|
|
The
Director, Anna Mackmin
|
Photograph by Chris
Saunders |
| How did you get into directing? |
I was an actress and I was finding it increasingly difficult
to sustain a sense of my own creativity because as an actor
you are always waiting for someone else to give you a job.
You are always waiting for someone else to endorse you basically,
and I found that increasingly difficult, and so I was looking
around for other things to do and, purely by accident, I took
up designing. I never imagined that I was going to give up
acting, I just thought I needed something else that would
give me a fall-back, as it were, and the designing of clothes
took over. I became more and more successful, very quickly.
So I gave up acting and became a designer, and removed myself
from the theatre, and grew up!
Suddenly, I was going to the theatre purely for pleasure.
Then a friend of mine gave me a play that she had written
and I literally had a moment of epiphany where I woke up in
the middle of the night and went ‘Oh my God, I’ve
got to direct this play, this is it!’ We were very lucky
because we took it to the Battersea Arts Centre and they said
yes! They were fabulous. We went straight on, we did it, we
sold out round the block, and then we took it on a tour which
also sold out. I then raised money from the Arts Council because
I felt that this writer was important and she should be paid
to write a play which she then did. We took that play to The
Bush Theatre and from there it transferred to The West End.
So, the second thing I directed transferred to The West End
and I had a very, very quick learning curve.
Then I came to Sheffield and Michael Grandage gave me the
kind of break which very few new directors are ever given
- the opportunity to direct on that massive stage with that
huge auditorium. This is unusual now that we don’t have
the repertory system in this country in the way that we used
to. I realise that I am privileged, in that I have been escalated,
if you like, very quickly through the ranks. So that’s
my story in a nutshell.
|
Is one of your aims as Associate
Director of Sheffield Theatres to encourage other directors? |
Yes it is. Since I have been lucky enough to become an
Associate Director I have spoken at evenings which are designed
to encourage new directors, and I’ve met over cups of
tea and chats, a huge amount of new people including designers,
directors and writers. A big part of what Michael Grandage
set in motion when he took over programming here, is indeed
exactly what he did for me - encouraging new talent. There
has been a lot of new talent developed through The Crucible
Theatre, people like Nikolai Foster, who was our Assistant
Director for two years, and was then given his first directing
job on our main stage, A Chorus Line. I am aware
that Michael also gave me that break and it is absolutely
an aim of Sheffield Theatres that we encourage people. This
touches me personally because I know what a difference it
can make to somebody’s development as an artist.
|
| What type of Theatre do you enjoy
directing? |
Well written theatre. I’m always looking for the
great new play. I love the thrill of working on new writing
because you never know what will happen. Everyone is making
it up together for the very first time and an audience have
absolutely no idea what they are coming to see. So there is
this wonderful act of faith, an act of trust, which happens
when you are working on something new. Firstly, between the
actors who will commit to it when no-one else has told them
if it’s a good play or not - it is just their own instinct
and taste. From yourself, just trusting your own instinct
that it’s a good play. From the writer trusting you
to do your best with their vision of the play. By which, I
mean they’ve written it, we all suspect it's great,
but there is no actual proof it’s going to translate
onto the stage. And then that act of faith extends to Designers
and indeed from the audience. You get this extraordinary vibe
in an auditorium when an audience have no idea what they are
coming to see, they have come because some piece of the pre-publicity
has interested them in some way and not because they have
expectations based on an earlier production. It quadruples
the very profound dramatic affect of an evening in the theatre
because you never know what a particular production or play
is going to be like. That’s why I love it. The privilege
of being in any rehearsal room with a group of talented actors
and a writer is that as a director sometimes you get to facilitate
people’s creativity to become bigger and greater than
everyone imagined.
|
| Why The Crucible? |
Well, I think that The Crucible is probably one
of those plays that every director who gets an opportunity
to direct it then thinks to themselves, ‘Wow, aren’t
I clever, now is the perfect time, the only time in history,
there couldn’t be a more perfect time in history to
do this play’. Unfortunately, that is very, very often
the case because we live in a culture surrounded by crisis
and it felt to me that with what was going on in the Middle
East and indeed America and Britain, The Crucible
seemed like an important play to produce. It has been one
of those plays I have always wanted to do and although, politically,
it is extremely relevant I am also fascinated by the heartbreak
involved in it. There is so much heartbreak and I think that
that is a profoundly theatrical thing.
|
| Do you feel that that is what the
play has to say to a modern audience? |
No, I don’t. I really dislike message theatre. I
would never ever set out to make a piece of theatre where
people went away thinking ‘Ah, that’s the message’.
My intention when I make a piece of theatre is that it is
as complicated as possible so that it speaks to as many different
individuals in the audience, on a personal level, about whatever
happens to be important in their lives at the moment. So the
more complicated the ideas, the more complicated the emotions
in a piece of theatre, the better the theatre is.
One of Miller’s geniuses is that he puts together some
of the most complex questions man can ever ask himself, but
the story is so simple that you have a compulsive need to
know what on earth is going to happen next. Emotionally you
are drawn along by this tidal wave of events. Then you leave
the theatre with your brain really buzzing with questions
and ideas, all of which you know could take a lifetime to
answer. That to me is great theatre - intellectually complex
whilst being emotionally compulsive.
|
| Miller is quoted as saying that
his work is about ‘the essential dilemmas of what it is
to be human’. What do you feel in response to this? |
That’s exactly what it is. I think one of the things
you can always do as a director, when you are setting out
to direct a play, is to ask yourself ‘What is the central
question that is this play?’ You can boil it down, and
although it is a simplistic way of looking at it, it can be
very useful. I was thinking about this the other night - I
was thinking ‘OK, if I had to say it was about one thing,
what would I say, and I suppose the central question is -
is the truth going to be told?’ Then in brackets ‘What
is the truth?’ And those are great, great questions.
Those are the questions that we should all be asking ourselves
every single moment we are alive. And, are we going to be
a big, brave, bold enough person to be able to tell the truth
at every moment of our lives. And indeed, what is our personal
truth?
|
| From the moment you decide to direct
a play, could you chart what is your approach from then on? |
One of the ways I know that I want to direct a play is
that I have a strong visual image; I can see a picture of
the actors in a particular environment. It very often ends
up being something completely different, as it is in this
case, but I can see it like a film in my head, I can see the
pictures. So I start from that point of view. Then I read
the play and I just start to make notes of anything that comes
into my head. When I read it, I am not reading it for the
ideas and the intellectual arguments, I am reading it imagining
the actors acting it and imagining different versions of staging,
and imagining sound effects and music I might use. I jot down
all those ideas and I read the play 10-15 times, allowing
all that stuff to just come to the surface. It can be completely
different each time I read it. I can imagine one scene being
directed one way one time I read it and then three days later
I can read it again and it goes in a completely different
direction.
I start to talk to a designer very early on and I bring all
of those ideas to the table and then talk through all the
ideas for the play with the designer. We talk and talk and
talk until we find a world that seems to work for both of
us. So all of this is going on in parallel - the development
of the design with my own work on the play. It is about this
time that I start to do research around it. For instance,
for this play I read the transcripts of the Salem Witch Trials
and I did quite a lot of research into the nature of hysteria.
These are things that may never be used in rehearsals but
they just interest me. At this time I’m also having
similar conversations with the rest of the creative team –
the Lighting Designer, Choreographer and Composers or Sound
Designers.
Then I will get together with a Casting Director and I will
talk through what I believe are the essential qualities of
each of the characters that have to be cast - what I believe
are the most important qualities a specific character needs
to portray. The Casting Director will come with their ideas
and we will discuss that. Then we will get together with a
group of actors to meet. So then the casting is set in motion.
Before I go into rehearsals, I hone down that huge melting
pot of ideas that I have had in response to the text. I have
basic ideas for the staging of the play which I take into
rehearsals with me so that the actors are not forced to have
to make everything up. I give them a skeleton of where they
can stand on stage and then they will have the confidence
to play with that.
As an actor I used to, with my own part, work on the development
of my character through the play and how that character’s
developing arch intercepts with other characters developing
arch and so I use this technique to chart the development
of each character in the play. It is like creating a framework
of the play; the emotional development of the structure of
the play. In this instance I also hired a dialect coach and
worked on, after my research into how Arthur Miller used the
phonetic transcripts of the actual trials, what dialect we
wanted to invent.
The important thing to remember is that there is no formula.
It is different for every single play. It is important to
have a structure for the way you work which you can then just
completely chuck in the air. In a way the most important thing
for a director is to have as much inspiration, information
and ideas at your fingertips because rehearsals are all about
a group of individuals getting together and you have no idea
what those actors are going to bring to the table so you need
to have as many ideas as possible to allow you to go off in
as many different directions as you need to.
|
| Of all the characters in the play,
which one speaks to you? |
| One of the reasons this is one of the best plays ever written
is that every single character has a journey. So it is entirely
possible, depending upon how you feel that morning, to read
the play from any character’s point of view. Mary Warren,
for instance, has the most extraordinary journey. Tituba goes
from being a slave in a repressed world out into this explosive
madness at the end. And even Cheever, a character whose role
could be considered as subsidiary, has a strong developing storyline.
I think it is a wonderful play for an ensemble. And yes, John
Proctor has more to say than anyone else but it is my profound
intention that it won’t just be ‘The John Proctor
Show’. I remember when we originally spoke, quite a while
ago now, we said we were both very excited about the nature
of Hale’s development but you know since then I have done
a lot of work on all the other character’s journeys and
all of them resonate deeply. I suppose that is one of the reasons
I instinctively knew it was a great play. And then the more
I study it, the more I know it is a great play as opposed to
just having an instinctive response to it. It is a great play
because it is peopled. It is a play about a community, about
an explosive bomb going off in a community. It can’t touch
you, it can’t move you, unless you have a sense of that
community and community is about a collection of individuals
and what is brilliant is that they are all so beautifully drawn,
all entirely different from each other with entirely different
responses. So, I think that it is the individuality and, at
the moment anyway, the nature of individuality; what it takes
to be on your own, that is what is really speaking to me about
this play. I haven’t got a favourite character at the
moment. Miller is quoted as wanting his legacy to be having
written ‘some great parts for actors’ and having
been an actor myself that is how I direct. I direct entirely
from the point of view of a vague memory of what an actors needs
are. There are no more extraordinary artists than actors. They
are brave and they make themselves so vulnerable. I am in awe
of how they mine their personal experience always with their
intellect alongside. They are inspiring people to watch working
and I am always very, very grateful to be able to work with
them. |
Anna Mackmin interviewed by
Susan Weaver, Education Projects Officer, on 22 December 2003
|
|
|