Your reports Find reports DIRECTOR’S THEATRE (Actor’s Theatre?) - (The) Changing relationships between Actors, Writers and Directors DIRECTOR’S THEATRE (Actor’s Theatre?) -- (The) Changing relationships between Actors, Writers and Directors Convener(s): Sam Jones Participants: Lots but forgot to pass the paper round but included Lisa Wolfe, Johnny McG, Tony B, Annette and many more Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations: These things and many others were said: Director as Auteur Director as person with strong Aesthetic. Difference between old meaning of director’s theatre ie P Brook etc and meaning of this phrase (if any) now. Lisa gave 2 example of artists she had worked with: writer and performer who worked with 2 co-directors and was able to separate writing self and performing self Director in devising process – who needed to and was allowed by the actors eventually to take ownership of the process The style of a production is defined by the director Complicite – v collaborative, but with a particular aesthetic, and director led Some notions of directors theatre = actor as puppet Director as editor of actor’s ideas – various egs including Propeller Dee – in her ensemble she wanted the actors to have a voice but initially like pulling teeth. Are actors not political enough Lots of discussion about Good Faith and Bad Faith in the relationship between actor and director (and writer) The director tends to be the one that takes the first leap of faith Actors need to create companies Actors need to remind themselves of what they bring uniquely to the table – they are usually too compliant The wasted resource of the ensemble ref. Propeller Colchester – and ensemble of 20 actors – the work programmed around them. The director is an outside eye When devising you don’t want someone to intrude on that or dilute the process – however it is useful to have an editor – shaping force – the dilemma of having a director in the devising process Need actors to invest in the audience – sometimes the director is the guardian of that relationship The audience comes to see the actors and the story primarily The ensemble model has come back into fashion Is director’s theatre a reaction to the move towards ensemble and democracy in theatre – directors digging their heels in against this movement The director’s aesthetic – the benevolent dictator who cedes power to a collaborative ensemble Is there a collective responsibility to finish a project even if the actors don’t agree on the aesthetic Directors can leave once the rehearsal process is done – actors need to go on every night. Actors don’t feel they have the right to speak. They are trained not to intervene in other peoples’ process We need longer rehearsal periods More workshops Better communication about process before and during rehearsal The actor needs to own the work but the director is editor of the whole vision TRUST Actors like being directed Director – a person who frames the questions It is the actor’s job to go in with an open mind It is about the director, the actors and the writers all not thinking they have all the answers Director – a holder of the framework Who makes decisions? Who has agency? Actors self regulators of the work An actor has a lot to give a writer – about whether stories or voices are sufficiently developed and illuminated New work is enriched when actor’s voices are allowed However: Vulnerability – needing the director as a referee and filter of the actors input to the writer The focus is different with new writing – ie wanting the play to be as good as possible/ focus on how is it best realized Different with a classic play – more about the particular director’s vision What are audiences going for?