Evaluation:

Verfremdungseffekt
Our performance consisted of many techniques that resulted in the “defamiliarization of the text” technique.
For example, name placards were often used so that viewers would not have to concentrate on the actors portrayal of a character, but could then focus on the message they are getting acros. The names used on these cards were very simple, i.e. A, B, C, D or Single mother 1 etc. This ensured that the audience made no pre-interpretations of the character, and so the only significance of the actors was to tell a story. Another technique we used was comedy. This was used to alienate the audience members from the characters. Comedy had been used in such a delicate/vulgar subject, so that even though the audience found it funny because of the exaggeration of such “evil” characters, towards the end, when characters (wearing placards) began to become serious, all was cut off so that we did not delve into gaining the audience’s emotional attachment-which meant that the extreme and sudden contrast went from being emotionally detached to questioning themselves, both of which Brecht focuses on.
Questioning in epic theatre:
Brecht wants audience members to go to a performance, and walking out conversing with other members questioning anything and everything that was brought up in the performance. However, this can be fairly challenging considering that one must keep the performance as alienated as possible, whilst getting the audience to question anything, which can be fairly hard without getting the audience members emotionally attached to any of the characters. However, in our piece, this was achieved by not only using the contrast of comedy and personal invasion, but it was also achieved with the use of guilt tripping. Throughout the play when the “table scenes” were commencing, serious conversations were taking place, but all members of that scene were stereotypical, conveying a message as simply as possible, without the involvement of individual objectives as such. However, during the last scene after comic sketches of cruel dictators, a monologue took place, which didn’t use personal experiences so that the audience could relate, and in turn, understand the message of the piece, but used contrast within this country and other countries in order to get people to understand, without the use of individual reflection. When doing so, this specific character spoke to the audience, only to gain their attention, and used every day conflicts, but vague. No detail was provided nor were there consequences that one must face as a result of individual reaction to the situation, so the events stayed fairly vague. Once this was done, contrast of things that scarcely anyone had experienced (daily events that occur in external and under-privilledged countries) were elaborated upon, relating to life and death experiences that some people face on a daily basis. This made the audience feel incredibly guilty for being ungrateful so the simplest of things in life.
Climatic Catharsis:
Brecht also focuses on this in order to achieve the audience questioning social and political subjects. We used this in our piece by creating an overwhelming sense of both laughter, but using black comedy, which eventually was picked up during the end once the guilt tripping began. This happened because everyone was forced to laugh at the sketches, because they were intended to make fun of cruel people. However, during the end, we were made to feel bad, and this overpowering sense of guilt was the followed by realisation and renewal in our interpretations of both life, and what we do with it, which is what lead to the questioning of everything-something that is so important, yet is locked away, untill something so unsuspecting (In our case, comical theatre) unlocks it, without forcing it, but is provoked. 
Other groups:Another group had used this technique, but used placards to illustrate emotions, and using a chorus to shout out stage directions, such as “EXCLAMATION MARK.” This was effective because this group was outside, and the audience were physically distanced from the stage. Often, 2 people would be involved in a scene, and a chrorus would support them with both actions and phrases. However, because they were all constantly shouting, this exclamation point emphasised and differentiated when there was an even stronger emotion, which again, helped the audience in the most basic of techniques to help and defamiliarize them.
General:
This made the audience question important things in life with the relation of people who suffer daily, and how easy we have it compared to them. Even though we do lead a difficult lifestyle, it is all due to materialistic things, which our piece conveyed using guilt. This guilt arouse without the use of emotional connection, which came about after the comedy, actor alienation and guilt trip. I think it went really well because of this. We made comical sketches of famous dictators, which again, alienated the audience because we are taught so much about how evil they were, that when they are being made fun of, it is an odd thing to watch, and so the audience do not know how to react. I also think it went really well because the use of third person narration was used, which helped the audience members realise what is going on. Often, this narration would come in mid-scene, to ensure that no one became attached and make sure they were clear on what was going on, so they could focus on the message rather than the story/actors.
I think this piece went really well, not only because we managed to use Brechtian terms effeiciently within our pieces, but we used it in very important and delicate subject, which was invading other people's privacy, for the sake of Brechtian theatre.

Political Protest:

Our protest began with two so-called "rooms." Each of the two rooms were decorated to extremes, one was decorated to look like a typical young girl's room, the other, to depict a young teenage girl's room. Two of our members were dressed accordingly. Our third member was dressed in a formal suit with our logo printed on it, "Sex it down," promoting the oversexualisation of young females. Music would play to match each of the girls, whilst the other was in a still image. As the member in the suit (playing the role of society, influencing both the girls) passed something newer and better than the object the young teen was holding, Society would take this old object, and pass it onto the young girl, who would then start playing around with it, unaware of the fact that society is changing her. It would then get to the point that the girl was almost completely identical to the teen, and get ready together for a night out. The older girl invited the young one to stay round after plenty of makeup and suggestive pre-party photos. The young girl agrees, but runs to her room, to grab something for the night. Her teddy. Symbolizing that she is still a young girl at heart, despite what society has done to her.
I think that the protest itself went fairly well. However, our group focused on the message entailed within rather than actually gathering the audience, and so when people did watch it, they seemed to enjoy it, but that was only for the few groups of people who actually noticed us. Our group also focused a lot of it's attention to symbolism and again, could only be understood if it was analysed enough, which is not practical when the main aim of protest is to get a message across, rather than focusing on the message of our themes. Protests are usually done so that one main message is given off to the public, and must be simple to understand, and easy to see within a few seconds, but our piece was the type of piece that had to be seen the whole way through, or it meant nothing if it was viewed half way through. We had stereotypical music playing when it was that characters turn to play, which was useful, as was the costumes, but because our aim was focused on the message, no words were said, unless it was coming from "society's" mouth. I think that the two characters should have at least had some scripted words, instead of improvised words which were initially intended, so that Brechtian techniques could have been embedded, making our protest more vivd to anyone who passed by at any time throughout our performance.
However, i think it went well too. I liked the way that it intrigued people with our subtle people, because people would stop by and pay attention in order to try and guess what it was were were promoting, and for those who really thought about it, understood it. I don't think that all protests should be so easy to understand, there are many examples where people create their own personal protests, and it is those that I find most admirable, because people need to learn what is going on in the world around them, and should not have to have people throwing the problems in their faces at such a small cost, without even thinking about it, so with protests like ours, people not only think about what our message is, but then they realise HOW we portrayed it, and start to think of their own underlying messages towards our theme, because of the thought they initially put in to it. Another thing i liked about our piece was the use of our third member playing society. Because we had no words, our third member really emphasised their words, and so every time they spoke, it was patronising but persuasive, which is in essence, how the media gets our attention. The third member in our group also manipulated us and our piece, so if she said something that wasn't planned, it would force me and the other group member to improvise, and even inspire us with new things to do.
Overall, i think our protest went fairly well. For the average viewer, it was hard to understand, but for those who stopped and thought, were taken away with something to think about, and not just our message that we had conveyed to them. I think our style was good for an abstract piece, but not suitable for a protest. The message was genuine, but for a protest event, something like that cannot be risked, and in such situations, messages need to be given straight forward, as that is generally the main aim of them, and so experimenting with protests isn't really the best thing to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aW8EUv4f44

I have decided to use this video as inspiration for my political theatre.
My team issue is "over sexualisation of young girls."
So, using this video, the right side of the wall will stay the same, but the other half will be decorated with pink fairies etc, resembling a young girls room. As the two scenes switch over, the teenager will find something that she no longer wants/needs-throwing it over the wall. The little girl will then experiment with this and become familiar with it, making it her own. Eventually, the little girl will be totally reformed, but her room will stay the same, symbolising that she is still a little girl, but her sister's influence (whom was influenced by the media) and changed her into becoming what she now is. Our third team member will be handing the two girls their objects, representing society, handing them what they "SHOULD" have.

Term 2, week 2- Lesson notes:

Today's lesson was focused on ensemble work.

Our first task was to walk around the room. There would be an action associated with every word. And so when someone shouted out a word, everyone would follow the action necessary. However, some words were contradictory. I.e. "Freeze," and everyone would freeze. But we were only allowed to follow the next action prior the word "Unfreeze," which people often forgot, and so this exercise focused on memory and multi-tasking.

This exercise was useful because many people would find it difficult to multitask. Anyone who didn't put in 100% was also out, and so this forced us not only to try and remember, but be as active as possible, a vital trait of someone who would be participating in an ensemble. It also allowed us to keep our ears open and focus not on what was going on around us, but what the actor himself needs to do. For example, if everyone had frozen, and an action was said without the follow on of "unfreeze," if an individual actor notices this, then he does what he thinks is right, not what everyone else is doing.

Another exercise was to think up an action. Once this was done, everyone walked around the room doing this particular action. Every time we froze, we were told to pair up with someone else, then onto fours and so fourth, until eventually, it went to halves, and one whole group.

This exercise, though useful, didn't end up as successful as it could have been. It was helpful because this exercise enhanced our chorus skills, allowing us to exaggerate and work in unison with others using an action that had been thought of spontaneously, and so being unaware-forced us to be aware of our surroundings, doing what others are doing. This may contradict the previous exercise, but the first exercise focuses on an actor doing only what he needs to do individually, but this exercise allows us to do so, but adapt with the provided surroundings.

The penultimate exercise we partook in, was similar to the last one. However, the class was split into two groups. Each group lined up, facing opposite each other. A leader would then step up (in chronological order) and perform a spontaneous action to the other group. the group from where this actor has just emerged from, will all then, in unison, reinact this action with as much enthusiasm and exaggeration as possible. The other group will also do this, and is repeated until everyone has had a go.

This exercise was useful because it meant that the chorus itself learned to perform the same action, but as in sync as it could possibly be. It taught the actors how to behave with other actors in the surrounding atmosphere and portraying the same action as enthusiastically as possible, working with what all the actors are providing to the audience. It also taught the leader of the group to make sure that no matter how simple his actions are, the chorus must be able to establish this, often why many of the leaders made a sound corresponding to this action.

Our final exercise was very useful, as everyone had also admitted. We were given stimuli, (Apocolyptic Britain, Syrian War, Blondie.) and from there, we were given a designated empty space. Each person would walk in whenever they felt like it, and get into an appropriate position according to the stimuli. By the end, everyone would have walked in, and a giant still image is created. The instructor would then tap on someone's shoulder and would then have to do a quick thought track, and then he (the instructor) would tell us to bring this still image to life.

This exercise was very useful because we had time to think, allowing us to have a rough idea of what our character's input towards the situation was, and how we reacted to it. It was interesting too, because other people would enter and would have to change their initial characters if necessary, depending on what the scene has evolved in to. Some people misinterpreted other people in the still image, and so that actor would then have to adapt everything he has just done, allowing us to enhance our improvisation skills, especially if this image would have been brought to life. I enjoyed this exercise thouroughly because as oppose to other still images, it is natural and hasn't been forced, so any reactions to you and your surroundings are natural, and you have had no time to discuss any relationships within the scene, making improvising harder, but more effecient.

Brecht's relationship to Marxism is both vital and complex. 

From the 1920s until his death in 1956, Brecht had been identified as a Marxist; when he returned to Germany after World War II, and met his actress wife Helene Weigel, where they formed their own theater company, the Berliner Ensemble, and were eventually given a state theater to run. Yet Brecht's relationship to orthodox Marxist officials and doctrine was often conflictual, and his own work and life were often related. Of a strongly anti-bourgeois disposition from his youth, the young Brecht was also initially repelled by Bolshevism. He experienced the German revolution of 1918  and dedicated himself to literary and not political activity during the early years of the Weimar republic.

Not only did Korsch strongly influence Brecht's conception of Marxian dialectics, but the Marxian ideas that were most important for Brecht's visual practice were exactly the ideas shared by Brecht and Korsch in their interpretation of materialist dialectics and revolutionary practice. Brecht used the Korschian version of the Marxian dialectic in both his aesthetic theory and practice, in ways that are central, rather than incidental, to his work.

Korsch wrote his book Karl Marx, which summarizes his description of the basic principles of Marxism, Korsch was a guest of the Brecht family in exile in Denmark and he and Brecht often had discussions of the basic ideas of Marxism. They tended to agree on the basic principles, although they differed widely on their application, with Korsch highly critical of Leninism and the construction of socialism in the Soviet Union, while Brecht was more sympathetic.

In his epic theater, Brecht looked to illuminate the historically specific features of an environment in order to show how that environment influenced, shaped, and destroyed the characters. Unlike dramatists who focused on the universal elements of the human situation and fate, Brecht was interested in the attitudes and behavior people adopted toward each other in specific historical situations, and wanted his ideology to be a "partially theatrical illusion." His work was also based on not entertaining the passive audience, but allow them to question every aspect of the messages given out by the actors of what they had just watched.

The actors in his work must be able to be "watched, judged and changed" and the audience must be able to do/experience that.

Brecht's Epic Theatre

When Brecht was looking for a term that would encompass the type of theatre he was looking to create, he was influenced by the work of Erwin Piscator, an established German director who during the 1920s and 30s was involved in the creation of new theatre forms. Piscator was the first person to coin the phrase Epic Theatre, a term that Brecht is often associated with.

The Epic Play

The Epic Play will follow a story familiar to the audience. The story is often in the form of a fable, or it will show historical events. Brecht's intention in using known material was to make it unsensational: by taking away any attraction-grabbing ‘wrapping' that an original story may have, Brecht was stripping away a disguise that dramatic theatre often uses.

The characters in the epic play represent an individual who in turn represents all humankind. This also assists in breaking any empathy that one might feel for a character.

His plays were able to stand-alone as Brecht wished to illustrate a story of perspective from many different viewpoints. He likened it to 10 different people witnessing the same car crash. The retelling of the story will be slightly different from each person as they have seen it from a different angle.

The Epic Actor

Epic Actors serve as narrators and demonstrators. They retell events and in doing so demonstrate actions and events that assist in the audience's understanding the situation. Brecht wanted his actors to always remember that they are an actor portraying another's emotions, feelings and experiences.

To assist in achieving this, Brecht often used a device or theatrical technique called Gestus. Gestus was a gesture or position that an actor would take up at crucial sections in the play. The gesture or action aimed to encapsulate the feelings of the character at the one time, and also briefly stopped the action. The most famous Gestus ever used was in Brecht's Mother Courage where the character of Mother Courage looks out to the audience, her face posed in a silent scream.

The Epic Stage

Brecht envisaged the Epic Stage as a place for discussion. The audience is presented with a topic of social or political relevance and an opinion or message on said topic. The epic stage provides its audience with questions, possible solutions and actively encourages them to think, determine and act.

Brecht had no desire to hide any of the elements of theatrical production. Lighting, music, scenery, costume changes, acting style, projections and any other elements he called upon were in full view of the audience; a reminder that they are in a theatre, and what they are watching is not real.

Brecht also wished to change the scale of the properties used, and then also use them out of context. For example, using a skyscraper that makes up part of the set and turning it over to use as a judges table in a courtroom. This challenged the audience, and also reminded them that they were watching something that was being manufactured, and not real life.

The Alienation Effect

Perhaps the best known technique of Brecht's epic theatre is the Alienation Effect: to make the familiar strange.

The purpose is that the audience be put in a situation where they can reflect critically in a social context.

The Epic Audience

"The one tribute we can pay the audience is to treat it as thoroughly intelligent. It is utterly wrong to treat people as simpletons when they are grown up at seventeen. I appeal to the reason."(Willet, 14)

The Relaxed Audience is how Brecht referred to the audience he wished the epic theatre to attract.

Although epic theatre is often perceived as lacking in emotion or entertainment value, Brecht was actually intent on creating a theatrical experience that entertained, educated and provoked thought. This misconception seems to stem from the notion that entertainment and education cannot co-exist. However his productions used intelligent humour, dance, music, clowning and colour to tell stories with high political and social content. After all, theatre is supposed to represent life, and life is derived from of combination of the personal, social and political climate of the time.

"One forgets too easily the difference between a man and his image, and that there is none between the sound of his voice on the screen and in real life."-Brecht.

Is all theatre Political?

I personally, believe that all theatre is political. I believe this because the majority of all problems that arise in life and are discussed in theatre, are rooted from politics. For the minority that supposedly "aren't," i believe that for the main event that has happened within this piece, or the emotions that are brought about, often relate to or originate from politics, just not as strongly as others. So even though a piece may not discuss politics, emotions or issues that arise are rooted from politics. I believe this because it is the government of the country that shape the nation, and all it's outlooks on situations, and so any problems or opinions that arise, may not be directly political, but often start with how the government and it's policies has effected peoples emotions.

Essential Facts

1. One of Brecht’s famous plays, The Threepenny Opera, was based on a ballad opera written 200 years earlier.
2. Brecht’s work was enormously collaborative, bearing the influence of his wife, Helene Weigel, and his troupe, The Berliner Ensemble.
3. Another of Brecht’s key theatrical tactics was “historicization,” which used events from the past to create parallels to contemporary issues. His important play Mother Courage and Her Children is considered a quintessential example of this technique.
4. Brecht was singled out by the House Un-American Activities Committee for his socialist leanings and was blacklisted in Hollywood.
5. Brecht’s plays continue to be produced in numerous versions and languages around the world. The Threepenny Opera was revived on Broadway in 2007, starring Alan Cumming and pop singer Cyndi Lauper.

Blondie, by Hayley Squires.

Reading the extract we were given, I managed to make out that it was about a female (blonde) politician, who had won the country's votes. They all loved her and she was seen as an angel. However, she comes into power only to create mass suffering. The play is powerful because even though the plot itself is somewhat twisted, the emotions and her reasoning behind her actions are powerful and touch me, personally. The gratuitousness of the descriptions of violence in the play unfortunately undermines the power of the images Squires is attempting to create, alienating audience members in the process. 
         "The blonde was a good idea." This quote could be interpreted one of two ways. The first few lines are discussing her hair colour. This is a very materialistic subject, and so this could mean that her outside/materialistic features won her the vote, rather than her true self, which is evident, she didn't portray to the nation. 
           "Women appreciate, Men want to stroke it." This quote shows how she knows the blonde helped her win the vote, and how confident she is in herself, as supported by "Do you think so?" She knows so, but she wants to provoke a conversation and hear it from someone else. However, the first quote goes to show how apparently everyone finds something about her positive. Even if it's in different ways, everybody loves it. The women are grateful for it and what it's done for them, and the men want to feel it (or it's consequences.)
            From the begining of the passage, you can already tell that character C is trying to suck up to "Blondie." All the other characters are listening to what Blondie has to say, as you are meant to be doing in an interview room. However, C is asking unnecessary questions, constantly, which have nothing major and will lead them to no clear answer/evidence that may be needed. "And sensual?" B: "What do you think?" There is obvious tension, a little of of it being sexually. Quite often when blondie says something shocking, C will sit and smile, asking a question completely off topic, carrying on from earlier, indicating that he is still pondering on the sensual tension in their previous question, trying to elongate this by bringing back questions despite the moving on. This technique has obviously worked, as "B smiles at C" quite often. He does the talking, and she accepts this, signalling so to C. "They lovED to look at you. I love looking at you." The first half of this sentence is in the past. As oppose to the second half, which is present, and relates to him. He is trying to encapsulate his desire for you, and say that despite people loving you before (and do not now) he still does.
        It is obvious that B knows she has power within this intense situation, despite the other characters official power.  She starts off by not being affected within this intense situation, but also making sure that everyone else knows this, by having full confidence in herself.  "It's nothing to be ashamed of." (Voting for her.) It blatantly is, otherwise they wouldn't be in this situation. The fact that C got slapped for admitting something, despite it's confidentiality, shows the delicacy of this situation, and Blondie only carries on with the previous quote to provoke more, and prove how little she thinks of the situation. However, you can tell that A is the most powerful of the men in this situation, not only when he slaps C, but when he retaliates instead of just listens to everything Blondie says. "But not just because of the way you looked." You can tell here that he is doing everything he can to stop her from being so confident, and maybe she can actually think about what she's done. This quote maybe represents him as trying to be the good cop in order to get something out of her. "You created an Apocalyptic state in this kingdom." This quote again, supports the fact that A is in desperate need of gaining back power, or more so, intimidating this woman. He gives her little to react to. No questions etc, but a harsh (but probably true) statement, said neutrally. However, the fact that Blondie reacts only with an "I did." shows that this means nothing to her, despite it meaning to have a strong effect, and so from then on, come the explicit insults, which again, only provokes her long speech, which even though is very true, does not, in my opinion, justify her actions.
        The ending to this extract is very powerful, because of the great intimacy, it is shocking because of the situation they are in, and is so unexpect, we feel exactly how this man feels, enabling us to empathize with him. Not only this, but she asks a question which is evident that she knows what the answer is, and so is left on a cliff hanger.

Lesson Notes, Lesson 1:

Todays lesson was focusing on Epic theatre. Epic theatre often focuses on the use of narrative, stereotypical characters, exaggerated body language and distancing the audience from having an emotional connection with actors themselves, and so we realized that epic theatre is, in theory, "representing, not becoming."
         Our first exercise involved us getting into pairs and standing on opposite sides of the room. The pair was labelled A and B. A would then pick a nursery rhyme in their head, and keep it quiet. Once instructed so, we had to sing it to them, along with everyone else in the class. 
Hopefully, B MAY have only just heard what their partner said. So, to help them both, we were allowed body language to help us identify the nursery rhyme. 
This helped the other partner clarify what was an uncertain guess. However, because we were focusing on epic theatre, body language is used to portray a message, clearly but without emotionally attaching oneself to the character, and so the partner was ONLY allowed to use body language to help enhance this skill we would be continuing to work on. 
This exercise helped because it enhanced our understanding to why body language is so important, and how to exaggerate the body language. This was useful, as in many cases, people exaggerate just enough to portray a vague idea of what is desired. However, this exercise FORCED us to use as big gestures as we possibly could, because we had no other aid, as we previously had, with words. It also helped because when our partner was confused, this forced us to use even bigger body language in order to help them, allowing us to be able to allow ANYONE of any intelligence understand what we are trying to portray through body language, and so we have to make it understandable for anyone. So, teaching us that it doesn't have to be complex, just so long as everyone understands and it's clear, the main objective of Epic theatre is achieved.
           Another activity we then used was again in pairs. This time, we we labelled each other A and B once again. A would then describe to B, something that had happened to them during the day. B would have to observe the body language, vocals and facial expression and then perform this story told EXACTLY as their partner did. However, we had to exaggerate one feature that was unique to our partner. This not only allowed us to become more physically aware of what we do, but allowing us to turn something so small that was noticed by close observation that we wouldn't have noticed otherwise, into the main image within our "speech." 
This exercise was very useful as it allowed us to not only use close observation, but allowing us to focus all our attention onto one tiny detail. In doing so, we didn't have to exaggerate everything in general, but focusing on one thing allowed us to pay much more attention to that one trait, which gave us the potential to make it bigger, purely because that was the only thing being focused on, and the attention was not divided. 
          Another activity allowed us to put this into action, but using reaction within this. So, we were all given a character, with a name and a job title. The scene, we were told, was set in a bar. We then had to create an improvised scene using the characters we were given, but having to maintain the stereotypical and exaggerated image. 
This exercise allowed us to not only focus on ourselves, but having the option to react with others made us more aware of how the stereotypical character of our person would react, and therefore, making it easier to understand (not become emotionally attached-big difference) how to become more of a stereotypical image of our character. Also, having other stereotypical characters around us, heightened the liveliness of the atmosphere, and so everyone was almost competing to be noticed. This could be take one of two ways. One, it was very useful because it pressured us using the social aspect of the scene to maximize our characters physicalisation. However, because it was pressure, many people may have done it for the sake of it and the fact everyone else was doing it, instead of focusing on their own characterisation, they became louder, rather than actually concentrating on how the audience viewed them as. So it all depends on how the person reacts to the atmosphere of the scene.
            Another exercise was using still images. We got into groups of 5 or so, and two stimuli were given. "War, the maker of heroes." and "War, the taker of lives."  The groups then had to create still images following that title. 
This exercise as very useful, because even though it didn't focus on individual body language, it focused purely on a message that is sent out to the audience. Even though an actor may be exaggerating his body language, the message he is giving out to the audience may be mixed, or even unclear, so that will have all gone to waste if that is the case. This exercise allowed us to focus on what the audience view, with the use of body language, which wasn't necessarily exaggerated. Even though that was what the image was based on, it wasn't about the size of the gesture or the clarification of the vocabulary/vocals of the actor, it was purely on what position the body was in and the overall view of the scene. This helped focus on Epic theatre because it was focusing on the message which would be sent out to the audience. Even though Epic theatre is about extravagant and big gestures, this is only focused on because it brings about a clear message to the audience without an emotional connection, and so this exercise was useful because it helped us to establish the difference between the two objectives, allowing us to use the two and merge them effectively.
           Yet another exercise we partook in was a Doctor/Patient Scenario. This involved us getting into pairs. Once in pairs, each person took on a role. There were two doctors (this exercise was done to twice, but changed in order to develop our understanding and skills), one was either arrogant because he wanted to get home and didn't care about the patience, or one that genuinely cared about their patients. The patients were either arrogant because they pay a lot of money and sees no reason in doing so, and another was extremely distressed and what to relieve some of this within the doctor. The two characters were instructed to improvise, depending on the character(isation) they were given. Once somebody clapped, the two people had to change roles.
This exercise helped us because epic theatre is about portraying a message without the audience OR the actor himself to create and emotional attachment to the character. This exercise enhanced this skill because the clap was inevitable and so the actor must be easily able to change characters because they both know the two characterisations, and they have no attachment, and if the actor does not attach himself, the audience deffinitely cannot do so. This exercise also helped us with enhancing our exaggerated body language. This was done because it is very hard to change characters if it is naturalistic, because the audience cannot establish this change, and in doing so, the audience can then make a clear judgement that the actor is indeed, multi-rolling, and is easy for the audience to establish which character is on stage being played by anyone. The fact that the clap was spontaneous allowed the actor to be prepared to change his character at any second, and so they never became attached, which the inevitable clapped forced them to do.
            The final exercise involved a fairy tale. In groups of 5 or 6, a fairy tale would be chosen. There were three types of narration to be involved:
An individual character being a narrator.
An actor who would occasionally come out of character and narrate for a short time and go back into his/her role.
An actor who narrated in third person WHILST acting the narrations.
Sung Narrations.
This exercise was also very useful as Epic theatre also focuses on narrations. This exercise helped because it helped establish different forms of narrations. It was also very useful because a play (mainly fairy tale) often needs someone to push the play along and help the audience establish what is going on, and this exercise helped us do so effectively, despite the different and unusual types of narration, and forced us to make it as easy as possible to guess the fairy tale for each and every type of narration. It also helped the actors improvise, and help THEIR exaggeration of body language to help the audience understand what was going on, both narratively and physically.