Bonzuko

I told you I would start publishing the stage combat book sequel here on the blog. Welp, here’s the first taste. Comment and let me know what you think, lovely lurkers.   ~Jenn

———————————————–

Acting the Fight*
Dale Girard mentions in Actors on Guard that very often staged combat is woefully underrehearsed; tacked on to a rehearsal schedule, very often near the end of the rehearsal process. What this does is makes the fight scenes look as though they are  inserted roughly and artificially into an already pretty much complete product, because they are. This leads to the all too often seen “act-then fight-then act” syndrome, especially when the fight scenes are towards the end, or near the climax of the story, like Hamlet. The actors are jolted out of their authentic experience and so is the audience.

Now this happens for for a specific reason: Staged combat is difficult to do. It takes a lot of training to to be able to stay safe and and keep up the illusion of violence, all while still remaining in character. This is why early and frequent fight rehearsals are so important: If an actor can become comfortable with the physical techniques as techniques, she can then move beyond the techniques as such, and make them instead tactics, which her character does to gain her objective.** Fight rehearsals need to be scheduled at least as early as the regular rehearsals, so that the fights are part of the acting process, not an accessory. The actors can then grow with them not as moves to execute rote, but as a part of their characters’ journey.

Because that’s why characters (and real people, too) resort to physical violence: Because words alone aren’t getting them what they want. When words fail as tactics, that’s when a character uses physical tactics instead.

 
*This phrase comes from Fight Master Dale Girard’s book on Stage Combat, called Actors on Guard. His chapter on, well, acting the fight is called this, and I was honored to be given the permission by him to title this book by his phrase. I highly recommend his book, by the way–it’s essential for any theatre or martial arts  library, especially for those of you particularly interested in stage combat. My first book, too, of course.
**For more on the Three Rules, as they are often called, see this post. Also this one.

“We are the bullfrog’s beard.”

I am at the moment working on drafting the next greatest stage combat book ever (besides this one), and I have been thinking long and hard about publishing options. So stay tuned, lovely lurkers, as there may be sections of said sequel appearing up here for your enjoyment.

But for now, please to enjoy this Prezi I made for an old Intro to Film class at Metro State. The reason I post it here, now, is that I came up with a 3 X 3 way categorizing system for stunt styles, and I am planning on expanding on this idea in the above-mentioned book. Apologies for old YouTube clips that may not play. ~Jenn

“We are the elephant’s arches.”

This is just silly. It’s been making the rounds, and I include it here for your amusement, lovely lurkers. Just silly. ~Jenn

Congratulations to Bob Lewis, who is this semester’s ENG 1010 blog-publishing contest winner! Below is his Analyzing an Image essay, which was chosen by vote by his classmates.   ~Jenn

Fear Itself: Of Skittles and Murder   –Bob Lewis

"Fear Itself" by Andy Bell. Skittles on plywood.

            When one first looks at Fear Itself, the first thought that comes to mind is that the brightness–one might even say levity–of the piece belies the violence and tragedy of the event itself.  The piece is made of 12,000 Skittles candies, of various color, on plywood.  It would seem to be the artist’s intent that the harmless and fun nature of candy would clash in the viewer’s mind with the tone of the crime.  Anyone who reads the news has seen photographs of George Zimmerman, and most of us who have followed the case in the media will likely have strong emotional reactions to his image.  Many consider him a murderer, so one might think that putting his portrait in such a lighthearted medium unduly makes light of the tragedy.  It is easy for one to think that the bright reds and yellows that compose Zimmerman’s face against a pleasant green background would be more appropriate on the image of a comedian than someone widely considered to be guilty of a serious crime.

            One might also think that by using something as harmless as candy to depict Zimmerman that the artist is making the less-popular judgment that indeed Zimmerman may not have been the aggressor.  It is possible that one could assume that the medium is meant to be a representation of the subject’s character.

            The title of the portrait seems to contradict these thoughts.  By putting Zimmerman’s image into the form of Skittles and titling the piece Fear Itself, Bell offers the viewer a choice.  Those two simple words tell us that, in the artist’s view, this case is all about fear, and we’re left with the choice between fearing Zimmerman or fearing the Skittles Martin was carrying at the end of his life.

            While no one doubts that Zimmerman fired the shot that ended Martin’s life, the question is whether or not he acted in self-defense.  Because it is widely known that all Martin was carrying were his purchases of Skittles and tea, Bell’s use of this unique medium is able to visually make his entire argument; namely, that Zimmerman cannot have seriously been in fear for his life unless we are to assume that Skittles can be considered a potentially deadly weapon.

            Contrary to making light of the situation, then, the piece uses its frivolous medium as a statement intended to make light of Zimmerman’s defense.  We’re invited by the artist to consider the possibility that Zimmerman feared Trayvon Martin, and further asked to consider why that may have been.  Did he legitimately fear for his life as a result of whatever altercation may have occurred that evening, or was he afraid simply because Trayvon was black?  Are we more justified in believing that Zimmerman should have feared Martin or that society should fear Zimmerman?

            Because race is a significant factor in this event, we can also look at the unreal color as having some meaning in Fear Itself.  If we assume that the artist intends the piece to speak to Zimmerman’s guilt, then we are immediately forced to question whether he was motivated by race, as is commonly assumed in popular opinion.  The artist’s depiction of Zimmerman in artificial color suggests that he wishes to communicate the insubstantiality of skin color.  He is telling us to consider that Zimmerman is recognizable regardless of the color of his skin.  By logical extension, he is telling us to consider that we all may be recognizable regardless of skin color.  In the context of this piece of art, that would suggest that Zimmerman not only is guilty of murder, but perhaps of murder over something lacking any real significance.

            I recall first hearing about this case just a couple days after it happened, and everyone was prepared to rush to judgment.  Since that time, there has been an extremely slow trickle of new information in the media.  Some of it has raised doubts.  Some of it has appeared to confirm initial reactions.  Regardless of one’s initial thoughts on Zimmerman’s guilt or innocence, it is certainly a difficult case to reconstruct from the information we’ve received in the press.  In order to fully understand what really happened, we must await the result of the criminal trial.  Perhaps we won’t know even then.  Is Zimmerman a racist murderer?  Who knows, but Andy Bell’s portrait gives us a clever and well-executed illustration of at least one artist’s opinion that he is.

Image found here

Thanks to Kevin I. for alerting me to this AWESOME video from Vimeo user Leo Burton. Definitely watch it until the very end. ~Jenn