Here are the guidelines:
- Reading responses must be AT LEAST 200 words.
- Include your full name at the end of your comments. Unnamed comments will be deleted.
- From the "Comment As" drop-down menu, choose Anonymous, then click "Publish."
- Reading responses are due by midnight on the night PRIOR to our discussion of the required reading.
In talking about the action in a play Spencer basically says that action alone is not enough to make the play engaging and interesting to the audience. On page 36 Aristotle is quoted as saying, "the imitation of an action" to help describe dramatic action. An action that has a desired effect or consequence. Sophocles said on the same page that "knowledge comes through action". When Aristotle says that drama is an imitation of action, he didn't mean a physical action. he meant an internal psychological need which is important to have because we all have those needs. It is very relatable to us. Hatcher on the other hand speaks about the importance of plots in a play. The arrangement of (action) to tell the story of the play. You can't have a plot without dramatic action. He also talks about sub-plots in a play. In larger productions you can have multiple sub-plots, but they are hard to carry out correctly. If it does not feed in directly to the main plot it will not work. I like his analogy of a sub-plot to a feeder road that feeds into the main highway (the main plot). I also like how he explains what plot is. It propels the characters forward from inciting incident to point of attack.
ReplyDeleteSpiro Zagouris
There are many different ways of defining action. Most would think that action is when someone does something (run, walk, breath etc). Action has a different meaning when it comes to plays. Spencer talks how action in a play isnt just what the characters are doing physically. I initially thought that was what action consisted of. A character or characters doing something voluntary. Spencer argues that action is what a character wants. I didn’t understand at first how a want could fall under action. Spencer goes on to say that the want invokes the action a character will take in order to get what he or she desires.
ReplyDeleteHatcher talks about the structure of play and how to maintain it. I like what he had to say about plots and subplots. I have tried to include subplots in my writing, but can’t seem to manage it correctly. My fear with subplots is that it won’t make sense or it will overall make everything confusing. Hatcher says that effective subplots enter the pain plot near the end. A subplot is also there to “provide dramatic and thematic resonance to the main plot”. Sometimes subplots can be difficult due to not knowing how much it’s going to take up in the overall story.
-Juan Gloria
Spencer helped me to identify what action was and provided several ideas and concepts to understand his point/ meaning. The shift in the reading from ‘What is Art’ to ‘What is Action’ is subtle and both points are tied together well. While reading I noticed how I was agreeing pretty frequently to the statements being made about how life is a basis for art and that action or language are not enough to keep the audience entertained. I really liked when Spencer mentioned that emotions and language are not actions and how “every character in a play should have an action”(pg43). The example provided about Joe wanting a glass of water on page 39 and the explanation following it that say that the want is the action helped clarify the point and allowed me to see action as an internal desire rather than a physical or verbal action. His second point following that says whether he gets the water does not change the action did leave me a bit confused as Spencer later stated that what Joe would do next was an important step to keep the audience engaged. But I just took it to mean that what follows the action is just part of the plot and as long as the following action which Joe takes makes sense than its fine.
ReplyDeleteThe reading on Hatcher was fairly short compared to Spencer but what I took from it and really liked was when Hatcher mentioned that Action causes a Reaction and how each reaction that a character has must be believable to the audience and have an underlying purpose and not just be done for the sake of a plot filler.
~Naidelyn Ramos
In a play Spencer defines dramatic action as not something physical such as a fist fight. The dramatic action is more of a character wanting something or a type of goal (pg38). For example my dramatic action in attending college if it would to be in a play would be my goal to graduate and find a good job. Though we would think action would be me attending school and the physical work I do. Spencer also says that emotions are not actions (pg39). So the emotions I go through while attending college such as stress, anxiety and frustration are not considered an action. Now for Hatcher a dramatic action is an act a character performs causing another character to perform an action; as well as an activity which is equivalent to an action but does not cause a reaction (pg35). Now in my example this would just be me attending school and not ending it with my goal. What really caught my attention was when Hatcher mentions that character such as humans have choices (pg37). this makes the audience relate or compare themselves to the character. The audience when being in a play compares the play to life situations they have gone through themselves in their life.
ReplyDelete-Valeria Garcia
In the beginning of Spencers I was very confused regarding the topic of action being entertaining but at the same time not being entertaining because it was physical. After continuing reading I was starting to understand a little better how physical action isn't enough to make the play interesting. I am still a bit confused as to what regards as action. I would have thought being physically active would have been enough but now I know that there must be a drive for the character. I feel like I understand that the character must want something and that is the action but at the same time I dont think im fully grasping that concept.
ReplyDeleteIn Hathers I was it was interesting to read how activities are not the same as actions. Even though the activities are physical actions, it's not the same as an action a character takes which is what Spencer was also mentioning. I never saw it that way, I would have thought that a fist fight or shouting would be actions. I enjoyed reading about subplots and plots, It really put them into perspective and being able to read them allowed me to better understand which will be more important and how everything must be connected.
-Rebecca Muniz
What I noticed about Spencer is how much is emphasized this one quote “Action is what a character wants.” (38) In order for a character to have action, they need to want something and really strive for it. I wanted to compare Spencer’s talk about Aristotle and imitation to “Self Reliance” by Ralph Waldo Emerson because I just read it for a class and i think it applies here. Emerson talks about how art only really teaches to imitate and I never realized just how true it is even today how we kind reproduce many copies of art forms and experience other kinds of art forms but our own. Something I really love that he said is “Insist on yourself; never imitate.” This kind of stuck to me because now reading Spencer, I see how Spencer sees imitation and drama as a reflection inward rather than outward. Then there is Emerson who wants you to dig in deeper and create something of your own without imitation. Both constantly have me thinking of that quote “life imitates art” which can reflect our actions.
ReplyDeleteFor Hatcher, I loved the connection to King Lear on how each of his reasonings all leads to something, at different speeds, but they all lead to a special and certain point of the plot. There is also the emphasis on the action here and how they focus on wants and needs (parallel to Spencer). Lear had certain reasoning that tied into the plot and if one were to be removed or changed it would've changed the plot completely and made it confusing and not made any sense. His actions cause a reaction (references to page 35) therefore making them an action. I kind of like comparing this to the Hamilton lyric repeated in two of the tracks (The Election of 1800 & Washington on Your Side): “Every action has its equal opposite reaction.” This was Jefferson's way of shining a light on Hamilton just rushing ahead- not really taking the time to breathe and think anything through and cause a lasting effect on the history of America.
-Faith Ortiz
Since the first day of class I have been trying to think of what play I can write. Technically I can write anything I want, but I don’t want to write a bad play. I have a general idea now that I have read some of spencer’s book. Unfortunately, I don’t have Hatcher yet but it will arrive soon and will surely help me develop my idea more. A problem I’m running into when thinking about my play was “Action” what did I want them my characters to do. I even wrote down 5 different routes my play can go because I don’t have an idea of what direction I want to go in. But in this reading, Spencer tells us about action and how it means something different in playwriting. In short “Action is what a character wants” (Spencer 40). Action is not limited to one character though. Every character in every scene should have an action. He also mentioned “Sophocles advised that ‘knowledge comes through action” (spencer 36) these two sentences alone helped me grasp a sense of playwriting. If that makes sense. I don’t know for sure if I can display action in its entirety yet but I do understand what makes a play such a different art form than others.
ReplyDelete-Abel arredondo
While Aristotle’s point of view on what major components make a play led him to believe that the plot was the most important, which it was at that time, Spencer argues that action alone is not enough to keep the audience entertained and engaged. By action, Spencer means the character’s want, and not the actions such as walking, jumping, and etc. At first, I didn’t anticipate action meaning anything but what came to my mind as someone doing a physical action, but action, as Spencer says, is what motivates a character to do something throughout the play because of the pure desire they have. It’s interesting to think of it that way, and I agree, action alone is not enough to entertain the mass, but I do believe that it is important. It is when a character finds this want, this goal, that they go headfirst into the story. Though it might move along the play, I’ve taken that the character is more important for the story. If a play has a dull character going towards their end goal, it would not be entertaining or have much of a message. It’s interweaving subplots, as Hatcher says, that helps enhance the play.
ReplyDelete-Kimberly Villanueva
Reading this chapter made me realize I can bring any story to life. To me that was easy the story I had worked on in Moreira's class I truly wanted to see it brought to life. Spencers work says action isn't enough and that made me think how do I keep the readers entertained? my short story worked because i told every detail here they would need to act it out. Reading Spencer's work was interesting keeping the audience entertained not only mean dialogue or theme behind the play but their actions what drives them. So what that in mind i am working on keeping the readers entertained over all.
ReplyDeleteAndi