- Email: [email protected]
The fictional family: In drama, education and groupwork
The Arts in Psychotherapy, Vol. 20, pp. 99-102, Printed in the USA. All rights reserved.
1993 Copyright
0197-4556193 $6.00 + .OO 0 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd.
BOOK REVIEW
The Fictional Family: In Drama, Education and Groupwork Muriel Gold (Springfield,
IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher,
1991, 262 pages, $32.75)
this review seek more clarification on the rationale, approach and follow-up in the context of drama therapy. It is curious that even when describing her fictional family group therapy sessions, Ms. Gold elects not to discuss drama therapy. The creation of a fictional family is the process by which each group mutually decides upon a family identity, with each individual family member choosing a role to play within that family. Each group creates a complete family profile including such information as historical background, income, religion, geographical location and the ages, personalities and interrelationships of all family members. The semester-long involvement in the family scenario is thorough and intensive, requiring sustained commitment to one’s fictional character and family. The underlying premise is that if students can immerse themselves into dramatizations of family issues they can identify with, they will then be able to transfer this process into any other acting they do. Gold credits this concept to the work of John Hodgson and Ernest Richards who stated (1966) that “the qualities needed for the best acting are also those qualities required for the fullest living” (p. 1). The fictional family model becomes the basis from which Ms. Gold engages her college acting students in a series of acting exercises to build characterization and ensemble work. Through sidecoaching (verbal suggestions and motivating comments), she moves students to connect their real life associations with their fictional family role situations. Gold acknowledges that the fictional family approach was inspired
In her book Muriel Gold explores the philosophy and practice of utilizing a fictional family paradigm as a structure within which to train acting students. Throughout the text, references are made as to how the fictional family structure can be applied to drama therapy, but the focus is on Ms. Gold’s work as an acting instructor of undergraduate students at McGill University in Montreal. Had Ms. Gold not been writing this as a college theatre course text, one wonders whether she would have chosen to write the text from more of a drama therapy perspective. As the book is being reviewed here in The Arts In Psychotherapy journal, it is important to note that the intent and focus of the book is not drama therapy; however, the book contains many dynamic concepts and activities the drama therapist can adapt. Because the primary objective of this text is actor training, the material Ms. Gold elicits from her students is discussed from a performance rather than a drama therapy orientation. Gold reveals at the outset of the book that drama therapy is an auxiliary rather than a central purpose of the text when she states, In related disciplines, where the stated goals of the group may be therapeutic, it will be up to the leader to decide what type of discussions will evolve from the performance. (p. 6) However, because Gold consistently refers to correlations with drama therapy and because the psychological content of her sessions forms a strong basis for drama therapy work, it is understandable if readers of 99
100
BOOK REVIEW
by the model of extended dramatization conducted by Professor Robert Landy of the Drama Therapy Program at New York University. Gold begins the text by delineating her rationale for using the fictional family as a model. The primary rationale is that because all individuals come from families of one type or another, the fictional family provides a secure source of identification instilling the confidence for fuller exploration into acting. She states,
Even the most sheltered and naive university students have been exposed all their lives to the depths and intricacy of family relationships. Their perceptions, their communication styles and their modes of interacting have been shaped within the confines of their families. (p. 3)
Further, she sees the fictional family as a nurturing unit conducive to unleashing the creative selfexpression of novice actors. In her view
the fictional family offers to these student actors a built-in support group where they can progress at their own speed, benefit from the creative input and energy of their family members, and gain the security which arises from group solidarity. (p. 4)
The text does not address the natural question as to how Gold incorporates the fact that her students will have very different frames of reference regarding family. Some will have been blessed with supportive families; others will have known only dysfunctional ones. Similarly, family structures themselves vary, from that of mother, father and siblings, to family units involving single parents, grandparents, godparents, friends and even street gangs. In light of this, it appears that the creation of fictional families will have varying levels of success depending on how receptive each individual is to the concept of family and how closely individual perceptions approximate those of fellow class members. Gold is also sketchy as to the process by which the student moves from discussion of individual character choice to family structure. How is consensus achieved to the satisfaction of all? How is she assured that some
individuals are not absorbed into a group process that precludes their original character choices? Can two individuals choose to play the same part in the same family? If so, would a form of doubling be used? Is there the opportunity to try on new roles throughout the semester? Particularly for the drama therapist who may use this book as a resource, more attention should be given to why Gold’s students chose the characters they did and the benefits they derived from their roles and interrelationships. Has the individual chosen a role similar to or distinct from his or her own life and/or personality? Does the role prove therapeutic or counterproductive to the individual? It would be constructive for each student to write his or her own portrait, including discussion of the similarities and differences between self and his or her fictional family role. Also, students should comment as to how they emotionally and artistically navigate these transitions. Because the level of involvement in these fictional families is intensive and long-term, the text should contain discussion of how the teacher or drama therapist is to handle the issue of possible student overidentification with role. This is particularly necessary for any actors/clients who demonstrate vulnerability to character or family issues that emerge in the dramatizations. Because, as Gold states, the individual “shares his fictional character’s defeats and pain” (p. 6), there must be an understanding that preparation and follow-up are needed regarding the possible emotional responses triggered within the participants. In a drama therapy session in particular, how would boundary problems be handled? As the drama therapist recognizes, this family construct reaches far deeper than the parameters of traditional actor training. Throughout the text, Gold describes how she employs a variety of approaches in her actor training. Visual arts therapy, such as drawing the family, enables students to physicalize and thus more fully relate to their fictional families. Sociodrama and family therapy have led to her use of family sculptures, whereby the students form family tableaux representing their fictional families’ interrelationships and values. The creation of fictional family genealogical trees is an adaptation of a transgenerational technique in family therapy. Inspired by Gestalt therapy, Gold invites students to enact individual and collaborative dreams representing their fictional families. In her
BOOK REVIEW actor training sessions, Gold also has employed aspects of assertiveness in behavior therapy, videotherapy (students’ viewing of their own videotaped work) and such psychodrama techniques as role reversal and the “empty chair” technique. Gold draws on the work of Stanislavski, Brecht and Beckett in a progression of “building a character, designing stage picturization, and identifying performance styles” (p.4). Stanislavski is highlighted in particular as it is his approach to actor training that has so strongly influenced her work. Gold’s immersion of her acting students into their fictional family roles directly relates to Stanislavski’s emotion memory technique whereby actors reach deep within to recall personal experiences relevant to their acting roles. Exploring the Brechtian focus on physicalization and sociopolitical theory, students employ symbolic representational techniques such as use of masks, puppets, costumes, props and songs. Study of Beckett and Theatre of the Absurd exposes students to wordplay, experimental movement, universal themes and symbolic poetic images. The text’s strongest aspect is that, as a resource for the practitioner, it is replete with activities and suggested leadership techniques. Gold has included sample lesson plans including her sidecoaching; because she writes in the actual language a group leader would use, there is greater likelihood that the practitioner reading this text will consider trying her approaches. She clearly demonstrates how she moves sequentially from one activity to another, each progressive activity urging students toward greater authenticity in their acting. Unlike many texts that describe vocal and physical warmups in isolation from the overall session objectives, Ms. Gold’s warmups closely relate to the intended theme of each scene. The primary intent of the warmups is to assist the actors in moving toward greater honesty and credibility in their characterizations. Within each session, there is a flow from individual, internalized guided imagery to ultimate ensemble work. For instance, she may request that the students explore sensory details in personal life situations and incorporate that recall into fictional family scenes. Ms. Gold’s creation of an open atmosphere conducive to creative exploration is evident; her students learn that they can engage in simultaneous play at their own individual levels. Ms. Gold presents a variety of creative leadership approaches. For instance, she has trained the class, or “audience” as she calls them, to keep each actor true
101
to his or her acting objectives. Through verbalization and physical representations, the audience offers feedback as to how they perceive each character. Further, a central aspect of her sessions is movement sidecoaching, which deepens characterization and performance energy. For example, a scene takes on new intensity following an improvised chase. Students are often asked to relate their individual movement styles to those of their characters. Gold often uses masks to free more expressive body work. Further, she may add an object to a scene to help character development; for example, the character of an unhappy, housebound sister was asked to drag around a sandbag to experience a sense of sluggishness. Writing is employed extensively in Ms. Gold’s sessions as a springboard to or synthesis of improvisations. Journal writing (also called fictional family diaries) and character autobiographies foster students’ identification with their roles. As a basis for scene work, students record incidents of their past from both their real and fictional families. Material written following a classroom exercise often becomes the genesis of later scenes. As ensemble acting evolves, so does collaborative script writing. The inclusion of student writing, much of it moving and skillful, gives a unique focus to this book, but it is not integrated well into the text. There are too many selections, none of which are accompanied by sufficient background or follow-up on the impact of the fictional family process. Also, the students’ written scenes should be included within the text and not in the appendix as a kind of afterthought. The text contains a wealth of information for the practitioner, but its effectiveness is reduced by the text’s lack of organizational cohesiveness. Ideas are discussed before being actually clarified in the text. Activities are listed without philosophical or programmatic linkage. For instance, the transitions from individual to group work, from Stanislavski to Brecht to Beckett, from creative writing to improvisation, and from real family to fictional family roles are not clearly defined. In spite of the structural gaps in the text, Ms. Gold is to be commended for creating a diversified presentation incorporating lesson plans, student creative writing and illustrative photographs. Each practitioner will have to determine if and how the fictional family model can be employed with his or her population; although it may not be appropriate or
102
BOOK REVIEW
desirable to conduct a semester-long process as followed by the McGill University students, certainly aspects of that process can be gleaned and adapted. Drama therapists, though not the intended primary market for this college theatre text, can derive many significant, workable ideas and insights from the activities employed in the creation of the fictional family.
Reference Hodgson, J., & Richards, Methusen.
C. (1966).
Improvisation.
London:
Ellen Williams, MS, RDT Registered Drama Therapist Caldwell College Caldwell, NJ
1993 Copyright
0197-4556193 $6.00 + .OO 0 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd.
BOOK REVIEW
The Fictional Family: In Drama, Education and Groupwork Muriel Gold (Springfield,
IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher,
1991, 262 pages, $32.75)
this review seek more clarification on the rationale, approach and follow-up in the context of drama therapy. It is curious that even when describing her fictional family group therapy sessions, Ms. Gold elects not to discuss drama therapy. The creation of a fictional family is the process by which each group mutually decides upon a family identity, with each individual family member choosing a role to play within that family. Each group creates a complete family profile including such information as historical background, income, religion, geographical location and the ages, personalities and interrelationships of all family members. The semester-long involvement in the family scenario is thorough and intensive, requiring sustained commitment to one’s fictional character and family. The underlying premise is that if students can immerse themselves into dramatizations of family issues they can identify with, they will then be able to transfer this process into any other acting they do. Gold credits this concept to the work of John Hodgson and Ernest Richards who stated (1966) that “the qualities needed for the best acting are also those qualities required for the fullest living” (p. 1). The fictional family model becomes the basis from which Ms. Gold engages her college acting students in a series of acting exercises to build characterization and ensemble work. Through sidecoaching (verbal suggestions and motivating comments), she moves students to connect their real life associations with their fictional family role situations. Gold acknowledges that the fictional family approach was inspired
In her book Muriel Gold explores the philosophy and practice of utilizing a fictional family paradigm as a structure within which to train acting students. Throughout the text, references are made as to how the fictional family structure can be applied to drama therapy, but the focus is on Ms. Gold’s work as an acting instructor of undergraduate students at McGill University in Montreal. Had Ms. Gold not been writing this as a college theatre course text, one wonders whether she would have chosen to write the text from more of a drama therapy perspective. As the book is being reviewed here in The Arts In Psychotherapy journal, it is important to note that the intent and focus of the book is not drama therapy; however, the book contains many dynamic concepts and activities the drama therapist can adapt. Because the primary objective of this text is actor training, the material Ms. Gold elicits from her students is discussed from a performance rather than a drama therapy orientation. Gold reveals at the outset of the book that drama therapy is an auxiliary rather than a central purpose of the text when she states, In related disciplines, where the stated goals of the group may be therapeutic, it will be up to the leader to decide what type of discussions will evolve from the performance. (p. 6) However, because Gold consistently refers to correlations with drama therapy and because the psychological content of her sessions forms a strong basis for drama therapy work, it is understandable if readers of 99
100
BOOK REVIEW
by the model of extended dramatization conducted by Professor Robert Landy of the Drama Therapy Program at New York University. Gold begins the text by delineating her rationale for using the fictional family as a model. The primary rationale is that because all individuals come from families of one type or another, the fictional family provides a secure source of identification instilling the confidence for fuller exploration into acting. She states,
Even the most sheltered and naive university students have been exposed all their lives to the depths and intricacy of family relationships. Their perceptions, their communication styles and their modes of interacting have been shaped within the confines of their families. (p. 3)
Further, she sees the fictional family as a nurturing unit conducive to unleashing the creative selfexpression of novice actors. In her view
the fictional family offers to these student actors a built-in support group where they can progress at their own speed, benefit from the creative input and energy of their family members, and gain the security which arises from group solidarity. (p. 4)
The text does not address the natural question as to how Gold incorporates the fact that her students will have very different frames of reference regarding family. Some will have been blessed with supportive families; others will have known only dysfunctional ones. Similarly, family structures themselves vary, from that of mother, father and siblings, to family units involving single parents, grandparents, godparents, friends and even street gangs. In light of this, it appears that the creation of fictional families will have varying levels of success depending on how receptive each individual is to the concept of family and how closely individual perceptions approximate those of fellow class members. Gold is also sketchy as to the process by which the student moves from discussion of individual character choice to family structure. How is consensus achieved to the satisfaction of all? How is she assured that some
individuals are not absorbed into a group process that precludes their original character choices? Can two individuals choose to play the same part in the same family? If so, would a form of doubling be used? Is there the opportunity to try on new roles throughout the semester? Particularly for the drama therapist who may use this book as a resource, more attention should be given to why Gold’s students chose the characters they did and the benefits they derived from their roles and interrelationships. Has the individual chosen a role similar to or distinct from his or her own life and/or personality? Does the role prove therapeutic or counterproductive to the individual? It would be constructive for each student to write his or her own portrait, including discussion of the similarities and differences between self and his or her fictional family role. Also, students should comment as to how they emotionally and artistically navigate these transitions. Because the level of involvement in these fictional families is intensive and long-term, the text should contain discussion of how the teacher or drama therapist is to handle the issue of possible student overidentification with role. This is particularly necessary for any actors/clients who demonstrate vulnerability to character or family issues that emerge in the dramatizations. Because, as Gold states, the individual “shares his fictional character’s defeats and pain” (p. 6), there must be an understanding that preparation and follow-up are needed regarding the possible emotional responses triggered within the participants. In a drama therapy session in particular, how would boundary problems be handled? As the drama therapist recognizes, this family construct reaches far deeper than the parameters of traditional actor training. Throughout the text, Gold describes how she employs a variety of approaches in her actor training. Visual arts therapy, such as drawing the family, enables students to physicalize and thus more fully relate to their fictional families. Sociodrama and family therapy have led to her use of family sculptures, whereby the students form family tableaux representing their fictional families’ interrelationships and values. The creation of fictional family genealogical trees is an adaptation of a transgenerational technique in family therapy. Inspired by Gestalt therapy, Gold invites students to enact individual and collaborative dreams representing their fictional families. In her
BOOK REVIEW actor training sessions, Gold also has employed aspects of assertiveness in behavior therapy, videotherapy (students’ viewing of their own videotaped work) and such psychodrama techniques as role reversal and the “empty chair” technique. Gold draws on the work of Stanislavski, Brecht and Beckett in a progression of “building a character, designing stage picturization, and identifying performance styles” (p.4). Stanislavski is highlighted in particular as it is his approach to actor training that has so strongly influenced her work. Gold’s immersion of her acting students into their fictional family roles directly relates to Stanislavski’s emotion memory technique whereby actors reach deep within to recall personal experiences relevant to their acting roles. Exploring the Brechtian focus on physicalization and sociopolitical theory, students employ symbolic representational techniques such as use of masks, puppets, costumes, props and songs. Study of Beckett and Theatre of the Absurd exposes students to wordplay, experimental movement, universal themes and symbolic poetic images. The text’s strongest aspect is that, as a resource for the practitioner, it is replete with activities and suggested leadership techniques. Gold has included sample lesson plans including her sidecoaching; because she writes in the actual language a group leader would use, there is greater likelihood that the practitioner reading this text will consider trying her approaches. She clearly demonstrates how she moves sequentially from one activity to another, each progressive activity urging students toward greater authenticity in their acting. Unlike many texts that describe vocal and physical warmups in isolation from the overall session objectives, Ms. Gold’s warmups closely relate to the intended theme of each scene. The primary intent of the warmups is to assist the actors in moving toward greater honesty and credibility in their characterizations. Within each session, there is a flow from individual, internalized guided imagery to ultimate ensemble work. For instance, she may request that the students explore sensory details in personal life situations and incorporate that recall into fictional family scenes. Ms. Gold’s creation of an open atmosphere conducive to creative exploration is evident; her students learn that they can engage in simultaneous play at their own individual levels. Ms. Gold presents a variety of creative leadership approaches. For instance, she has trained the class, or “audience” as she calls them, to keep each actor true
101
to his or her acting objectives. Through verbalization and physical representations, the audience offers feedback as to how they perceive each character. Further, a central aspect of her sessions is movement sidecoaching, which deepens characterization and performance energy. For example, a scene takes on new intensity following an improvised chase. Students are often asked to relate their individual movement styles to those of their characters. Gold often uses masks to free more expressive body work. Further, she may add an object to a scene to help character development; for example, the character of an unhappy, housebound sister was asked to drag around a sandbag to experience a sense of sluggishness. Writing is employed extensively in Ms. Gold’s sessions as a springboard to or synthesis of improvisations. Journal writing (also called fictional family diaries) and character autobiographies foster students’ identification with their roles. As a basis for scene work, students record incidents of their past from both their real and fictional families. Material written following a classroom exercise often becomes the genesis of later scenes. As ensemble acting evolves, so does collaborative script writing. The inclusion of student writing, much of it moving and skillful, gives a unique focus to this book, but it is not integrated well into the text. There are too many selections, none of which are accompanied by sufficient background or follow-up on the impact of the fictional family process. Also, the students’ written scenes should be included within the text and not in the appendix as a kind of afterthought. The text contains a wealth of information for the practitioner, but its effectiveness is reduced by the text’s lack of organizational cohesiveness. Ideas are discussed before being actually clarified in the text. Activities are listed without philosophical or programmatic linkage. For instance, the transitions from individual to group work, from Stanislavski to Brecht to Beckett, from creative writing to improvisation, and from real family to fictional family roles are not clearly defined. In spite of the structural gaps in the text, Ms. Gold is to be commended for creating a diversified presentation incorporating lesson plans, student creative writing and illustrative photographs. Each practitioner will have to determine if and how the fictional family model can be employed with his or her population; although it may not be appropriate or
102
BOOK REVIEW
desirable to conduct a semester-long process as followed by the McGill University students, certainly aspects of that process can be gleaned and adapted. Drama therapists, though not the intended primary market for this college theatre text, can derive many significant, workable ideas and insights from the activities employed in the creation of the fictional family.
Reference Hodgson, J., & Richards, Methusen.
C. (1966).
Improvisation.
London:
Ellen Williams, MS, RDT Registered Drama Therapist Caldwell College Caldwell, NJ