Over the course of the summer, my primary task in embarking upon the
writing process was the synthesis of several ideas I've been mulling
over for the better part of a year. Without probing too deeply into my
own process (for fear disrupting it), I do know that this is most often
the first phase of my creative output. I accumulate ideas, sentences,
sentiments, sketches, quotes, and images in notebooks and on scraps of paper everyday.
When I begin to piece together different components of a prospective work, I carefully choose from my arsenal of mostly unrelated ideas, piecing them together carefully but without much premeditated thought. I find that my voice is more authentic if narrative and thematic elements emerge organically... I'm not really sure how this happens, but I'm not intent on finding out.
So, often akin to pastiche in form, a narrative or series of visuals emerges from these preliminary steps, and a unique aesthetic begins to crystallize.
The difficulty in creating my IP from its conception, however, revolved around several foundational guidelines I attempted to respect through the entire process:
When I begin to piece together different components of a prospective work, I carefully choose from my arsenal of mostly unrelated ideas, piecing them together carefully but without much premeditated thought. I find that my voice is more authentic if narrative and thematic elements emerge organically... I'm not really sure how this happens, but I'm not intent on finding out.
So, often akin to pastiche in form, a narrative or series of visuals emerges from these preliminary steps, and a unique aesthetic begins to crystallize.
The difficulty in creating my IP from its conception, however, revolved around several foundational guidelines I attempted to respect through the entire process:
- Write for an audience of non-native English speakers; while there were certainly native English speakers in the audience, and while others have produced remarkable IPs showcasing the complexities of the English language, the source of my intentions was two-fold: first, I imagined that it would be an interesting personal exercise in cogency and conciseness, forcing me to avoid superfluous detail and language that might distract any audience member. Secondly and simply put, I wanted to fully involve and engage everyone viewing my production; I've heard numerous student IP viewers contend that they struggled to appreciate a clearly polished production simply because the language therein was too esoteric. I still infused many cultural references, allusions, and innuendos, however my goal was to produce a straightforward narrative whose emotional gravity would be driven by imagery and the talents of my actors.
- Infuse the cultural and pop-cultural elements I often find in my work without alienating my audience; perhaps the ultimate challenge in writing for a universal audience, at Pearson I saw the need to strike a fine balance between cultural saturation and cultural sterility. Here, I find that audiences appreciate some commitment to an unfamiliar cultural influence... however, my since of humor often drawing from pop-cultural references, I knew that the limits set by the audience's prior knowledge would prohibit many of the stylistic choices I'm used to making.
- Strike the Pearson Cliché Equilibrium; through my theatrical experiences here, I've noted a trend that emerges from the relationship between thematic content and audience reaction. One of the primary factors influencing this phenomenon is the familiar nature of casting here: no one is an unknown actor; rather, everyone shares a relatively personal connection the each actor onstage, and thus, special attention must be paid to casting—both with and against type. At times it is necessary to manipulate casting here in order to completely alienate a character from the audience by characterizing his or her actor in a way divergent from that actor's real-life persona. Other times, "type" can be used strategically in order to cultivate an emotional response from the audience that might not be possible using an otherwise "unknown" actor. In a sense, every actor in an IP is "famous"... and there is no way to cast an "unkown". Keeping these calculations in mind when considering casting, during the writing process, I strove to strike the perfect balance of what might be dubbed cliché and iconoclasm. Due to the scope and circumstances of any IP, and especially considering that most participants in IPs do not seriously pursue acting, it is almost necessary to incorporate cherished imagery, storylines, characterizations, and "in-jokes" a la community theatre in order to advance the plot and commit your audience to your characters. Through my observations, I've noted that a rare, near-perfect balance can be struck using these "clichés" tastefully. But, the risk of overuse threatens to render any production a trite exercise rather than an expression. Thus, I hoped to bolster my clichés—punchlines and one-liners, a simple plot, a melodramatic climax set to evocative music, etc.—with the unexpected.
No comments:
Post a Comment