Staging the Unstageable Scene
A class is studying a play text containing a scene in which a character is drowned offstage and the body is carried on. The text's stage directions are sparse: 'A crash of water. Darkness. Then, light.' The play was written in the mid-twentieth century and its original production used a bare stage with minimal props. A student group must stage this scene for a 15-minute excerpt assessment in a school hall with a flat floor, no fly tower, no water, and a budget of $50. One group member wants to mime the drowning realistically; another wants to project a video of water; a third wants to use a large sheet of blue fabric manipulated by the ensemble. The group cannot agree and has two weeks.
1. Evaluate the three staging proposals against the play's original conventions and the available resources, and recommend an approach with justification.
Read the worked answer
The judgement call is to read the text's conventions before choosing a spectacle. The play's original bare-stage, minimal-prop production is a strong signal that the scene is written for suggestion, not simulation. That reframes the three proposals.
Realistic mime of drowning. Weakest option. It demands the audience accept an actor thrashing in invisible water, which in a flat-floor hall with no water reads as literal but unconvincing - the worst of both worlds. It also contradicts the text's spare stage direction ('A crash of water. Darkness. Then, light.'), which does not describe a visible drowning. Mime here fights the play's convention.
Video projection of water. Attractive but risky. A school hall with a flat floor and $50 cannot guarantee a projector, a screen, or controlled sightlines; a projected image also fixes the image, whereas the text's power lies in what is not shown. Projection can work if a projector is confirmed available, but it introduces a technical dependency that could fail in performance and shifts the scene toward a different (screen-based) convention.
Blue fabric manipulated by the ensemble. Strongest option. It is cheap, uses the ensemble as a chorus-like force, supports the text's suggestion-based convention, and turns the 'crash of water' into a theatrical image rather than a literal event. It also solves the body-carrying moment: the fabric can envelop and then release the body.
Recommendation: fabric, with the sound of water (a recorded crash, or ensemble vocalisation) carrying the auditory shock, and a hard blackout to honour 'Darkness. Then, light.' Justification: it respects the play's conventions, fits the budget and space, and converts a limitation into a stylistic choice.
2. The group has two weeks and cannot agree. Propose a decision-making process and a two-week plan that converts the disagreement into productive rehearsal.
Read the worked answer
The disagreement is not really about water - it is about unstated assumptions about what 'good theatre' means. The group should surface those assumptions before voting.
Decision process (days 1–2): Each member states in one sentence what they believe the scene is for (e.g., 'to show the horror of drowning' vs 'to show the community's complicity'). Then test each proposal against that purpose. This converts a taste argument into a criterion-based one. The group should also agree a decision rule in advance (e.g., majority with a fallback test) so the decision cannot stall again.
Two-week plan:
- Days 1–2: purpose statements; quick workshop tests of all three ideas (30 minutes each) with the actual space and budget. Empirical testing beats debate.
- Days 3–4: decide using the agreed rule; document the choice and the reasoning so it can be defended in the assessment.
- Days 5–8: build the chosen staging; rehearse the drowning sequence and the body-carry in isolation.
- Days 9–11: integrate into the full excerpt; add sound and blackout cues.
- Days 12–13: run the excerpt twice with a peer audience; gather feedback on whether the scene reads as intended.
- Day 14: final polish and a technical check of cues and sightlines.
Key principle: the group should reserve the right to change one element after the peer run if the scene does not read - building in a review point prevents a bad early decision from becoming a bad performance.