Minor Project: Wilson- The Byrds

Wilson's goal of merging the two screens is evident in the manner by which he works with his performers. He formed the Byrd Hoffman School for Byrds (named after the dance teacher who had helped him overcome his childhood speech issues. All but one of Wilson's Byrds were untrained and as a such weren't limited by the preconceived ideas or styles that they would perhaps be subjected too through a formal acting education. As these people were taken essentially from the streets the workshops taught them to not come at it with their preconceptions of what acting, or dancing would look like or how it should manifest itself. Wilson instead encouraged them to find their own styles of movement and expression. In a a way it could be said that Wilson was in fact teaching the Byrds not to act. This allowed them a freedom of expression that then gave audiences a freedom of interpretation, in other words they could make of the performance what they wished, there was no existing pretext for the quality of meaning of the performance. You see, movement isn't explicitly natural, nor is it completely functional either, if we compare basic movement patterns of people who have been raised in an asian background to those of someone raised in western culture, we see vastly different movement patterns, such example is in the way we greet people and/or show them respect, in Asia it is not uncommon to bow to people, In the west this would seem very out of place. From this we can then infer that they way we move is undoubtedly shaped by our culture and social understanding. This is important because your basic social subject will 'write their movements based upon their culture and social understanding, they will then read the movements of others based upon those same rules. Byrds performed in a manner which was not readable by these traditional means as their kinesics (non-verbal communications) were not built upon standard ideologies, they were sign posted to viewers as being uninterpretable in this way. With no cultural logic available to interpret the work of Wilson, a spectator has no choice but to respond subjectively, thus relying upon their internal screen.

One way in which Wilson very successfully portrayed this idea of non-conventional movement was through his collaborations with performers who were sensorially or intellectually impaired, this was because these people synthesise the world differently and as such this shines through in their performance. Most famously Wilson did this when working with painter Raymond Andrews who was deaf and mute, unfortunately this meant that he had been limited so much so that no one would give him work in theatre until Wilson did, though this is a painter not an actor, this is still relevant as it is just a medium of expression. It was said that Andrews had a very unique portrayal of space on a canvas and spacing as he was in a world he perceived as being open and also empty. Wilson and Andrews collaborated frequently, perhaps most fruitfully on Deafman Glance where Andrews also acted as a small boy.

Wilson's works always feature 'icons'; Abe Lincoln, Einstein, cowboys, dinosaurs, astronauts and other such seemingly iconic images. He does this because by including iconic imagery the viewer is automatically invited to interpret them, this acts as a technique of sign posting that says that the signs can be read. However, the diverse and seemingly crazy pairings of such iconography means that these readings inevitably become frustrated, this is because, as I have explained, Wilson's work doesn't conform to any discernible logic. Ironically, this production technique of almost dream-like plays and set pieces looked to escape from cultural expectations and labels but, in doing this was to be considered 'acultural' which is in itself a label, and the irony is that this label comes with it a whole host of preconceptions and ideas which viewers will carry into their viewing of a piece of Wilson's work.

How then, is this important to my personal work, well, academically it has taught me the importance and significance of movement from a cultural point of view, for a character to be realistic they must move appropriately with the time and culture they exist in. This is something I will look out for in my actor's performances. The other thing I have learned is that this can be broken, it usually gives a surreal effect to the piece but with practise and skill it can be broken and someone can be directed to move freely outside of the cultural expectation which surrounds them. In all honesty, this wasn't the most useful of my researches, however, this is completely fine because though it doesn't help me greatly in this module, should I want to create a surreal or dream like piece, then this is something I could definitely revisit and employ within my works.