~Regarding the Michael Kearns reading yesterday: I don't like being manipulated and having someone tug at my heartstrings. This is why movies often freak me out: the premise or the dialogue becomes false and yet there I am in the theatre, weeping. Or, like, when the news does a story on the baby panda Tai Shan right after a stock depressing interview with the parents of a dead soldier.
Micheline Veaux suggests a vocal equivalent of the mirror stage. Who is Micheline Veaux? I want to read about vocal equivalents of the mirror stage. Screw occularity! I'm tired of looking and being looked at.
Of course, what felt most manipulative about Kearns' performance yesterday was his tone. Manipulative is the wrong word. I mean there were predictable dramatic crescendos, conflict, and melodrama [the subject-verb agreement in this sentence still sounds weird to me. Why?] Drama and conflict and even dramatic crescendo are believable and real, but they need alienation to be believable.
Anyone know anything about the recent history of the dramatic monologue--I mean its history as being a genre separate from a persona poem, written for and performed on stage by an actor?
Rodrigo Toscano's radio dramas and polyvocal pieces from Post Moot made me pull Frederic Ewen's book on Brecht off my shelves. I didn't finish it before I left DC. I had just started the section called "Chorales of Chaos and Doom." It makes me swoon.
Here is a picture of Lester. He is so pretty:
No comments:
Post a Comment