[Scriptwriting] [SoliloTech] [Guest Testing] [Production Process] [Lessons Learned]
[Schedule] [Research Questions]
The High Concept:
Audiences will have the power to create their own experience within a play by delving into a stream-of-conciouness narrative of one of the three characters on stage. This structure will create an experience with a high potential for repeat viewing (an area in which theatre currently falls short), and creates an individual journey for each audience member who participates.
The Scriptwriting Process:
- People aren't always honest with themselves or each other
- The "I'm okay, dont worry about me" mentality
- 2 primary characters
- More characters might overload the technology
- 10-15 minutes
- Limited production time, audience size
- Characters:
- Initially considered blind date - two strangers
- Characters needed emotional stake - something to lose
Download Final Draft: The Virgin Island [Copyright '02, H. Howe]
We created an "Exploration of the Technologies" in order to fully assess what was feasible and desirable within the constraints of an ETC project.
Transmission:
We want to transmit the "soliloquies" via audio. Video technologies just aren't at the price point yet to make them feasible for an entire audience.
Option: Cost: Quality: Difficulty:
Extensibility: Streaming Audio Expensive
[1 computer/guest]Medium High High Infrared Listening Very Expensive
[$3500/4 channels]Highest Low Low FM Radio Transmitter
Low
[$80/transmitter]Low-Medium Medium* Low After investigating all of the options (and taking some feedback and ideas from previous Open Houses), we decided that FM Radio transmissions would be the way to go. It has its drawbacks - namely, low audio quality and the need to build custom receivers on the audience handheld devices - but it gives us a cordless solution, and it's much less expensive than our other option.
For this purpose, we have purchased three FM transmitters [see below] (after attempting to build our own at a much lower cost).
It should be noted that shows with many actors and/or shows in a densely urban setting might have difficulty finding usable bandwidth for interference-free transmission. Changing venues will most likely require a re-scanning of the spectrum and resetting the stations we choose.
Trade-offs for our radio solution:
- Movement of people between transmitter and receiver causes frequency shifts
- May prevent or hinder reception by audience
- Requires us to prohibit "extra" audience members
- Certain electronic devices cause interference on all transmitted stations
- We must minimize the amount of extra equipment we use, and all audience devices such as cell phones must be turned off prior to performance
- Low sound fidelity (one or two guests complained about this during pilot tests) - can't get rid of white noise
Focus-Switching:
We want something that won't have a steep learning curve and that won't prove frustrating to an average guest while allowing them to swap their audio "focus" seamlessly between actors. We wanted to use an infrared system that combines a bit of "attention tracking" with a bit of a remote control metaphor.
However, after the Open House and some discussions with faculty member Jesse Schell, we realized that the myriad problems associated with tuning an infrared system might be insurmountable in the time we have. Rather than marry our experiment in non-linear theatrical storytelling to a fragile technology, we decided to keep things as simple as possible.
During performances of The Virgin Island, audience members will switch between actors by pressing buttons on their remote devices. The remote devices are simply small consumer radios [Sony model SRF-M35, see left] with their presets mapped to the frequencies we've chosen for the actor thought broadcasts.
In order to keep people concentrating on the story and not the device, we've created a themed container for each of the radios.
Once all of the parts of the production came together, we began a quick and dirty pilot audience test to answer some of our most pressing research questions - and, of course, the meta-question: "Does the show work?"
Download a blank copy of the Pilot Audience Survey [.DOC]
First Pilot Audience: December 2nd, 8:00 PM
- Show Conditions:
- Radios, no themed containers
- Bare-bones set
- Some reception problems on Leslie's channel
- Pilot Audience Demographics:
- 6 guests - 5 male, 1 female
- All CMU students or recent grads
- No ETC students
- Some with a theater background. Varying disciplines. (CS, Writing, etc.)
Findings from first audience:
View a copy of the Pilot Audience Survey Summary in HTML
Download a copy of the Pilot Audience Survey Summary #1 [.DOC]
- Big Wins:
- Every participant was highly interested in seeing another production using the same technology.
- Audience felt the production could have been longer
- Didn't feel too overloaded or exhausted; they wanted more.
- High interest in a repeat viewing of the same production
- (money making!)
- Audience felt the technology was easy to learn and use
- No one said that they had a hard time keeping track of what was going on onstage.
- Interesting notes:
- Seemingly no direct correlation between "interesting onstage", "interesting thoughts", and "listened to the most". This seems to indicate a willingness to experiment with the technology on the part of the audience.
- Some people expressed a desire to hear *all* thoughts at once.
- Reactions to the "someone else is laughing" problem are much less problematic than originally thought
- Some said they ignored it
- Some specifically tried to stay on one channel
- A few changed channels
- Some said they felt left out, others specifically said they didn't feel left out.
- One audience member noted that they thought it might be better to have live actors doing the thoughts or convey the thoughts using cue cards
- Interesting quotes:
- "The listening in added to the sense of voyeurism that plays already possess - it's a complete picture."
- "The technology was a little frustrating because I couldn't hear everything at once."
- "Very interesting concept. I would definitely be interested in seeing more."
Bottom row: Final set and lighting design, 12/05/02
|
Character
Sketches
|
|||
|
Final Leslie #1
|
Final Leslie #2
|
Final Jesus
|
Final Mark #1
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
PR
Design
|
|
|
The Virgin Island: Logo >> Designed for use on programs, posters, and any publicity about the production. |
 |
 |
<< TVI Teaser/Poster Designed for
use in publicizing the show's existence and date to interested parties
around campus. |
- Shouldn't have left some things to the last minute (of course)
- CD/Minidisc/Computer playback question
- Performance of transmitters in the space
- Use everything that you have at your disposal
- Tinfoil, projection screen...
- We could have started guest testing earlier
- Was tremendously helpful and generated great enthusiasm, even for a theatrical production
- Projects aren't like cookies!
- They're not always better when you make them from scratch (transmitter, receivers)
- Radio sound quality really is pretty awful
- General Questions:
- What can't we do in theatre, and what do we want to do?
- How can we get the audience involved without "voting"?
- Voluntary or involuntary control?
- How does technology change the playwriting process?
- How much interaction does a theatre audience want?
- How much interaction can they tolerate?
- Specific to The Virgin Island and Solilotech:
- Audiences have become used to multi-layered storytelling techniques, but can this technique transfer over to the stage?
- How do we construct a play that is both successful and impossible for the audience to grasp all the content in one sitting?
- Will they become frustrated and stop paying attention to all of the monologues, clearly focus on one, or continue to bounce back and fourth between them?
- How is a universal theme developed so that the whole audience can understand and absorb it?
- How do we marry the individual experience of this new interaction with the unqiue group experience that can only be found in theatre?
- If only part of the audience is laughing, and an audience member isn't listening to/seeing the comedic moment, how does that affect that audience member's experience with the piece?
Milestone Date(s) Complete? Concept Development October 1st - 15th Yes First Draft of Script Due October 15th Yes Casting Completed October 18th Yes First Read-Through of Script Monday, October 21st Yes Rehearsals Begin Wednesday, October 23rd Yes Order Prototype Materials Friday, November 1st Yes Final Draft of Script Completed Tuesday, November 5th Yes Inner Monologue Vocal Recordings Due Sunday, November 10th Yes Technology Prototypes Due Wednesday, November 13th Yes Begin Pilot Audience Testing Thursday, November 21st Yes (late) Final Technology Delivery Wednesday, November 27th Yes Load-In (Set & Tech) Sunday, December 1st Yes Tech Rehearsals / Pilot Audiences December 2nd - 3rd Yes Dress Rehearsals December 4th Yes Public Performances December 5th - 7th In progress External Exhibitions December 11th