PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY

CSC co-founder Susan Wilson came up with the name, “Community Shakespeare” and I wrote the mission statement: “to enrich young lives and cultivate community, with theatre as the means and Shakespeare the inspiration.”  These have been at the heart of what we do.

Another way to say it is, Shakespeare is not the most important thing.  Even the play is not “the thing.”  The experience of working together for a common artistic goal, in a safe, nurturing, fun atmosphere, under the guidance of creative and caring adults: this is the essence of Community Shakespeare.  Our particular artistic goal is to put on a play, a process that inherently cultivates community.  Finally, our approach is consciously non-competitive.

Why Shakespeare?  We started out using Canadian author/teacher Lois Burdett’s series of adaptations, subtitled, Shakespeare Can Be Fun.  She’s right:  virtually every Shakespeare play has humor in it.  This is a good way to interest kids in almost anything.  On a practical note, Shakespeare’s plays have lots of characters; we’ve never had to turn away a student from production.  There’s always room for more “attendants” or “fairies” onstage.  And of course, Shakespeare is in every school curriculum in the English-speaking world, so students will encounter his work at some point; the earlier they understand it, the better for them. 

But to return to CSC’s particular methodology of “applied Shakespeare” – the notion of non-competition is central.  We begin by advertising a “Casting Call,” not an “Audition.”  (The latter implies that you are “trying out” for roles; i.e. against each other). To be “called for casting,” suggests that you are welcome to join if you want to.  “Come join us, learn about the play, read a part if you want to, and tell us which parts you’re interested in.”  This is literally what we do. 

On a given day, student actors and their parents are invited to join us.  I try to summarize the play in 15-20 minutes, using a white board, drawing lots of arrows and emphasizing whatever is funny.  (Example: Rosalind is a girl who falls in love with Orlando – arrow – but when she flees to the Forest Of Arden – arrow – she dresses up as a boy, so when Orlando comes there – arrow – he doesn’t recognize her.  Meanwhile a shepherd girl, Phebe, falls in love with Rosalind – arrow – who’s dressed as a boy, but there’s a shepherd boy, Silvius, in love with Phebe – arrow – etc. etc.)

Next we hand out scripts, but not enough for each person to have one.  We share, and we all sit in a circle, usually on the floor. I explain that in Shakespeare’s time, male actors played the female roles (hence, not very many female roles), and in our production, some male roles will likely be played by females.  I then assign parts by going around the circle: the first four parts to the first four actors (regardless of  sex).  A boy may read Rosalind and a girl Orlando.  We’re simply listening to the text, not “trying out” for parts.  In this way, the tone is set for everything that follows (e.g. cross-casting, non-competition), and also we get our first impression of each actor’s reading ability.  Reading is optional at this point.  An actor can choose to pass, which also tells us something about him or her.  (He may be shy. She may have difficulty reading. This needs to be explored outside of the circle.)

Another critical component at this stage is to try to learn each actor’s name.  We have the advantage in our company of having worked with many of the students before, but in other situations I have used nametags on the first day.  It’s very, very important to try to call a young person by name from day one (not least because the noisy one needs to be called something other than “hey you!”).

For Casting Call, a number of scenes have been pre-selected which provide opportunities to hear all the major roles read.  As we work around the circle, I make notes about the actors, then start asking them to read certain characters. Most students are given a chance to read major roles.  We also ask who would like to read roles, making sure everyone who says they are interested has the opportunity to read a part.

Beyond that, we make sure that each student writes down (privately) the names of roles he or she would like to have, in order of preference.  We emphasize that it’s good to have a variety of choices, including some that may be of the opposite sex, or smaller (in terms of lines).  Over the years, students learn that the more flexible they are in what they write down, the more likely they are to have stage time.  Finally, we’ve found it very useful to have them write down any part that they absolutely do not want to play.

From sitting in a circle we eventually move to standing up and reading, usually in groups of four or more.  This has the very practical effect of involving as many students at once as possible, and getting everyone’s blood moving.  It also tells me more of what we need to know about each student’s character, their acting ability and their experience on stage: how do they stand and project their voices?  Do they appear to be easy to work with, flexible, and generous with other actors?  How do they look next to each other?

This entire process used to take place over a couple of days.  Now we can usually complete it in one session of two to two and a half hours.  Since elementary school children often start to fade after 90 minutes, it’s better to release those who can’t last rather than to keep them beyond the point where it is fun.

Once we have gathered as much information as we can in this limited time, we get down to the business of casting.  The goal remains to fulfill the mission: “enrich young lives and cultivate community.”  Seniority is also a factor, since generosity of spirit and patience are acquired from one CSC season.  But we try to break the mold often enough so that people joining the company recognize it is not a closed society.

Richard Carter
June, 2008