BOREDOM, OR WHY SOMETHING RATHER THAN NOTHING

Work Method

The process will be divided into 3 sessions.

1.Phase: analysis
-Individual meetings with each actor
-Each actor will have to respond to 30-50 questions in writing, building a sort of diary
Questions and answers will be used for:
-Analyzing feelings, memories, fears, desires, and hopes of the interpreters
-Refresh body sensations, habitual and spontaneous movements
-Create a personal, isolated story for each interpreter

2.Phase: interaction
-initial meetings between actors (in couples, in groups...)
-reciprocal narrations of personal stories created during Phase N. 1
-interweaving of stories
-contact improvisation, in-depth analysis of themes like: melancholy, sadness, nostalgia, love,
aggressiveness, creativity, competitiveness, collaboration…
These situations will also be exploited to continue:
-listening to the body and the noises that the body produces in various states of mind or moods
-identifying habitual gestures and repetitive movements linked to specific feelings

3.Phase: orchestration of the material

-development of the scenes and playing schemes

A PLAYWRIGHT will follow all the phases of work. He/she will help to construct the
personal stories of the interpreters, the schemes/interaction, and the simulation network. This
should allow the actors to react and enter “ad hoc” into the various situations that will be
created during the show.

Structure

The show is based on an interview between me and a guest. The person interviewed is not part
of the team and changes at every performance. The subject of the conversation will be agreed
upon from time to time with the interviewee, even if some themes will always be touched upon
(for example: a passion for objects).
The actors are always present on the scene and follow the interview. Apparently, their
characters have no problems or, at least, no visible problems.
In reality, a problem exists, hidden deeply within their body, their organs, their brain. This
problem is boredom, the fundamental state of mind among the interpreters. The actors must
react or escape from this initial condition and the interview become a pretext for their actions.
The conversation, therefore, will never be able to be developed in a linear fashion. It will be,
instead, continually interrupted by the actors' interventions, which will make it impossible to
develop an organic and coherent situation.

The objective is to have a very solid but open structure on the stage, from which it will be
possible to escape. The show intends to propose team work that is sensitive to the
circumstances of the moment, a “theatrical jam sesson” where the actors develop “ad hoc”
situations and themes elaborated during the rehearsals.

Damir Todorovic