The Moors – Jen Silverman
Directed by Sean Linnen
Research:
Initial response to the play:
When first being told we were going to be working on “The Moors” I researched Jen Silverman (see 1a) and read through the play twice to understand the full story arch of each character because I knew we wouldn’t do the entire play. I wanted to fully understand each character’s journey and how the relationships change throughout the piece. I found that although the play is set in the 1840’s, Silverman’s writing is in a colloquial modern day style which meant that my approach to research changed from using it to emulate a woman from the 1800s with 100% accuracy, to instead using hints of the body language and social constructs of the time mixed with modern day. For example, I researched women’s posture in the 1800’s (see 1d) and although it was extremely straight due to being trained with books on their heads as young women, I occasionally dropped this in emotional moments such as when I found out that Branwell was “dead” in scene 4. This helped me to explore how the Moors is like it’s own time period and has it’s own rules which change Emilie.
Research:
As a class we split up our research on the historical and political context and understanding the world of the play. We each took a different category to feedback to the class by the end of the week (see 1d). This allowed me to view the circumstances of the play differently than my initial read through, most notably being the relationship between Emilie and Agatha. Understanding the dangers of same sex relationships being illegal in the 1800s but also the grey area around lesbian relationships (see 1d) affected my acting choices within scene 4 when my character found out that Agatha was sending the letters. It was important that I knew this context so I could play the shock, anger and fear of people finding out that would have been very different to how I would have chosen to portray this scene in a play set in 2025. I also wanted a visual reference for what Emilie would be seeing in each scene so I could imagine truthfully the world around me. I decided to create a mood board of the setting (see 1c) as well as visiting Guiseley moors to see the vast emptiness they describe in the play in person. I could then transfer this to my acting when Agatha is convincing me to go on a walk outside. I could now play this as more cautious but excited remembering what the moors looked like. I also watched and read Jane Eyre and some of Charlotte Bronte’s letters and wrote down the similarities between them and “The Moors” (see 1d). I used these letters to inform Emilie’s backstory and inner monologue about why she’s so nervous to please the woman of the house because of bad experiences in the past.
Accent:
Although I was quite confident with a general American accent going into this project, I wanted to make sure that I went over it before starting rehearsals as I had been doing southern last term and was out of practise. I went back on the lesson slides from Jess’s accent lessons last term as well as watching American films set in the 1800s, for example the 1994 adaptation of “little women”. I didn’t get the chance to have individual time to work on my accent with Jess which made me slightly nervous about if I was accurate enough but I practised with the vocal feedback she gave when coming to see our run through later in the week (see 1b). Overall I enjoyed doing the accent and found that it helped me to make vocal choices and differentiate Emilie from myself for example using a higher more nasally tone when she’s trying to pretend everything’s fine and a lower more resonant sound when angry and frustrated especially in scene 7 “Now look here”.
Analysis of process
Character process:
Before starting rehearsals I began my process by going through the full play again and writing down everything that was written as a fact about Emilie and everything that’s inferred as well as opinions of other characters. (see 2a). In our first two rehearsals we went through the full script and marked in every unit as a company. Then, before we started getting it on its feet, I went through my script again and for each unit and scene I wrote down my objectives and my super objective using the Stanislavski method, as well as my tactics using Mike Alfred’s technique. This meant that I was able to make strong choices from the start when working with Sean even if they were changed and I could play about with different objectives when in the room to develop my version of Emilie. For example, with Sean I discussed the objective Emilie has in scene 4, ‘to find out where Branwell is’ but then I discovered that this is achieved when Agatha says he’s dead which is why the scene ended up falling flat near the end as I had achieved the objective too early. I then tried out different objectives in the second half of the scene and decided on the objective ‘to convince Agatha to say she’s lying’ which gave the scene a new energy and drive and meant I had a much clearer sense of what Emilie wanted to achieve in that moment.
I also filled out the character questions (see 2b) we had from first year and compared them with Katie and Darcie who were playing the other Emilie’s to share our perspectives on the characters. This inspired me to change some of my answers, for example her age which I assumed as 19 or 20 and Darcie presumed was around 25. In the script it mentions her past jobs which we found out in research would have likely been for a year or 2 at least so we compromised on her being 22. This changed my choices because I hadn’t thought about how she would probably know her job well by now so I played her more confused by this household because it would be so different to what she was used to.
I also used Stanislavski’s unbroken line of action (see 3a) which helped especially with the note that Sean gave me the most which was to be bolder and more impolite with my acting, particularly when reacting to the room. The unbroken line of action really helped me specifically in scene 7 imaging that I’d been all over the house in so many rooms that all looked exactly the same trying to find Marjory before I entered the scene which gave a newfound energy and drive to my entrance. This helped keep my persistence and desperation in trying to find out what was happening in the house.
My main obstacles during this process were letting myself be bold, getting things wrong and just trying things out in the rehearsal room because I struggled with wanted things to be perfect first time. During this process Sean helped me to discover that the most interesting things to watch are when people go big and try something insane which I discovered whilst watching the others rehearse. I was particularly drawn to watching Aislinn because she was so bold and fun to watch. Having the safe space where it was seen as worse to be “acting politely” than just trying something random meant that I found a new way to discover my character by trying things that don’t always work out. For example, I initially only played Emilie as a very exaggerated almost child like presenter which didn’t end up working for later in the scenes. However, I learnt to use that for parts of the character so that when I got angry or confrontational it made more of an impact on the audience like in scene 7 on the “now look here”. That was also a particular part of the scene I struggled with on letting go and feeling the anger because I got stuck in a loop of just playing upset since I had decided that Emilie wouldn’t get angry because of the social constructs she follows. However, Sean explained that being coughed on normally is very different to being coughed on by somebody with typhus and that would cause anger in someone even if that’s not usually in their nature due to it’s such extreme circumstances. This then meant I had the permission for her to be angry in this scene because I could see the context and where it came from. We built up each time to getting angrier and angrier in this scene until it felt like the stakes were so much higher than before and she had more depth as a character.
2a
2b
Personal reflection
As the rehearsal process went on I began to accept that there were lots of unanswered questions within the play and Sean helped me to understand that part of performing this was just accepting this. This helped specifically with my character because during her journey throughout the play she does just have to grow to accept that this house and circumstances don’t make sense in what we deem as normal in society.
I think I improved upon my Laban skills specifically during this process because before this project, in lessons with Jen, I had just started to understand how I could personally use Laban within my process. I used the technique of having an inner Laban effort and an external Laban effort (see 3a). This helped me to explore inner conflict in specific moments for example in scene 7 where I want to find out information but I’m conflicted because I also don’t want to give over any power to Marjory.
As mentioned before, the main challenge that I faced during this project was letting myself be free to make mistakes. Getting through this was a real breakthrough, not just performance wise but also in confidence because it helped me trust myself that I could get to that place. I learned so much more when I stepped out of my comfort zone and tried choices that weren’t the safe option which is something that I am still learning and will continue to develop next term.
I think my strengths during the rehearsal process would be that I responded to feedback well and tried to implement everything suggested to me in the room. For example Sean suggested in scene 4 that Teddy and I should hold eye contact for the entire time I challenge her, which felt unnatural and awkward for me but I implemented this anyway. It ended up feeling much more tense, adding to the stakes of the scene which helped me step out of my comfort zone of the “safe” choice. Another strength is my organisation and the depth of the research and worldbuilding that I put into my character and scenes. Some things I’d like to improve on further is taking more risks because although I made huge breakthroughs during this process there is still much further that I could go. I’m going to choose scenes to work on in scene study that are out of my comfort zone as well as characters that are my type cast. Additionally, I would like to try weird choices that don’t always have to make sense or be the one that I stick with.
Overall this rehearsal process has changed my perspective in many ways. My goals to develop further would be to continue taking risks and to be okay with not having an answer immediately as things present themselves through the process and it’s not all about the end result.
