Stage | guardian.co.uk: With a new play, audiences never quite know what they're getting, but early ticket-buyers for Anthony Neilson's latest piece at the Royal Court were taking an exceptionally wild shot in the dark. Originally advertised several months ago as "Untitled New Play by Anthony Neilson", it was only revealed to be called Narrative on 15 March, three weeks before opening.
15 comments:
As rehearsals for As You Like It (or make it hurt) have proceeded in the School of Drama, the effect of a play's title on its performance has been very evident. Early in the process, the question of how to "make it hurt" often came in conflict with the classic ways of telling the story, and in those times where the classic way won out, the team felt a bit of trepidation at letting the adaptation lose (even if it was fully justified). I wonder what title we would have ended up with, if the whole rehearsal process went by before naming it - the show has let some of the hypersexuality and hyperviolence go, but it's still sufficiently different from Shakespeare's text to warrant a difference.
I think the title of a play is very critical, not just for box office purposes, but for symbolic and clarity purposes as well. In Foundations we talked about the imagery behind titles and how we relate them to plays we already knew. It was funny that at some points we imagined images very far from any major theme in the play, but that made sense in context, and other times we were given insight to themes and ideas. I agree that in working writing the actors shouldn't go in with any pretext, but it would be helpful to have the names of shows listed before tickets started selling. However that's not to say that there aren't patrons who would go to see a new show no matter its name.
The title of a play is extremely important. Just as the author of this article said it draws people in, it makes them want to see it even if they have no idea what the play is about. In famous plays and musicals it is the name that eventually brings people to the audience. If you have a good name it can stick out in peoples mind making it easy to tell their family and friends to go see it. Now that is not to say a play does not need a good story/plot/be a good play or musical. It just means the name is the selling point of the play. It is your pitch to the possible audience members or producers. With a poor or bad name they won't be interested enough to even read a description of the play. The process of naming a play is an extremely difficult one. You have to capture the essence of the play as well as make it appealing and desired. Some play shouldn't even be named because the name would reduce it to a simple level, but alas they are named for the audience.
I think calling a play untitled is such a copout. You could never get a book published or a movie produced if you did not have a title and I dont think plays should be any exception. Unless you have a very specific artistic reason to put untitled as your title I dont think you have any business writing a play that you want realize if you are not going to put in the proper time to give your play an adequate title. I dont think titles have to necessarily be this hugely vital part of a show that you cannot have any idea what is going on if you dont analyze the title or anything extreme, but all written works deserve to be properly named. It almost seems like a cry for attention to call your play untitled in the professional world.
Is the title important? How is that a question... Really?
The title of the play is essential. If you choose to title it "untitled" then that is meaningful and stands for something. I do not believe that a play can be untitled without some director, dramaturg, critic, or other person assigning a meaning to that title less title. As we look at the semiotics of things in class, it has become aware to me that even if something is placed there without purpose, someone will assign a meaning to it. It's what we do.
I realize that this article is discussing the various approaches to creating a title - but what should we expect. There are absolutely going to be the sections of the revived classics, the already knowns, and then they are followed by "Untitled" "Untitled" and "A New Play". This article briefly mentions the puns that naming something vaguely that can be produced, but titles of plays and films can become an entire other character to the production. It can be the playwright's underhanded commentary or snarky remark.
Needless to say, changing the title during the rehearsal and development process can be hell for the organization. Budget tracking, routing finances, and paperwork can become mixed up and create additional work for a company that should be ramping up to focus on actually making money on this Untitled piece.
The psychology of how audience members choose unknown plays would be an interesting investigation. They say that lots of words can draw the eye, but be hell for the producer. Does alliteration make it more memorable. Or a spin off of a memorable piece. I always said that "Taming of the Shrew" sounded like "Turn of the Screw".... not sure it made me want to go see the piece more or less, but how do you play on the brains and associations that audience members have with the "must-see" productions.
I've never really thought about how important a title is, but after reading this article I realize that the title of a show is the first impression the audience get's of the show. Therefore, playing the name game could be a sort of manipulation for the writers. I wouldn't suggest false advertising, and calling a show something that leads the audience to believe the show is about something different could lead to very unhappy critics/ patrons, but I think a title that forces the audience to ask questions is very important. I think a lot of people did a really good job with that for playground this year, particularly with shows like Casual Encounters, and I Love You Is Back. I didn't know what either of those phrases meant when I walked into those shows, but I knew what they were called and I wanted to know what the title meant. Other shows that have titles that just set the mood for the show like Urintown and [Title Of Show] are very important I think, because the audience has some sort of idea of the mood of the show, but they don't know what it actually is about. I also think that the actual "event" of naming a show is a very powerful marketing tool. If there's a lot of hype over the show during the entire rehearsal process, and everywhere there are signs for "So-and-so' new untitled play!" when the name finally appears, it makes people question why that title was chosen after so much time. Of course i understand how this could backfire and why producers get nervous, because in the end, it doesn't really matter how or when a show gets named, the title is just extremely powerful.
Truthfully,I never really though about the play's title in detail before. It's not that I don't think it's important, I do. Rather I always just assumed that the plays title was a line from the play or some important character trait displayed in the show. It makes sense that a great deal of thought should go into those few lines, but since it tends to end up as a short phrase, it seems as though it was just plucked from the tale and placed at the top of the page. When it comes to longer play names, I tend to get annoyed. like the "for colored girls..." title. The way they shortened the title for the movie was smart. If i look at a play poster I don't want to have to spent a while reading the show's title, I want to look, think, and go. Simple as that.
I think play titles absolutely matter. On the other hand, having a work be untitled matters just as much. With a title, there is already a basis for the entire work, something to play off of, and an expectation for audiences. But a title is the norm. Untitled is just as strange because it leaves everyone thinking about the specific reason for the title being excluded. It's a game that can't be won, so we have to work with it. We have to figure out how to best convey our vision of works, keeping the title in mind, and see how that vision alongside the title either confines or frees the actors. It's something so basic that we rarely even consider it. But it definitely has an effect, and I am going to be careful to take better note of hat effect in the future.
Absolutely. There are many time where I am ashamed to admit that I have judged a play or musical only by its name. Even movies have this same phenomenon. If the title of the piece is not original and exciting enough to catch my attention then it probably won't be worth my time. Like at a restaurant, if It doesn't SOUND good, then I probably won't eat it.
I think play titles are important, as it often gives the audience some idea what to expect, and can in fact be the reason someone decides to go to see the play. Unless the audience is going to see a particular actor, the title of a play is the first impression said audience member gets of the play. it's the first clue they have to figure out if it's something they feel is worth seeing. It also must be something memorable enough that if they see it somewhere and think it looks interesting, they remember it long enough to actually order tickets.
i mean lets be honest who doesnt choose a book by its coveR? because i totally do the title of a show is extremely critical, the title of the show should strike a perfect balance between informative and interesting yet noit to literal. like the title Mud for the show mud its perfect. it discribes the show just enough to give it a certin ombiaunce and a feeling how ever it also gives you a preconsieved notion of how the shows going to be. the title sometimes gets written last but yet also sometime gets written first and i just find it very interesting that the idea of a title wouldnt ever be considered important.
Titles are super important. I often get turned off of a play where they don't bother to title it (when it is called untitled or something similar). If I can look up the play before hand then its more alright but I am much less likely to go to a play if the name gives no note as to what it is, and there is no way to research it. Maybe once calling a play untitled was original but its been done. Even untitled Feminist Show gives you a good idea of what the show is. If you want your piece to be purely artistic then fine but if you want people to actually come see what you did its silly to scare them off by refusing to tell anyone anything about it.
I think this is fantastic. It actually reminds me of Wassily Kandinsky and Bob Dylan. Kandinsky made many "Untitled" paintings. He made art for the sake of making art. He may have had an opinion on what he was creating, but that doesn't matter. Because the piece was untitled, no one was forced to think that the piece was something specific. The viewer themselves were able to trust their own opinion and decide for themselves what the painting meant. No opinion was wrong. Even with Bob Dylan, he always said he didn't know what his songs were about. Of course he did, but that didn't matter. He wanted to know what each audience member felt. With this show being an untitled piece, each audience member is able to decide for themselves what the show means. The writer will not force an idea into their minds. Instead, this is pure creativity. Every viewer will experience something new. I think this is wonderful!
A lot of thought is put into a plays title because it matters the first or few times we hear it. The whole show is defined in the few words that make up the title. After that the title just becomes something to identify this show as. We do not pay much attention to the title anymore. The first few times do matter though, like the article said the title can make or break weather someone sees or auditions for a show. When a person first hears the title it automatically makes them think what the show is about or gives them a perception of it.
Post a Comment