Characters on Demand: Training the Actor for Professional Level Work in Role-play

The professional actor is constantly engaged in the pursuit of finding work. Be it on stage or before the camera, as a voice over artist or by bringing movement to an animated character, finding more opportunities to act is a never ending challenge. Like any other profession, an eye towards job growth in the field is imperative. According to the US Bureau of Statistics, employment for actors is expected to grow by approximately 11% through 2018 (the average for all occupations).[1] This statistic, however, only accounts for actors working in the traditional areas of employment, primarily on stage, motion pictures, video, and other broadcast industries. An emerging field of employment is not accounted for. This new line of work falls under the title that is sometimes referred to as “applied theatre.”

“Applied theatre” is a term that has been used in the United Kingdom for many years, but is just now becoming more accepted in North America. The title has gained traction with the introduction of such relatively new graduate programs as the one found at the City University of New York (CUNY). CUNY’s MA in Applied Theatre has devised a straightforward description to help define this evolving discipline;

Applied theatre is a specialized field that uses theatre as a medium for education and social development. It involves the use of theatre and drama in a wide variety of non-traditional contexts and venues – in teaching, the justice system, healthcare, the political arena, community development, museums, social-service agencies, and business and industry[2].

 Though it is too early to confirm, through statistical research, if the applied theatre field will translate into more paying jobs for actors, the potential for growth is hard to deny. Speaking from my own experience, over the past fifteen years I have placed numerous actors into “applied theatre” type jobs that have often paid better than more traditional employment. These jobs almost always consisted of an actor assuming an improvisational role for the purpose of the training and development of individuals in another profession. Area police departments and the University of New Hampshire State Defenders Association are examples of organizations that have sought me out to hire actors for their training needs.

Eight years ago, Mary Banach, Associate Professor of Social Work  approached me with a similar need. She had graduate students in Social Work who were struggling to create an effective simulation model to be used for their case work. They were using each other in a role-play exercise where one student played the role of the social worker and the other, a client whose role was based on an actual case study. The cases involved an array of people from various socioeconomic backgrounds, all of whom were in need of some degree of social work intervention. Examples included a pregnant teen from a very conservative family, a gay man of color with an ongoing drug problem, and a family in crisis after the death of the mother. In all, there were about seven cases, all involving extremely complex characters that would provide a challenge for the most accomplished actor. Yet, here were student social workers trying their best to provide a semblance of real people based upon no more than a one or two paragraph description. It was clear to Professor Banach that they were meeting with only partial success. Of course, from the perspective of an individual who teaches acting, it was easy to see why they were failing to achieve the outcome they desired. The students, though very familiar with the problems facing these characters, did not have the skills necessary to bring them to life as “characters.” As much as they had real life experience, the fact was that these scenarios were not real life. They were artificial structures, no different than any other human-made play. Though these situations they enacted may have been based on real-life cases, their recreation was ultimately a dramatic construct. In other words, what they were really dealing with was an improvised scene; complete with conflicts, obstacles, character arcs and the many other dramatic elements one would expect to find in a script.

 The MA programs in applied theatre are, generally speaking, devised to train professional practitioners in this field. These programs are not focused specifically on the discipline of acting, but rather more on the development of skills to create and facilitate applied theatre models. In most of these cases, it is likely that the applied theatre practitioner is working with non-actors in some form of established “community.” This may include, for example, working with a school community that has experienced a rise in bullying. An applied theatre practitioner would be brought in to use these techniques to address the problem. This practitioner, however, may be in need of the services of the professional actor. Why? Because a trained actor possesses certain skills that can bring characters to a fullness of life that may be critical for the applied theatre model to be effective. I have seen this in my own work. In one instance, I was developing a model to use applied theatre techniques for a workshop as part of the Bioneers regional conference being held at the University of New Hampshire in 2000. The goal was to help environmental activists be better prepared and effective in confrontational situations. The model was based on Augusto Boal’s “Forum Theatre.” A short scenario was created with the session participants where a confrontation would occur. (In this case, at a town meeting where a change in controversial zoning laws was going to take place). To a degree, the session was successful. Issues were brought up, and the model served us well as a springboard into a discussion about the issues. I conducted the same workshop the following year, but this time I decided to bring in some well-trained student actors to play the critical “oppressor” or antagonist roles in this improvised scene. The participants played the “oppressed” or protagonist roles. The trained actors instinctively understood how to keep the conflict alive, to a far greater degree than the participants who had played the roles in the exercise the year before. They brought a level of fullness and power to these roles that forced our participant protagonists to explore a far wider range of tactics than what we saw the previous year.

With this in mind, I set out to supply actors for Professor Banach’s social work students. Banach was exceedingly pleased with the results. She felt that the overall outcome was far superior to what she was achieving when her students were playing both the roles of social workers and clients. I noticed, however, some distinct shortcomings. There was a wide variation of quality from actor to actor. Some were obviously better at this form of acting than others. Even with our stronger actors, they sometimes went off on improvisational tangents that created contradictory character traits and inconsistencies with the stated facts in their case. Another major problem was that the scenes did not always give the social work students the opportunity to overcome obstacles that they might encounter in a real-life situation. This was not unlike what I observed at the Bioneers workshop. The antagonist must create a clear obstacle for the protagonist to overcome. For these exercises to be truly beneficial to the student social workers, they really needed to possess the same core that is critical for any drama; conflict. I realized that our actors had to not only have the ability to develop truthful and fully realized characters, but it was up to them to also create and maintain a truthful obstacle/conflict for the protagonist to try to overcome.

I concluded that I needed to develop some form of systematic training method.  This would better prepare the actors to fulfill their purpose in the exercise to a higher and more consistent degree. Professor Banach and I had also decided that it would be more beneficial for the social work students to meet with the actor/characters over a series of three sessions, better mirroring what they would likely face in the actual field. This made training all the more important, because now our actors had to not only create a realistic, consistent character and provide obstacles for the social worker to deal with, they also needed to build a believable through-line, based on their case scenario and the unknown details that would arise through the ongoing improvisations.

 Requirements for Role-Play

Before a useful method of training can be created, it is important to first examine what the role-play actor needs to achieve. Though there are countless exercises and models that may utilize the role-play actor, a common set of basic requirements can be established for maximum effectiveness under most circumstances.

The outcome of successful role-play work requires the actor to fulfill the following major objectives:

•  She must create full, complete and as believable characters as possible. All actions and words must be consistent and truthful within the context of the facts stated or implied in any source material provided (a case study, for example). This would include expanding on the given circumstances (all the set (unchangeable) facts about the character’s life, past and present) in order to better develop and execute a useful psychological profile. The improvisational nature of the interactive role-play makes the grasp of the psychological profile and given circumstances extremely crucial. This is because the role-play actor does not have the benefit of a preconceived play-script to provide an anchor to these critical character building blocks. The role-play actor must create this script on the spot, in partnership with the non-actor (in this case, the social work student). Failure to establish truthfulness and consistency, as the character progresses through the exercise(s), will result in an outcome of limited use to the non-actor.

• Within the context of the psychological profile and given circumstances, the actor must establish a base for character “tools.” Tools, in this sense, meaning clear character attributes that can be called upon to propel the actor/character through the improvised scenes. These tools will flow organically from specific character traits, and the clear development of the character’s wants and desires. Without bringing to the conscious surface a character’s potential to achieve his/her wants and desires, the role-play scenario runs a great risk of remaining at one level. For example, a character case profile may state that the character is suffering from multiple failures to overcome a drinking problem. It will be important for the actor to establish reasons the character would want to try again to overcome this problem. There may be no mention of a child in the case scenario, but the actor could add such a character, providing it does not contradict any facts in the case. So the addition of a young daughter, for example, could be an example of a “tool.” His love of this child could be used as a real reason for him to want go back for addiction treatment. This does not mean that the role play actor will make this known to the non-actor, or even that this is something the character understands at the start of the exercise. It will be up to the non-actor to uncover this “tool” and use it to help the client. By pre-establishing the tool, the actor provides the non-actor with a way to bring the character/client a level nearer to achieving their primary objective in the scene. In this case example, overcoming a drinking problem so he can restore his life.

• The actor must be able to provide believable obstacles for the non-actor involved in the role play to overcome. In essence, this is at the heart of a successful role-play session. The non-actor’s purpose in role-play is to utilize the exercise to simulate the obstacles he may face in any given situations in the actual field. For example, the actor/character may have established a mistrust of social workers. This could be used as a realistic and effective obstacle. Perhaps the character’s previous social worker had overstepped her bounds (in the character’s eyes) by contacting his estranged mother, despite his expressed wish that the social worker not do so. Of course, the actor must specially articulate for himself all the details surrounding such an obstacle. This will heighten his ability to react to the social worker’s inquiries and also limit the amount of important past action facts that need to be created on the spot. (Why is he estranged from the parent? Why did the social worker defy his wishes? What exactly happened after the situation came to a head? How much time has passed? Etc.)

  Process

With the overall goals in mind, the actor undertaking role-play will make use of aspects of actor training that they may already utilize for work in preparation for playing characters in traditional, scripted plays. What follows is a specific process for preparing to perform a character in a role-play assignment, utilizing and adapting these familiar exercises.

It is strongly suggested that this process take place within a group setting. The feedback and insight an actor receives from developing a character with a group can be invaluable. It will also give the role-play actor the opportunity to begin to become more comfortable and well versed with the improvisational format. Though this process is designed to be executed with a group of actors, many of these steps can also be done on an individual basis. The group in these exercises will be referred to as the “development team.” I will use the role-play needs of Professor Banach’s social work class as the example. Here is a sample of a case study we were given, from which we were asked to build a character. These four paragraphs are, in many ways, like the facts that would be embedded in the text of a play. That is to say, these are the unchangeable facts for these improvised scenes. Both the social work student and the actor work from this base. This does not mean, however, that additional details cannot be included. These additions, though, must build logically on the base provided in the case study.

      Jim

Jim is a 38-year-old small-parts factory worker who was laid off from his job a year ago.  He has been the primary breadwinner in the family and as a result of the lay-off; he and his wife have not been able to meet the mortgage payments.  Both Jim and his wife have found part time jobs, but they do not have insurance benefits and the money coming in is inadequate to meet their expenses.  Their house is in danger of foreclosure.  Additionally, as a result of the stress Jim is experiencing, he has started drinking.  When he has been drinking, he has become emotionally abusive towards his wife.  He pushed her once in anger.

Jim has been married for ten years and has two sons ages eight and six years. He has had numerous arguments with his wife, Melanie, concerning his drinking. He gets very angry and defensive when she confronts him about it, and asserts that he is not an alcoholic.

Jim’s work history is very good.  Prior to the lay-off, he missed less than one day per year.   He completed high school and went briefly to a community college but lost interest in pursuing a degree.

Jim is not close to his remaining family members. His mother is very religious and wishes Jim would see religion as a way out of his problems.

 Role-Play Character Development Exercises

1.                  Brainstorming  on the world of the character

The process begins by building the world that has shaped the attitudes of the character. This step will also establish as fact the character’s important past experiences and relationships, leading up to the point of the first meeting with the non-actor (in this case, the social worker).  As with the creation of any character, specificity is of primary importance. The key facts about the world of the character must be fleshed out and scrutinized. It will be important to keep in mind that all “facts” must be logically connected to the brief case scenario. Establishing these “given circumstances” is critical because once these facts are stated, it may be impossible to alter them without putting the reality and integrity of the scene into question. Having explored and set as many facts as possible beforehand, the possibility of making a critical mistake in this all-important character foundation will be minimized. Of course, in order to behave as truthfully as possible in this improvisational format, it is crucial that the actor have a firm grasp of the environments the character has lived in and is living in. Francis Hodge, in his book Play Directing: Analysis, Communication and Style, breaks these areas down to the social, political, economic and religious environments[3]. I have found that the division of the character’s world into these categories is very useful for the role-play actor.

The format of this step, if working with a development team, is to have the actor playing the character begin the discussion with her ideas and thoughts for each area (social, political, economic, religious). After she has had a chance to set out her thoughts, the group may ask questions and offer possibilities for either the establishment of fuller details or the addition of important facts in the character’s life.

Given Circumstances: Brainstorm the following categories:

a. ALL IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIPS

Who are the people in this person’s life who have played a role in shaping the current situation? These characters must be fully established and developed.  (In later steps, the development team may play some of these roles in order to deepen the exploration.) Are his parents still alive?  Does he have any children? Is he divorced? Etc.

b. ALL IMPORTANT PAST ACTION FACTS

What are the important events that occurred (prior to the first interaction with the non-actor) that have significantly impacted this person’s life? (Remember to always ask first, “Is it relevant?”)  Has she just moved to this community? Did her partner ever cheat on her?  Has she ever been convicted of a crime? Etc. In some cases, the actor may have to “suppress” a past action fact. It may not be an event the character even recalls, unless prompted in some way by the non-actor in the role-play. This will be a valuable tool for the actor.

c. THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

What are the social mores that define this person’s world? What are the rules dictated by family, peers or the general public and how much interaction does he have with these groups? Is social standing dictated by career success? Are tattoos and piercings accepted?  How are bi-racial marriages viewed? Is being a stay-at-home dad looked down upon? What are the consequences of defying the social rules of this person’s world? What is the level and quality of this person’s education? What does he do when he has time off? Etc.

d. THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

What are the economic conditions that this person lives in? Has it changed over time? What is the level of her job security? Does she make enough money to live on? Are other people dependent on her income? If she loses her job, how good are her prospects of finding another one? Etc

e. THE RELIGIOUS ENVIRONMENT

What role, if any, does religion play in this person’s life? What is that religion? How observant is he? Has the rejection or acceptance of religion or a religious doctrine played an important role in his life? Etc.

f. THE POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT

Do political or legal factors play a role in this person’s life in any significant way? (For example, is he an illegal immigrant?) Does she owe a great deal of family support payments? Is she pregnant in a state where parental notification for minors is the law if she is seeking an abortion? Does the state she lives in offer equal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons. Etc.

After cementing the facts that will be used to establish the given circumstances for the character, it is time for the actor to turn his attention to establishing facts that can be set concerning the psychological composition of the character. It is important to understand that these facts, unlike those that make up the given circumstances, can change to a degree in the course of the ongoing improvisations. For example, a character may have a specific fear of revealing information about their past. Though that fear is established as fact at the beginning of the improvisation, the character’s trust may be won, so that this fear is overcome. This relates back to the idea of “potential.” If the character does not have the potential to overcome certain psychological “facts,” the scene may be limited in its ability to build or change in a way that will be useful to the non-actor.

2.     Brainstorm on the basic psychology of the character

With the actor working on her own or with a development team, the following areas of the character’s psychology are explored:

a. Fears

b. Hopes and desires

c. Important wants and needs

d. Phobias

e. Likes

f. Dislikes

g. Superstitions

h. Major disappointments

i. High points (achievements, personal victories, etc)

j. Dominant behavioral patterns (for example, does he close off all communication when certain subjects are brought up? Does he often interpret any criticism of his behavior as an attack, and in turn responds with anger and resentment?

k. Additional questions

As with the case of the given circumstances, the purpose of this analysis is to give the role-play actor a psychological base from which a realistic character can emerge.

3.    Action questions

The following questions flow naturally from the psychological investigation. These questions help the role-play actor relate his training in script analysis to the needs of the improvisational scene. Making clear choices related to objectives and obstacles is essential to the role- play actor:

a. What are his primary wants and needs?

b. What is the character’s relative strength in being able to obtain what he needs?

c. What is in the way of the character obtaining what he wants?

d. What is the character hiding (in relation to his wants and needs)?

e. How does the character view the social worker?

f. What obstacles exist between the character and the social worker?

g. Additional questions

4.    Developing the physical manifestation of the character.

This is an area of character development that is most often not considered in the development of any role-play character. Because role-play requires the actor to portray a character that is virtually indistinguishable from a real-life person, drastic differences between the physical manifestation of the character and the physical make-up of the actor is problematic. Close attention to the more subtle variations in the physicalization of the role, however, can be of great value in anchoring the actor to the life of the character. For example, the sensation an actor feels from the physical adjustment of slouching while sitting in a chair, versus sitting upright and rigid, can be profound. The actor “feels” like a different person.  This “feeling” helps inform the psychological response in an instantaneous, instinctual way. This is of tremendous benefit when working with these improvisational structures.

This phase of the character development is based on Laban styled movement analysis. The following questions should be asked and physically (not simply mentally) explored. The actor will need a reasonable amount of space to fully engage the body as she addresses each question:

a.  Time: As you walk as this character, how quickly and hurried or sustained and unhurried do you move through space?

b.  Direction: As you walk as this character, how directly or indirectly do you move through space? Do you wander, or do you tend to move in more direct lines?

c.  Weight: As you walk as this character, how “heavy” or “light” is your body as you move through space?

d.  Flow: As you walk as this character, how bound or unbound are you? Where in the body do you tend to be the most bound? What happens to the flow of this character when under stress?

e.  Does the character tend to lead from a certain part of the body? (nose, chest, mid-section, groin) Use this exploration with caution. It is fine to go a bit extreme in the exploration, but it must be pulled back to a point where the realism is not lost.

f.  Does the character have a specific way she eases tension from the body when under stress? (For example, does she play with her hair? Does she clench her fists?)

g.  How does the character sit? How does this character get up from sitting?
Does the character have any specific physical characteristics as dictated by the case study? If, so, make sure to explore these.

5.     Active Development: The Speaker’s Circle

This phase of the development process brings together the psychological and physiological explorations in order to create a more complete character. In this step, the actor will begin to work with the character’s voice and thoughts. As with the exploration of movement, the voice of the character must not move too far from the actor’s natural sound.

Before this exercise begins, the facilitator should establish a circle large enough for a person to stand in, in the middle of the room. A hula hoop works very well, but string or shoes or other objects can be used to make the circle. This is known as the “speaker’s circle.” This is an adaptation of an exercise I learned from solo artist Dan Kwong. The actors will need to be able to easily move in and out of this designated area. (The “speakers circle” section of this exercise is described in step j, below).

Once the speaker’s circle has been established, the actors taking part in the exercise find a place anywhere in the room to stand. The facilitator guides the players through the exercise using the following steps:

a.  Imagine your characters are standing in front of you. How do they stand? How are they dressed? Can they look you in the eyes? If they are nervous, where do they put their tension? Let the characters turn around and now see them from the back. Slowly walk into the body of your character. Feel what it is like to live inside this body.

b.  Begin to walk through space. Weave in and out of each other. Fill the space. Give attention to your rate of speed, your weight, how you cut through space, and your flow (how bound or unbound you are).

c.  Experience sitting and getting back up and walking though space again.

d.  Begin to make some sound. Not verbal. Just a sound that this character might make when they are thinking.

e.  Allow that sound to transform into a word or phrase that seems to capture who they are right now.

f.  As you are all moving though space (at times sitting and then standing up and walking again) begin to be aware of others in the room. Do you avoid them? Are you drawn to them?

g.  As you pass each other, take a moment to pause and be with another person for a moment. How does it feel to be this close to another person? How close can you get before it is uncomfortable? Move on and connect with others in the same way.

h.  Now as you pass someone, pause and have a moment, but say your word or phrase (when you feel you can). After both of you have said your word or phrase to the other, move on to find another person to connect with. You may find yourself shaking hands or making some kind of other physical connection. That is fine, but you are not required to do so.

i.  Continue to move through space, but now, you are just working on your own, and no longer playing off the other people in the room. Begin to talk to yourself as you move through space. Just say whatever happens to be on this character’s mind right now. This is not a mental exercise. Actually speak. What words and phrases does this character tend to use? Just how articulate are they? Really try to use the words they would use.

j.  The same question will now be asked to everyone in the group. Throughout this exercise, continue walking and circulating around the room. You may sit at any time, and then get up and move again whenever you wish. You must always stay in character. When you are ready to say your response to the question, walk into the circle in the middle of the room and speak. When you are done, step out of the circle and continue to walk. Once the circle is free, another actor may now step in and say his answer to the question. This will continue until every actor in the exercise has responded to the question. After that, a new question will be asked, and we will repeat the process. There is never a specific order for when an actor may enter the speaker’s circle. Simply move into the circle when you are ready, and when it is free. It is important to note that you are obliged to listen carefully to every person in the exercise when their characters speak from the circle. This will give you the opportunity to learn about the other characters as you are developing your own. You are not allowed to talk in this exercise unless you are in the speaker’s circle. Your character must always speak the truth from the circle. Your answers do not need to be long (one or two sentences at the most).

Speaker’s circle sample questions:

a.  What is most important to you, right now?

b.  What are you most afraid of?

c.  What do you not want anyone to know?

d.  Imagine you are walking to the office to see your social worker. What is going through your mind?

The facilitator may ask as many questions as needed. When it appears that the actors have succeeded in establishing a strong psychological/physical foundation for their characters, they are instructed to pause, breathe, and let go of their characters. The participants are now prepared to undertake the final phase of the development process.

6.   Hot Seat

“Hot Seat” is adapted from exercises developed by Jacob Marino and his “Theatre of Spontaneity.” The premise of this exercise is very simple. Enough chairs for everyone in the group are set up in a circle. One of the chairs in the circle is designated as the “hot seat.” It is called the hot seat because the actor who sits in that seat will be the center of attention for the exercise. One of the actors takes the hot seat, while the other participants in the exercise, along with the facilitator, take the other seats in the circle. They become like collective therapists meeting a patient for the first time. Essentially, the participants are a group of trusted, non-judgmental confidantes who know little about the character or his background. Because all the actors are now familiar with the case and character on the hot seat, they should have what they need to formulate good, probing questions. The facilitator begins the process by asking the character to say a little about himself. From this point on, anyone in the circle may ask the character a question. The goal of the exercise is to help the actor, who is developing the character, to delve deeply into this individual’s thinking and to fill in all the missing parts that make up this complete person. The actor should be fully committed to all the physical and psychological aspects of the character that have been established thus far. It is also important for the actor to keep in mind that the character should always try to answer the questions truthfully. Approximately twenty minutes of this exercise, per actor, will offer a chance to bring a tremendous fullness to the overall character, and a dependable back log of additional facts to help keep the character consistent.

After the facilitator wraps up a session, the actor lets the character go and a review process begins. At this time, the actor is given the opportunity to reject any answers or facts that came up during the interview that he feels are not useful. Because the overall goal is a full, complete, and consistent character, anything that was stated in the session that does not lead to that result should be discarded. For example, an actor may have responded to a question like “Is there anyone in your life right now who you love?” with the answer “No.” But upon reflection in the review session, the actor may realize that it is far more useful for the character to have had someone who he is deeply in love with, but who left him because of his drug abuse problem. If this is the case, the actor should now make that change.

7.   After each session with the Social Worker

If the role-play is going to continue beyond a single session with the non-actor, it is important that the actor explore possibilities for how the character may have changed since the last meeting. For the multiple interviews our actors had with the student social workers, a number of questions were devised. Each actor, working on her own, addressed the questions before each follow up session.  When responding to the questions, the actor was instructed to be as specific as possible in listing concrete events that occurred in the character’s life.

a.  What has happened to the character over the time that has elapsed since the last session with the social worker?

b.  Has the situation gotten worse?

c.  Has the situation gotten better?

d.  How have the relationships in the character’s life changed since the last session?

Has the character’s view towards the social worker changed?

 Conclusion

Though this process was devised primarily for the use of character development for role- play work, it can also be applied in many ways towards role development for traditional plays. I also use this process when I am creating characters for ensemble devised plays, and for playwriting in general. However one approaches this work, one fact remains the same; the creation of a fully realized human being within any theatrical context takes a great deal of work. The professional actor, through her training, has developed a systematic approach for bringing characters to life in a traditional play. With the process I have described, the same may be done for this form of applied theatre. If actors are able to raise the quality level of their craft in such areas as role-play, the case can be made that the hiring of professionals for such work is crucial. The benefits that a well trained actor (with a reliable creative process) can bring to a client will be evident and powerful. Setting this higher bar of quality will help grow the field because the overall effectiveness of role-play forms of applied theatre will rise. This, in turn, should translate into a growth in work opportunities for the professional actor.

Works Cited