Without risk we would be seeing the same shows over and over again and theatre would really be dead. Its the risk takers that propel the industry forward and keep audiences engaged in the future of this industry. Some of the shows that I've seen in my life stick with me more than others because they are so bad. Lets face it, sometimes bad theatre is better than average theatre because at least bad theatre has some sort of impact on you. I don't know if I totally agree with this bad theatre festival thing. It seems very much like an encouragement for people to not even bother trying at something incredible. Perhaps a gem may be found in this nest of awful theatre, but chances are, it will just be a nest of awful theatre.
Agreed!! The most common complaint I have with shows I go to see is that they are just plain and uninteresting. It is so important to take risks, especially in our field. Being bold and making dicey choices is necessary to truly innovate and bring something new to an audience. At school we are able to take these risks safely and it is essential to take advantage of that. This article is a good reminder of that for all of us.
I agree with what everyone else has said. I think it's important to be able to look at a show objectively, especially for those involved in it. So often we get so involved and concerned with the details, and then get stressed out and then never take a step back to look at the big picture.
I think this article points out an interesting idea that i think we should all try to accept: bad theatre still has some merit. I think what's important, especially while we're all in school, is to realize that bad theatre and boring theatre are two different things, and so I think that, as people above have pointed out, risk-taking is what's most important.
Also, no babies will die, and it's just a school play. If it's bad, you still have an experience to work forward from.
Failing Better.
I honestly believe that this is a skill that many of us lack, and unfortunately one of utmost importance. Without failure, it is impossible to know what success is. Failure helps to achieve success, in a roundabout way. When I fail at something, it does no good to simply accept that fact and move on. I make a point to take something from that failure, be it a lesson, new goal, or simply a knowledge of what does not work in a given situation.
In terms of theater, boundaries cannot be pushed and new horizons cannot be reached without putting the risk of failure on our line. Failure is an inherent part of our business, whether we like it or not. It's better to realize that and use it to your advantage, rather than letting it sneak up on you without warning.
Wait, there is a whole festival dedicated to bad theater! How have we stooped to this. I realize that bad theater is part of life. It happens and you don't usually see it coming, but that is no reason to put it on a pedestal. Failure is something to learn from not something to cherish. I find it especial disheartening that there are entire theater companies devoted to it. It almost a slap in the show that are unintentionally bad. Also, who wants to go see a show that is intentionally terrible. I know people enjoy Miranda Sings even though the whole point is that she sings horribly. Rebecca black's "Friday" was the same thing. But those are just short songs. An entire show, that another beast entirely.
Take risks. Why yes! I learned all about taking risks during My Favorite Class. Actually over the past 2 years. If you dont take any risks you will never fail, and will never do anything outstanding. It is so true. Im glad that we are starting to learn to take those risks and overcome something because we dont know how to react to it. How can be know something is good or bad before we do it? Your biggest failure can be your greatest success. We have all seen this happen before. Why dont we embrace it more?
yes we will fail in life. No we should not try and fail though. I think the idea of a theatre festival for bad theatre is not a great idea. Failing at something has consequences and often in theatre they can cost a ton of money. However by getting consequences we know what will happen if we fail and then take steps to prevent it. I think that celebrating failure is not the right idea. We should celebrate what we learned from failing and then move forward ready for the next project and change to prove that we will not make the same mistakes twice.
I'm not sure if intentionally bad theatre would really bring any good to someone, however I do agree that a bad production can bring about new ideas and thoughts as to how to make your next production a "success" as deemed by society. I find that a failure of something is always a success because I learn from it and that is what I feel this article is trying to state; we learn from our mistakes.
Another article about taking risks and "failing better." As always, I completely agree, but I wonder if all of this reporting about the necessity of failure will affect people. I think the idea of having a festival devoted to failing works is a risk within itself-- is it more important to have an environment that encourages people to create without the worry of being successful, or is it a total flop because who would want to see a show that is guaranteed to be bad theatre? I think the best place to encourage this way of thinking is in educational facilities on grading scales by not grading based on success. This is not my way of asking for an "A for effort," but grading based on risks taken. In my experience, being graded based on this is even more difficult than being graded based on the actual effectiveness of the work I produced, but it shifts the focus from "success" to extending your boundaries, which is great.
I agree that allowing for the possibility of "failing better" opens up the door to creating much more interesting and revolutionary work, but is it really a good idea to go into a process constantly saying "This might fail. I hope this doesn't suck. Update: right now, it sucks a little bit, but maybe it'll get better. Nope still sucks. Happy opening." I think rather than focusing on turns such as "success" and "failure," the important thing is taking bold risks and diving in with 100% commitment from your group. If not everybody's behind it, your show is certain to "fail."
I don't understand why people would strive to be bad at something. If the company strives to be bad and succeeds at that, aren't they succeeded and not failing in their goal? I agree that we learn best from our failures, but that is when we are trying to succeed. We set goals, fail, and improve. I don't see how failing on purpose can help you in the future. I do agree with Natalie though. What is bad theatre, and who is this company to define it. Theatre should not be labeled as bad, rather it is an experimentation. With experimentation, you set your goal, fail, and again improve. At least improving means you are editing and perhaps creating something new. If this company simply strives to fail, I would get bored, because I know that they will fail.
AThis is an interesting concept, though I must admit I would never want to go and see these shows. I feel like if the production team and the actors are not acknowledging how bad the shows are then they are not making the correct adjustments to them! Especially a festival of these productions could be particularly harsh. Then again this could be really funny, like the Producers (like Natalie said) and you never know, it could be a hit!
It is hard to image that people make specific pieces of theatre to flop. I feel like if your goal was to flop if you try to hard it might become comical and then it is not a flop. It is easy for me to see how I would be as hard to purposefully make a hit as it would be to purposefully make a flop. I do however think that it would be an amazingly freeing experience to make something in the hope that it would be a flop. In this situation it is weird to define the word success when you want it to flop and you don’t want it to be a hit.
This whole idea of bad theatre becoming popular reminds me of popular YouTube videos that are popular not because they're good, but because they gained so much hype that everyone wanted to see what it was all about and then have a good laugh afterwards. I think this kind of popularity lends itself to being parodied to gain even more of an audience and is kind of a cop out for shows that are actually good shows. Then again, I also think that bad entertainment just to get a good laugh out of it and to be entertained is just as valid because we need to be reminded that it's okay to laugh at ourselves every once in a while.
I’ve found it! The article that is the perfect mix of controversial, applicable, and short to solicit the maximum number of comments. I’m so pleased with this discovery: there was a decided shortage of these articles this week. Not being afraid to fail is an integral theme in the school of drama. The most interesting and worthwhile work in the world is always an enormous risk. If you never invest yourself enough to fail, then you will never create anything of worth. Every brilliant new thing probably had five prototypes that were complete failures before finally producing a final product. I’m not sure that agree with making failure a goal, but understanding the recipe for failure can produce a better understanding of what success requires.
I think that the risk theaters take is necessary to make theatre happen. And i think the idea of making bad theatre is hilarious. Becuase really what constitutes. There are so many shows and new plays that ive gone to see with friends or read for fun that i loved and my friends hated or the other way around. So i think in every show there is something for someone which in my opinion is what is really important.
Post a Comment