What IS it that Directors DO?

I would apologise for what I’m about to write, if I didn’t think it were true…

The title of today’s blog is a serious but provocative one. I wonder and care about what directors do in rehearsal; about the little useful training they receive; and id they receive plentiful training, just how useful any quantity of that training is.

“Okay, no no, stop there please, stop there,” a frustrated voice comes out of the darkness. There is one day until the dress rehearsal and the show looks like shit.

Having spent three weeks in rehearsal, the show should be currently in fourth gear and ready to motor in the days to come. But it’s not. Why?

Well, what do directors do in rehearsal? Traditionally, they create a vision for the play and realise it through their skills with other artists, bringing them together to create an overall glory.

However, few directors have bothered to attempt to connect to the vision of the play that already exists. The one issued by the writer in writing the play. This vision of the play then evades the actors as the director attempts to auteur/graft their own vision onto the play in production. I’ve spoken to directors about this, they do so in the mistakenly belief that the writer does not know about bringing the play to life, as this is not their world. Funnily enough, most playwrights have a pretty good idea how staging works, because they go to the theatre, unlike many directors.

They spend some time discussing the director’s understanding of the play, usually assisted by the director asking questions to the actors, to which they want their own answers to be repeated back. The sound of the director’s voice is the most consistent noise in this stage of rehearsal.

Next perhaps comes a rudimentary blocking of the scenes. A well trained cast should not need a director for this task. If one of them wants to stand outside and ensure that the blocking makes a pretty picture, than they can do that. A director is not necessary for this, helpful perhaps, but a bit of a spare prick.

Next comes perhaps rehearsing the scenes, with questions and repeats until the actors remake the inside of the director’s mental plan for the show in flesh in front of him/her. This time could be greatly reduced and more productively used if the analysis time had been more directed towards helping the actors understand what they needed to do in each scene. Then this period of time would be spent practicing those things.

This goes on until they run the show. Notes are given and the actors, having had little help from the director in what they actually need to do during the performance pull the show off, despite the spare prick’s interference.

That’s my belief, that the director is an interfering intellectual in a room full of frustrated do-ers. If you are not this kind of director, if you are really something else, I really admire you, because frankly most are much worse than this.

Actors, you put up with this shit because director’s have power they don’t deserve. They will have it until you take it back.

Read tomorrow’s blog if you want to find out what I think director’s SHOULD DO…