Monday, March 23, 2015

Original Practice?

The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project performs using the unrehearsed cue script technique. We work from cue scripts that are based upon the First Folio printing of Shakespeare’s plays from 1623. Because we choose to approach our performances in a manner that we believe to be comparable to the manner that Shakespeare’s own actors may have used, our model falls under the umbrella term “Original Practices.” Lately, although we have used this term ourselves, questions have arisen: what does “Original Practice” mean, and what value do “Original Practices” have?

There are many aspects of the term “Original Practice:” architecture, costumes, pronunciation, production, etc. This blanket phrase covers so much, it almost has no meaning, except to denote theatrical practices as we imagine they may have been. The truth is that no one knows exactly what “original” theatre architecture, costumes, pronunciation or production methods were. The best we can do is conjecture – and in some cases, we can get very close. But let us not fool ourselves we will ever get it “right.” Anything we do today is merely a modern interpretation.

If that is the case, then what value do “Original Practices” have? If the aim is to recreate an authentic (another fuzzy word) Elizabethan theatrical experience, then they mean nothing but living archaeology. Living history has its place, but that place is not in a theatre. Should a theatre get absolutely everything historically correct (which may in some cases meaning breaking several laws concerning alcohol and/or solicitation), there will always be a missing factor: the audience. No matter how accurate the theatre, the actors, the costumes, the accents are, the performance will never have an Elizabethan audience with Elizabethan morals and an Elizabethan understanding of the world and its place in the cosmos. This is a sheer impossibility.

Everybody’s work should be “original” or else what is the point? What we do is “original.” Other companies in Chicago and Portland that work from the same theories as we do have different audiences than we have in Pittsburgh. The case can be made that we are looking for some sort of historical accuracy in our productions, but what would that matter? We do not create museum exhibitions. We create live theatre for a live audience, not an imaginary historical gathering.

So how would USP describe what we do? We acknowledge that our working practice is based on historical theories regarding the production of theatre during the time that William Shakespeare worked. We work from cue scripts that are designed to give the performer the most pertinent information needed for performance of the role in the most economical way possible. We include our surroundings and audience as much as possible (not to be confused with audience participation, although that is sometimes used). We tell the story without telling the audience what to think or feel about it. Our goal is to bring our shows as close to the audience as possible and to give them an experience that can only be had at a live theatrical production.

Our process has evolved, and will continue to do so as we see how the audience and our actors relate to the approach and the performance. It will adjust as much as necessary to remain relevant to our audience. By stamping a method with any label, especially one with such connotations as “Original Practice,” we suggest something finished and complete. This also supposed that the audience is frozen into certain attitudes, which is another impossibility. As performers our methods must be fluid, and we must be willing to let go of ways of working that we may have held dear if they no longer serve the audience. This does not mean playing to the lowest common denominator (but there is always room for it), but it does mean respecting the audience, challenging them when necessary and always remembering that the performance is for them and not us.

The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project’s practices make our productions unique. As we grow, those practices will have to evolve to fulfill our mission, and as they change they will certainly get farther from what many people consider to be “Original Practices.” Nevertheless, everything we do will always be “original.”

-Andy Kirtland
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project

Friday, February 13, 2015

A Labour of Love, or There and Back Again

I have triumphantly returned from Lyon after illustrating how approaching the text of Love’s Labour’s Lost as one of Shakespeare’s actors would have done, through a cue script, reveals directions from the playwright that affect the performance of a role. At the outset of the journey, it was unclear if my presence at La Société Fraçaise Shakespeare’s 2015 conference would be a possibility. Luckily, everything worked out well.

For this trek to Europe, I was fortunate to fly on Turkish Airlines, a decision that had two immediate consequences. First of all, this particular international company does not fly out of Pittsburgh, compelling an extra leg of my trip from the Steel City to The Big Apple, adding a day of travel on both ends. Secondly, being Turkish Airlines, in order to get to Lyon, France, I would need to take a layover just down the road a piece in Istanbul. Rather than spend 13 hours in the airport between flights home, I was able to extend my layover, and have a day in a city that I had long longed to visit. The paper and the trip were shaping up nicely.

Mother Nature, however, did not want to cooperate. The day before I was to leave Pittsburgh, my bus to New York City was cancelled as New Jersey was placed under a travel ban in anticipation of the record-breaking snow that was to bury Manhattan. After a bit of very stressful scampering, I booked a seat on the only train, and in fact the only mode of transportation between Pittsburgh and New York, that would get me to JFK International Airport in time for my flight – if that flight should even take off the following afternoon.

Upon arriving in New York City, the snowstorm was painfully evident by the lack of debilitating snow. There was more snowfall in Pittsburgh that morning, the major part of the weather deciding to head north to Boston. Still, the question of delays hung in the air. The flight I had booked was the only flight I could take that would get me to Lyon in time for the conference.

That evening was spent with friends and watching a rehearsal for a staged reading of one of USP’s Artistic Director Elizabeth Ruelas’ plays. Arising from the couch early the next morning, I made my way to the airport where everything went off without a hitch. I was in the air for more than nine hours to Istanbul for a three-hour layover before a three-hour flight to Lyon. Thirty minutes on a train and ten minutes on the thoroughly efficient metro later, I was checking into my hotel.

Not succumbing to jet lag, I decided to take in Lyon’s spectacular Roman ruins. There are two theatres on the hill of Vieux Lyon, one being the oldest Roman theatre in Gaul. The excellent museum on sight was free that day, so I was able to take in quite a bit before heading back to the hotel to nervously rehearse my presentation. Presentations we rehearse, but Shakespeare, no. As the last speaker of the day and the only performer on the agenda, a persistent question nagged me: am I going last because they think I’ll be entertaining, or because nobody sits through the entire conference? My stomach was in knots, filled with butterflies or kittens, whichever metaphor you prefer.

The following morning, I arrived early giving myself plenty of time to get lost. The conference was held on the Déscartes campus of the École Normale Superieur, and when I reached the room, it was locked. The receptionist informed me that the room was reserved from 9:30, which was curious because all the materials for the conference listed 9:00 as the start time. I had difficulty using my computer while traveling. Had I missed an important email while I was in transit?  I began seeing students moving in the right direction, and heard mention of a conference and speakers, so I followed. I must have arrived just a bit too early. It’s still better than the alternative.

More topics were addressed than I thought would have been in a conference devoted to reading Love’s Labour’s Lost. Speakers came from the UK, Scotland (a transplant from Pittsburgh), Norway, France and of course the USA (me). I was the only one not connected to some institution. Would I be taken seriously? Would I be understood? Would anybody care? These were the questions that occupied my mind while the other speakers took their turns, causing me to miss a good amount of their presentations.

It turns out that the answer to all of my questions and worries was ‘yes.’ The program was running 20 minutes behind schedule when I took the stage. While preparing it struck me that I was not reading a paper, but giving a presentation. During my time, I mixed things up by presenting from in front of the large desk at the front of the room and not reading directly from my paper, but using it more as an outline. As difficult as it was due to nerves and adrenaline, I tried to speak slowly. Most of the attendees were students, and English was their second language. A majority of the presentations were in English, so I hope that we were understood.

I was able to explain how Shakespeare was able to direct his actors through cue scripts, how shifts between verse and prose alert the actors to a change on stage, how pronouns direct blocking and how a couple of important rules of staging Shakespeare without rehearsals effect the performance and the interpretations of roles. My paper was greeted with some very welcomed comments and questions when I was finished although the conference went over time. I also know for a fact that some of the students who had been checking out fishing videos on Facebook throughout the conference ended the day by checking out USP’s page - a very encouraging sign.

The entire experience left me wanting to do more conferences. They are a great way to keep in touch with what is going on in the world of Shakespeare, and to spread USP’s name and methods. I am grateful to La Société Française Shakespeare for the opportunity and all of their help and support. A big thank you goes out to the presenters for their time, talent and knowledge. To read ‘An Unrehearsed Cue Script Perspective on Love’s Labour’s Lost,’ and the other papers presented at Lyon and at the second part of the conference taking place on February 13 and 14 in Paris, visit La Société Française Shakespeare’s website in March (http://shakespeare.revues.org/?lang=en).

After leaving my hotel the next morning, I wandered around in search of a post office only to find that it was closed on Saturdays. Then I got off at the wrong stop on the metro before waiting for half an hour at the wrong stop for the train to the airport. Thankfully, I made it on time.

That evening and the next day were spent in Istanbul, and while having absolutely nothing to do with Shakespeare I still enjoyed an amazing time there.

The ten-hour sleepless flight back to the USA the next day was punctuated with three crying infants going off every 20 minutes. We arrived in JFK on time, however, the city and airport were in the grips of another snowstorm fear. Upon landing, I was notified that my bus, scheduled to leave 5 hours later, was again cancelled. Between sitting on the tarmac for two hours and a slow A Train to the Port Authority, I missed the last bus to Pittsburgh for the evening. Instead, the night was spent on a very generous friend’s futon before getting the only train from New York City to Pittsburgh the next day.

I spent 9 hours of my birthday on the train catching some much needed rest, before arriving home at 8pm, only 14 hours later than originally intended. Thankfully I was greeted by my much-relieved wife for a lovely birthday dinner.

This entire trip amounted to over 45 hours in transit, 2 trains, 4 planes, 3 cities, 3 languages (4 if you count the people in Turkey who thought I was German) and one great experience sharing USP with a completely new audience and sparking interest in the process.

Ah - the distances we go for Shakespeare, and the experiences he gives in return.

-Andy Kirtland
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project



My traveling companion Balzac is ready to go!



Signage for the seminar

The view of Lyon from Vieux Lyon

Feels like you're there, doesn't it?



I've waited a long time for this picture, so have those people on the bench.


Thursday, January 22, 2015

Much adoe and Me

As we at USP prepare for our upcoming tour of Much adoe about Nothing, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on why this is such a special play for me.  It wasn’t the first Shakespeare play I read.  That was Romeo and Juliet.  It wasn’t the first Shakespeare play I saw.  That was The Comedy of Errors.  It wasn’t the first Shakespeare play I was in or even the first Unrehearsed production I was in.  Romeo and Juliet and The Taming of the Shrew, respectively.  However, Much adoe… is a Shakespeare play that I am very passionate about and, therefore, of which I am very protective.
My first brush with this comedy was when I was an undergrad.  It was to be one of the first plays of the upcoming fall/winter season and I desperately wanted to play Beatrice.  All of that wonderful wit and not suffering fools coupled with such charm?  Yes, please.  So, I spent the entire summer before auditions studying the script on my own.  Just me and my Schmidt Lexicons (you Shakespeare-philes know what I’m talking about).  I prepared completely and was ready!  Then a few days before the auditions, I was in a horrific car accident.  Against recommendations, I pulled myself out of bed and showed up at the audition complete with bandages and pain killers.  I was not going to be deterred from doing my audition monologue and let all those months of preparation go to waste.  Forgetting all pain when I was on stage, like all actors do, I did scene after scene that the director requested.  Then I came home and collapsed.  A couple of days later, a fellow actress in the drama department called me.  I was in a bit of a pain killer haze so I don’t remember everything she said until I heard the word “Congratulations.”  “For what?” I said.  “Well…you’re Beatrice.” She said, surprised.  Apparently, the casting sheet had been up for a day or so, but due to my injuries I hadn’t gone to school to check.  I burst into tears over the phone.  Tears of joy, release, and gratitude that all of my hard work had paid off even though I was hobbling around the stage.  A few months later, the pain killers and bandages were gone and I was playing a part I had set my heart on and worked so hard to get.
Years later, I was cast as Beatrice in Much adoe… in an Unrehearsed production with The New England Shakespeare Festival (my fourth year with them).  It was supposed to be just one performance for me this time since I wasn’t sure I would be able to do the entire tour since I had other show obligations in NYC.  But, after the wonderful actor playing Benedick called me after the show and said “Let’s do the tour!” – I checked with my director in NYC who was able to work out the schedule so I could go.  Little did I know that this tour would change my life, forever.  My first day there, I met a very funny and very charming man named Andy Kirtland.  He was a vet actor with The New England Shakespeare Festival, like me, except he had been with them longer and just happened to perform on the tours that I wasn’t on.  After years working for the same company, this was our first meeting.  We instantly fell in love – not just romantically, but with each other’s talent and humor (Andy played Dogberry).  Shortly after the tour, we moved in together and were married a few years after that.  During that time, we have worked together on many, many occasions – either as actors, director/actor, co-teachers, co-producers, etc. and realized how well we work together due to our mutual respect and enjoyment of theatre and each other.  Even fellow artistic directors have commented on our awesome working relationship.  We decided to work together on a full-time basis doing theatre that we love and are passionate about, so in 2012 we founded The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project and have taught, directed and produced some wonderful theatre so far (and will continue to do so).
This year, we are doing our first tour with USP.  As Artistic Director, I chose to do Much adoe about Nothing this time to celebrate this play that I have been passionate about and very close to for years as well as to celebrate the play that brought my husband/partner/best friend and me together.  It’s going to be one hell of a show!

-Elizabeth Ruelas
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project
 

Friday, January 9, 2015

USP Is Going to France

At the end of the month, I will represent The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project at La Société Française Shakespeare’s 2015 conference in Lyon, France. The topic of this year’s gathering is “Reading Love’s Labour’s Lost.” In the interest of full disclosure, this is not one of my favorite plays penned by Mr. Shakespeare, and my interest in this opportunity lies in the chance to explain our way of working to a new audience.

This international conversation about Love’s Labour’s Lost, the sister convention of the larger one to be held in Paris on 15 February, will host speakers from France, Norway, the UK and me (the only speaker from the USA in Lyon). A vast array of approaches and perspectives of the play will be covered. The topics range from very esoteric philosophic takes on the comedy to performance-based approaches of exploration. I have the honor of being the final presenter of the day.

My paper, An Unrehearsed Perspective on Love’s Labour’s Lost, focuses on the role of Berowne. By examining parts of the cue script that the Berowne-actor would receive, I demonstrate how Shakespeare wrote stage direction into his texts as well as plot and situational information and suggestions for how his actors may play their role(s). There is a great amount of information to condense into a 20-minute presentation. My exploration is limited to the cues that appear in the actor’s cue script, changes and shifts in the way Berowne speaks (or in the way the text appears in cue script form) and the ways in which they mirror and direct changes in the character. I explain the first two basic rules of performing the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique and demonstrate how they can affect a reading of the script. To find out what those rules are and to make an interesting discovery or two about the role of Berowne, you will have to wait for La Société Française Shakespeare to publish my paper on its official website.

On a personal note, I am looking forward to spending what limited time I have in Lyon, France’s second city. Lyon has hundreds of years of history to explore in a very small amount of time. In regard to history, I will be turning an extended layover in Turkey into one day in Istanbul, a city I have longed to visit. On this trip, I will be in the air for about as much time as I will be free in Lyon and Istanbul, but I will make the most of my time in these amazing cities.

Above all, I plan to take every advantage offered by La Société Française Shakespeare and the connections I make in Lyon. Over the past year, USP has put a great effort into expanding our presence online and enhancing our local visibility in Pittsburgh. With the presentation of this paper we will put our first footprint in European soil.

-Andy Kirtland
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project

Friday, December 12, 2014

The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project's Book Review

For all of you who have been keeping up with what we have to say about the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique and all things Shakespeare and would like to learn more about it, I’ve put together a reading list of books that I have enjoyed and / or influence my work on the Bard. Please, comment and let us know if you have other favorites or recommendations. USP is always looking for interesting and new research and inspiration.

Secrets of Acting Shakespeare, The Original Approach, Patrick Tucker, Routledge, 2002
            This is the book that started it all. In these pages Tucker talks about how he “discovered” (used in the loosest sense) unrehearsed Shakespeare. He details some of the performances, what worked for him and the Original Shakespeare Company and what did not. Everyone of whom I am aware that works in this style has roots in what Tucker sets forth in this book. It is the best source for starting your exploration of this technique.

Shakespeare in Parts, Simon Palfrey and Tiffany Stern, Oxford, 2007
            At the moment, this award winning study is my bible and greatest influence. Tiffany Stern is Patrick Tucker’s niece, and with him ran the Original Shakespeare Company. This is a much more involved study of the style and is intended for academics as much as it is for theatre practitioners. Parts of it can be wordy, and it is a long read at 490+ pages, but it is a gold mine. Stern details brilliantly how the cues contain just as much important information for an actor as his own text. She has some very astutely observed and detailed accounts of how the technique influences characters. This is a must read for anyone with any interest in the subject.

Acting from Shakespeare’s First Folio, Theory, Text and Performance, by Don Weingust, Routledge, 2006
            The title sounds like a thesis paper, and the book almost reads as one. Wiengust was a party to the Original Shakespeare Company’s productions at the Globe Theatre in London during its first three years in operation. He gives good, thorough reasons for the use of the technique as opposed to the New Bibliography movement that for a long time has held sway over the editing of Shakespeare’s texts. It is rather dry, but it should be read at least to get another perspective on the technique from someone who was not directly involved with Tucker’s productions.

The following books are not on the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique, but will be of interest to any scholar or actor who has a passion for Shakespeare.

Playing Shakespeare, An Actor’s Guide, by John Barton, Anchor Books, 1984
            The only thing better than the book is the television series from which this book is made. I cannot recommend that series enough. It is brilliant to see so many famous British actors relatively early in their careers sitting literally at the feet of John Barton, and seeing them going through the same steps as every young actor takes when learning how to perform Shakespeare. At this point, this book is most likely required reading for every Shakespeare class for actors, but in truth, everyone should read it – or even better, see it.

The Shakespeare Wars, Clashing Scholars, Public Fiascoes, Palace Coups, by Ron Rosenbaum, Random House, 2006
            This is a wonderful book in which Rosenbaum, inspired by Peter Brook’s famous production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, sets out to discover what makes Shakespeare Shakespearean. He talks with scholars, editors, theatre practitioners getting conflicting views on just about every aspect of the Bard from authorship to attribution, performance style to editing texts. This book raises more questions than it seeks to answer and gives a great picture in the variety of Shakespeare scholarship. It’s a big book at 500+ pages, but rewarding.

A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare, 1599, by James Shapiro, Harper Perennial, 2005
            This is my favorite book regarding Shakespearean biography. Rather than taking the usual approach of reading Shakespeare’s texts and attempting to extrapolate biographical details (from works of ­fiction – don’t get me started), Shapiro looks at the facts and actual events surrounding London in 1599, then looks at the texts to see how these events influenced the writing. 1599 was a particular busy year for Shakespeare: amidst the drama of constructing The Globe, the Bard finished Henry V, wrote Julius Cæsar, and As You Like It, as well as completed a draft of Hamlet. It was also a busy year for England: the Spanish Armada, the Irish Rebellion, the beginning of the East India Company, and the Queen was aging without settling on a successor. Shapiro paints a wonderful picture of the time, and how Shakespeare incorporated the themes of his contemporary life into his plays.

Becoming Shakespeare, the Unlikely Afterlife That Turned a Provincial Playwright into the Bard, by Jack Lynch, Walker, 2007
            I love this book because it shows how subsequent generations built the pedestal upon which so many now place Shakespeare. So many people point out how they want to get back to what the playwright originally intended, or to some approximation. Lynch shows how the changes imposed upon the plays over the past 400 years have made that a near impossibility. This is a great antidote to the terminal Bardology that many suffer from today. It lets us know that Shakespeare was a playwright. Whatever else we see him as today is our own construction.

 
-Andy Kirtland
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project
 

Friday, November 28, 2014

Benedicke versus Leonato: Who Will Stop Her Mouth?

I have been putting the finishing edit touches to the script of our next production: Much adoe about Nothing, trying to work out the best way for ten actors to play all of the characters.  I’ve had to combine a couple of characters and, unfortunately, completely delete one (apologies, Antonio).  As we’ve blogged about before, there were some lines in the First Folio (the only version we use) that were not attributed to characters but rather to the actors who played them at the time.  Without using modern versions to fill in the answers for us – Andy and I enjoyed working out who should say what.  It was pretty easy to figure out, but still a fun exercise for us Shakespeare nerds.  Then, in Act Five… the last scene…28 lines from the end of the play, there it was: “Peace I will stop your mouth.” delivered by Leonato instead of the usual Benedicke. 

We knew it was coming.  So, now the question: should I, as the director, give the line to Benedicke to say (which audiences will expect and enjoy) or leave it as Leonato’s line (which may throw some for a loop?)
The line is Leonato’s in every Folio and Quarto version I could find: First Quarto (1600), First Folio (1623), & Second Folio (1632) has the line plain as I’ve written above.  In the Third Folio (1664) and Fourth Folio (1685) the line is still Leonato’s, but a comma is added after “Peace”.
In modern texts, there is also a stage direction added: “kisses her”, which is not in any of the Folios or Quartos. 
This begs the question: why give the line to Benedicke and add the stage direction?  Based on the Unrehearsed Cue Script Technique, the actor playing Leonato would have endless options to ‘suit the action to the word’ (an unrehearsed technique rule) with stopping Beatrice’s mouth.  After all, she’s the one who’s talking when this line is spoken.  He’s her uncle and has been living with her brilliant wit for years, day after day.  So, stopping her mouth would mean something else coming from him rather than Beatrice’s soon-to-be husband.  Plus, the added stage direction in modern texts takes the choice away from the actor.  Yes, a kiss is fun and it’s what the audience is waiting for, but letting an actor’s imagination be free to decide how to stop her mouth can be an exciting moment!
But, it’s not what the audience who knows this play expects.  True.  That is what the Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project is all about.  Introducing audiences to this fun, original way of performing Shakespeare’s plays.  It’s fast-paced, true to the text, and as close to the style that Shakespeare’s company would have performed them. 
So, who will be stopping Beatrice’s mouth and how will they do it?  You’ll have to come see our show in 2015 to find out!

-Elizabeth Ruelas
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project
 

Friday, November 14, 2014

"This is Not the Theatre of Subtlety" - Guest Post by Elizabeth Chappel

I would argue that there are two nightmares for actors:
1.      Going onstage not having a clue of what you are doing. (Don’t lie; you’ve had that dream. EVERYONE has had that dream: the one where you didn’t even know you were supposed to be in a play and have no idea what the lines are.)
And…
2.      Auditions.

The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project turns the first into an insanely fun experience. Sure, you have the inherent directions in your text, and you’re taught the basics (action to the word; cross to the person to whom you are speaking, if you do not know to whom you are speaking, cross to the person who gave you your cue). However, you have no idea what anyone else is going to say or do or even what the specific plot of the show is. It is thrilling and unexpected and absolutely wonderful.

Now let’s talk about the second nightmare.

Any audition can be a nerve-wracking process. The audition room turns into this blank void where anything could happen – somehow it becomes a torture chamber with an inherent, intense pressure to be everything the director wants or you face corporal punishment. Maybe? I don’t know. Trying to encompass the normal audition process with metaphors is hard.

Anyway, this is what auditioning can be. Auditioning for Unrehearsed is NOT this.

When I walked into the audition last year for Unrehearsed, I went in nervous (as I am for every audition ever). I checked in and was given the cold reading with lines for Adriana and Dromio. Obviously, I thought, I shall prepare for Adriana, as I am female. Once I was ready, I walked into a large space with two people unexpectedly beaming at me. Elizabeth and Andy were sitting at this table with an infectious, expectant excitement on their faces that put me immediately at ease. They explained some of the concepts about how cue script technique is performed, and off we went into the world of Shakespeare.

I started off with the Adriana monologue, hamming it up a little bit, moving around and directing some of the lines to Elizabeth. Elizabeth and Andy gave some notes, and then I was asked to perform the Dromio monologue… which was unexpected. I winged it, verging onto vaudeville in the character and running around like a crazy person. I left the audition room feeling exhilarated and like I made a complete fool of myself in the most wonderful way. It turns out that this is how Shakespeare performed in the cue script technique should feel. It feels be big and vivid, and you are completely exhausted afterwards.

Some tips:
-Gender-swapping may occur.
As you read, if you are a girl, you may be asked to read for a boy, and vice
versa.
-Have fun!
If you haven’t gotten it already from the other blog posts or watching a
performance, performing Unrehearsed is incredibly fun. No reason the
audition shouldn’t be the same.
-Action to the word!
The bigger the better. This is not the theater of subtlety – there’s a time and
place for that, but think of yourself as entertaining the Elizabethan masses.
Pretty sure physical humor might get you a better response.
-Interact with your audience.
In this case, the auditioners. I know there are some auditions where there is
this awkward, invisible, impenetrable barrier between you and the director. Not so here.

And that’s it!
Think of it this way: the final performance of the Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project will be surprising and wonderful in its flaws; why would the director expect the audition to be any different?
Hope to see you all for Much adoe about Nothing!

-Elizabeth Chappel
The Unrehearsed Shakespeare Project