Scene Design for Spring Awakening: a Post-Modern Approach

Home , Company (musical), Duncan Sheik, Fly crew, Frank Wedekind, Master Electrician, Nine (musical)

SCENE DESIGN FOR SPRING AWAKENING: A POST-MODERN APPROACH

A thesis submitted to the College of the Arts of Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Fine Arts

Holly M. Breuer

May 2013

Thesis written by

Holly M. Breuer

B.F.A., Syracuse University, 2008

M.F.A., Kent State University, 2013

Approved by

______, Advisor Raynette Halvorsen Smith

______, Director, School of Theatre and Dance Cynthia R. Stillings

______, Dean, College of the Arts John R. Crawford

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………….. iii LIST OF FIGURES ...... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... vii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

II. SCRIPT ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE ...... 3 Context…...... 3 Original Script Versus Musical Libretto ...... 4 Personal Response ...... 6 III. DIRECTOR’S CONCEPT ...... 8

IV. AESTHETIC CHOICES ...... 9

V. REALIZATION ...... 12 Approach . ……………………………………………………………………………12 Implementation ...... 13 Technical Rehearsals ...... 15

VI. SELF EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION...... 17 Self Evaluation ...... 17 Conclusion ...... 19

APPENDIXES

A: PRELIMINARY SKETCHES AND MODEL PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 21 B: PAINTER’S ELEVATIONS ...... 24 C: COMPLETE SET OF DRAFTINGS ...... 27 D: CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ...... 35 E: SCENE-BY-SCENE STORYBOARDS ...... 42 F: PANEL SHIFT SHEET ...... 56 G: PROJECTIONS CUE SHEET ...... 60 H: COMPLETE SCRIPT ANALYSIS ...... 69 I: SELECTED PRODUCTION PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 78 REFERENCES ...... 91

iii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Sub-Apron Platform……………………………………………………….………..…..22

2. AutoCAD Three-dimensional drawing of Central Platforms…………………….….…24

3. Panels on Paint Frame……………………………………………………………………25

4. Early Sketch 1……………………………………………………………………………29

5. Early Sketch 2……………………………………………………………………………29

6. Early Sketch 3……………………………………………………………………………29

7. Early Sketch 4……………………………………………………………………………29

8. Intermediary Digital Render………………………………………………………..……29

9. Intermediary Digital Render 2…………………………………………………………...29

10. Quarter Inch Scale Working Model……………………………………………….……..30

11. Scale Working Model with Sample Projection Digitally Added………………….…….30

12. Half Scale Panel Mock Up……………………………………………………………….32

13. Floor Sample Elevation………………………………………………………………….33

14. Groundplan (Not To Scale)………………………………………………………………35

15. Section (Not To Scale) ………………………………………..…………………………36

16. Unit Details (Not To Scale) ………………………………..……………………………37

17. Platform Details (Not To Scale) …………………….……………..……………………38

18. Orchestra Platform Detail (Not To Scale) ………………………………………………39

19. Catwalk Detail (Not To Scale) ………………………………..…………………………40

20. Panel Details (Not To Scale) ……………………………………………………………41

21. Storyboard Plate 1…………………………………………………………….…………43

22. Storyboard Plate 2…………………………………………………………….…………43

23. Storyboard Plate 3…………………………………………………………….…………44

24. Storyboard Plate 4…………………………………………………………….…….……44

25. Storyboard Plate 5…………………………………………………………….….………45

26. Storyboard Plate 6…………………………………………………………….…….……45

27. Storyboard Plate 7…………………………………………………………….…….……46

28. Storyboard Plate 8…………………………………………………………….…….……46

29. Storyboard Plate 9…………………………………………………………….……….…47

30. Storyboard Plate 10………………………………………………………….….…..……47

31. Storyboard Plate 11………………………………………………………….….…..……48

32. Storyboard Plate 12………………………………………………………….….…..……48

33. Storyboard Plate 13………………………………………………………….……...……49

34. Storyboard Plate 14………………………………………………………….……...……49

35. Storyboard Plate 15………………………………………………………….……...……50

36. Storyboard Plate 16………………………………………………………….……...……50

37. Storyboard Plate 17………………………………………………………….……...……51

38. Storyboard Plate 18………………………………………………………….……...……51

39. Storyboard Plate 19………………………………………………………….……...……52

40. Storyboard Plate 20………………………………………………………….……...……52

41. Storyboard Plate 21………………………………………………………….……...……53

42. Storyboard Plate 22………………………………………………………….……...……53

43. Storyboard Plate 23………………………………………………………….……...……54

44. Storyboard Plate 24………………………………………………………….……...……54

45. Storyboard Plate 25………………………………………………………….……...……55

46. Storyboard Plate 26………………………………………………………….……...……55

47. Top of Show ………………..……………………………………………….……...……79

48. “Mama Who Bore Me”..…………………………………………………….……...……79

49. “All That’s Known”………………………………………………………………...……80

50. “The Bitch of Living”……………………………………………………….……...……80

51. “Touch Me”……………………………………………………………...….……...……81

52. Act 1, Scene 5………………………………………………………….……...…………82

53. Act 1, Scene 7……………………………………………………………….……...……83

54. “The Dark I Know Well”……………………………………………...…….……...……83

55. “And Then There Were None”..…………………………………………….…….....….84

56. “And Then There Were None” end of song..……………………………….……...... …84

57. “The Mirror Blue Night”...………………………………………………….……...……85

58. “I Believe”……….………………………………………………………….……...……85

59. “The Guilty Ones”.………………………………………………………….……...……86

60. Act 2, Scene 2……………………………………………………………….……...……86

61. Moritz’s Final Mom.ent.…………………………………………………….……..……87

62. “Left Behind”…….………………………………………………………….……..……87

63. “Totally Fucked” ...………………………………………………………….……..……88

64. “Whispering”…….………………………………………………………….……..……88

65. Act 2, Scene 7…....………………………………………………………….……...……89

66. Act 2, Scene 9……………………………………………………………….……...……89

67. “Song of Purple Summer”………………………………………………….……....……90

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, and foremost, I would like to thank the production team, cast, and crew of Spring

Awakening. Without them this show would not have existed as it did and would not have been such a wonderful experience. I would like to thank Michael Rupert for trusting me when I needed him to and Ms. Roe Green for getting us all together in the first place. I would also like to thank my projections programmer, Cyndi Hoffman, and my design assistant, Daniel Ebert, for their dedication, valued opinions, and unrelenting sarcasm.

I must also acknowledge what a supportive and challenging team my thesis committee has been throughout this process: Raynette Halvorsen Smith, Jakyung Seo, and Dr. Yuko

Kurahashi. Additionally, I would like to say a special thank you to the 2012 Kent M.F.A. class – you adopted me and helped keep me on this path – and to the many family and friends who have supported me over the past three years.

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Kent State University produced Spring Awakening during the 2012-2013 academic year under the auspices of the Roe Green Visiting Director Series. The Series celebrated its tenth year with this production, and to commemorate the event Tony- winner Michael Rupert was invited to direct the endeavor. The production team consisted of Lighting Designer Jakyung Seo (Assistant Professor of Lighting), Costume Designer

Susan Williams (a graduate student in Costuming), Sound Designer Brian Chismar (a senior undergraduate student), and Stage Manager Kelly Cosgrove (another senior undergraduate student). The show was performed in the E.Turner Stump Theater, a 506- seat proscenium space, from February 15, 2013 through February 24, 2013.

Spring Awakening is based on a German drama entitled Frühlings Erwachen, or

The Awakening of Spring: A Children’s Tragedy written between 1890 and 1891 by

Benjamin Franklin Wedekind. This modern adaptation was conceived by Duncan Sheik and Steven Sater in the late 1990s. It was work-shopped for seven years in theaters across the United States from the La Jolla Playhouse to the Baruch College in New York.1 The world premiere full-scale production opened June 15, 2006 in New York, New York at the Atlantic Theater Company and then moved to the Eugene O’Neill Theatre on

Broadway a mere six months later.2

Director Rupert was living in New York City at the time of this production and so held early meetings with the design team via internet chat software, or telephone. This

2 distance was one of the first communication obstacles we had to overcome as a design team. Until his first Kent visit, on October 4, 2012, Rupert had not even seen the space we were to work in and when he did he was taken aback at the size of the performance space.

Spring Awakening has been previously performed with other companies on smaller stages to highlight the intimate nature of the text. However, Kent State elected to produce the show in its largest main campus theater – not exactly a close encounter for the audience.

During the initial design phase of the process, a tropical storm developed off the

Eastern seaboard. It formed into a Hurricane dubbed Sandy by the NOAA and made landfall in New York City on October 29, 2012. As a result, the week before I was to submit preliminary designs to the technical staff, we lost all communication with Rupert for five days and we did not regain internet access to him for another ten days after that. I continued to sketch but had no means of sending him any alterations or developments.

Finally, after almost two weeks of delays, we were able to resume visual communication and the process carried on, albeit at an increased pace as we approached our final production deadlines.

CHAPTER II

SCRIPT ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE

Context

There were two textual considerations for this project: the original text and the more recent adaptation. Benjamin Franklin, or Frank as he was known, Wedekind (1864-

1918) wrote The Awakening of Spring: A Children’s Tragedy in 1891. Germany at that time was undergoing a political shift in power. The country was leaving the reign of the aged and out-of-touch Chancellor Bismarck and moving into the time of the youthful and inexperienced Kaiser Wilhelm II. As a result of the Kaiser’s rule, Germany experienced a period of renewed nationalism which led to a strengthening of the traditions of

Romanticism through the spread of the German language and commercialization. As the wave of unification spread and the economy strengthened, the visual and performing arts became available to a broader range of German citizens and were no longer restricted to the large cities.3 As the rest of the country moved forward, the arts, too, sought to challenge the traditions of the past by way of secessions. These fractured groups of artists broke away from the established academies of study to create their own ideological communities for furthering the study of artistic techniques.4

While most German artists in the secession movements sought a renewal of a true

German culture by a return to what they viewed as their country’s aesthetic roots5,

Wedekind chose to explore the influences of religious and institutional authorities by depicting a story of youths growing up surrounded by extremely varying accounts of

4 right and wrong. His play, which equates knowledge to atheism and loss of parental authority to sexual exploration, shocked the nineteenth century audience.

The style of the adaptation’s libretto lends itself to a post-modern approach. The plot provides a sense of continuity; there are events, they progress, and there is a conclusion, while the songs provide a rupture of time and space.6 The libretto is Post- modernist in that it erodes pre-established semiotics by erasing traditional categories of social, political, and economic spheres. The resulting conglomeration of events creates a pastiche of styles and themes within the piece. Furthermore, Wedekind creates a world that no longer accepts a cognitive system based on binary opposites. Instead, it seeks answers to questions beyond a simple affirmation or denial.7

The verbosity of Wedekind’s nineteenth century text, which contains excessive character-inspired observations, is not necessarily useful to the development of this design. While the characters themselves provided expressive interest, the meat of my aesthetic approach came from observations about their interactions within their world, the hierarchy of their bourgeois society, their physical representations, and how these observations could be connected to our contemporary world. What we, as a design team, did not want to lose was the significance of the parallel between the sexual and emotional themes of the text and the realities faced by those involved in and observing the production.

Original Script Versus Musical Libretto

In contrast to the original work, the musical focuses on the sexual and social awakening of a group of school children in late nineteenth century Germany. Wendla

5 questions her mother on the mystery of childbirth while Moritz, Melchior, and the boys address issues of their increasing sexual urges. The adaptation team kept some of the dialogue from Wedekind’s text but has added many break-out moments of song which serve to depict the inner turmoil and experiences of the youthful characters. As Steven

Sater stated in his preface to the print version of the libretto, “the time-jumping structure of our show is meant, thus, to underscore the sadly enduring relevance of our theme.”8

Emotions, perceptions, and themes are maintained but several core plot points

(Melchior’s interaction with Wendla, Moritz’s with his father, to name two) have been altered from the original.

A key addendum was Sater’s deletion of Wedekind’s Masked Man/ Devil character in the final graveyard scene. Instead, Sater has allowed the ghosts of young

Melchior’s friends to return and help him to celebrate “the love still felt for those we have known that enables us to continue in the face of losing them.”9 This softer treatment of the themes ignores the parallel created by Wedekind between the illusive Masked Man and the ghostly Moritz. Wedekind’s two characters try to lead Melchior to their respective, prescribed paths: Moritz to join him in death and the Masked Man to a life of adult facades and platitudes.10 Sater’s modern ending, however, rejects the binary options presented to nineteenth century Melchior and instead offers an open-ended conclusion which does not reveal the young man’s fate.

In the Spring Awakening’s libretto, the children’s motivations and reactions to events are more important than the events themselves.11 In contrast, Wedekind’s work is concerned less with individuals and more with society on a whole; this is perhaps why we

6 see the adults as caricatured representations instead of fully developed characters. The adults have a desire to cling to hierarchy but, unlike the children, have abandoned their ability to think on their own.12 While Wedekind’s play builds up to the graphic nature of the reformatory scene, the musical dives right in to an extreme portrayal of sexual and violent acts. In the original text, the major dramatic actions (Moritz’s suicide, the physical copulation between Melchior and Wendla) take place off-stage. In the adapted musical, all events, no matter how private or sexual, are performed on stage. In our current social state of hyper-awareness, internet activity, and constant recording of every element of life, the musical’s brash portrayal of previously unseen events simply matches the expectations of a contemporary, voyeuristic audience.

Personal Response

My initial response to the libretto was not overly enthusiastic. I had read the original text first and was surprised to see how much had been added in to the adaptation.

To me, part of the appeal and elegance of Wedekind’s text was his ability to shock us without actually displaying shocking behaviors in front of us, with the exception of the later scene in the boys’ reformatory when the crass actions of the juvenile delinquents are meant to remind us of the darker side of society. I had concerns about how successfully a seemingly tactless text would come alive on stage.

However, my preliminary anxiety was put to rest during the first read-thru with the full cast. What began as a simple table read with piano accompaniment quickly changed into a full-fledged performance; the student actors found that they were unable

7 to remain seated during their recitations. At this first gathering, where they had yet to receive any direction from Director Rupert, the actors all seemed to dive in as enthusiastically as they could. By the end of the evening, a majority of the cast and some of those in the room to observe were in need of tissues. This is not to say that that night was the most successful performance, nor the most nuanced. Instead, the open and free atmosphere allowed the performers to react purely on instinct and the power of the result was undeniable. For me, this was the moment I realized that to a certain extent it didn’t matter what I felt about the show. The raw connection to the story that the actors obviously felt was enough to convince me of the emotional validity of the piece. I was motivated by their energy to provide a visual world which would allow them to best convey the thematic value of the text to an audience.

For the scenery, I initially felt a sculptural approach would be most fitting and wanted to utilize that approach and a textural treatment by way of projections. I wanted to create a visual representation of the difference between the poetic elegance of the original text and the textual brashness and rock musicality of Sater and Sheik’s adaptation. I chose simple architectural styling as a way to offset the jarring compositions of eclectic projection images.

Aesthetically, the challenge of this production was to provide a setting which reflected both the period specific elements of its 1890 German setting and the stylized rock-and-roll elements of its musical moments. My goals were to further develop my scenic painting skills, to ensure that the designed elements fulfilled the spatial and emotional needs of the show, and to provide a strong connection with the audience and

8 those involved. Other goals of this project include: to build an effective long-distance working relationship with a guest director; to try a new approach to a known Broadway production; and to develop my proficiency in the creation and implementation of projections in scenic design.

CHAPTER III

DIRECTOR’S CONCEPT

Rupert’s concept for the show centered on the merging of two distinct spaces: a more realistic lantern-lit Germany of 1892 and a more impressionistic “electric neon song world.”13 The realistic playing areas needed to provide both architectural definition and also easy physical transition into the second more suggestive space of song. The audience needed to know exactly where they were but also needed to be able to easily forget the importance of where they were and be carried away by the emotions of the character’s songs. Although Rupert did suggest the use of multi-level platforms and surrounding open space, the final shapes and heights were not dictated.

Layered with these considerations was Rupert's insider’s knowledge of the musical’s development. He had followed the show since its inception by attending early workshop productions and brought with him an excitement and knowledge of the process that was intrinsic to the development of not only the our scenic design but the entire production. In his presence, I immediately felt the pressure to achieve a design that would

9 pay homage to the conceptual and performance successes of the Broadway show while creating a look that was entirely its own.

The first full team design meeting was held on the actual Stump Theatre stage. In discussing conceptual ideas, Rupert implied that he would be blocking a series of vignette-type moments which were emotionally connected to each other by the power of the music. In order to address concerns regarding the large expanse of the performance space – an unusual size for a production with this level of intimacy – we came up with the idea to use the vastness of the space to our advantage. The open sides of the playing area would be used mainly for song-world moments and in contrast the focus would be visually narrowed for the more intimate moments. For example, we decided to bring the performers physically closer to the audience by constructing platforms downstage towards the audience and raking them so as to give the illusion we were dumping the performers into the laps of those patrons sitting in the first row. Rupert saw costumes and properties as realistic grounding elements and regarded the set as a more open canvas for stylized movement and projections.

CHAPTER IV

AESTHETIC CHOICES

My goal was to create a theatrical environment which would fully express the emotional depths of the text while highlighting the elements of the performance space.

This production was never intended to showcase keen historical accuracy or to create a

10 highly realistic mise-en-scene. Rather, the emphasis was on the integration of the score, the book, and visual representations of internal tempests.

My first task was to analyze the historical art and architecture of Germany. While looking at Romantic folk art techniques because of their connection to fairy-tale lore, I came upon the delicate art of shadow boxes. A shadow box is a way to preserve mementoes in small box-like compartments under a glass cover. It is a way to capture a moment in time, keep it safe, and display it for pleasurable reminiscing. To me, the shadow box exemplified the final moments of the show and Melchior’s decision to spare his own life and continue on accompanied by his memories – the ghosts of his fallen companions. I also found artwork created with dried and preserved flowers. The flowers, though somewhat literal imagery, represented to me the fragility of the characters’ blossoming youth. Additionally, I researched German folk art of the Romantic Period which centered on a study of the lines of nature. Contrary to my own assumptions about

German styles, the lines were not harsh and structured but soft and curved. Artists such as

Caspar David Friedrich, Arnold Böcklin, and Lovis Corinth depicted the epic heights and textures of the natural world which surrounded and dominated humanity – traits considered a common principle in the Romantic approach.

I was also inspired by the illustrations of nineteenth-century British artist Arthur

Rackham. Specifically, Rackham created a series of illustrations from 1900-1909 for several editions of the Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm.14 To establish an aesthetic for this design, I chose the saturated but faded colors used by Rackham. The dark subject matter of the fairy tales contrasted the delicacy of the ink lines used by the artist.

According to one biographer, Rackham was “fond of children and a close observer of their moods and movements.”15 Rackham’s observance was apparent in the delicate yet energetic way in which he illustrated the children’s tales. He was able to capture the darkness of Grimm’s texts while showcasing the capriciousness of the young characters. I knew that those images would influence my selection of projections and the creation of paint treatments. The disparity between the thematic content and graphic style demonstrates the dichotomy of the two worlds of Spring Awakening.

Rupert kept an open-minded approach to the design process and the variability of the scene-scape. The one uncompromised factor, however, was the need for a large, central, multi-leveled playing space. Within those confines I was able to play around with the layout, composition, and shape of that central unit. This initial layout did evolve in a variety of ways over the course of the initial sketching process (see Appendix on sketches). In addition to the historically relevant architectural and illustration styles pertinent to the center area, this set design needed to reference the modern elements of rock concert design to reflect the surrounding “second space.” I decided to create a feel of rock concerts as “instant high-performance, live architectural environments.”16

To create this rock concert feel and to reflect the vitality of the characters’ emotions, we needed to reach into a recently resurgent technological practice: projection.

At this point, I became the projections designer for this project in addition to my scenic design responsibilities. After speaking with several faculty and staff members including

Jason Potts, Master Electrician, and my own adviser, Raynette Halvorsen Smith,

Associate Professor, it became apparent that projections could provide the design aesthetic with a supplemental element unrealized by the other components.

CHAPTER V

REALIZATION

Approach

The challenge of the production was to simultaneously achieve a visually fulfilling and large scale dramatic mise-en-scene for the rock and roll musical numbers and an intimate space for conversation between audience and performer. To help create an illusion of a smaller space, the actors’ more realistic scenes were relocated downstage to be close to the audience. All aesthetic lines of this smaller visual space served to draw the audience’s attention to specific performers instead of creating a large vista look.

Outside of this intimate space, the band was visible on-stage, in full view of the audience to highlight the concert aspects of the musical numbers and allow interaction between the performers and the musicians. A thematic phrase that recurred in our discussions was the

“physicality of children” as a description of the nature of the performance and the open requirements of the rock concert space.

To supplement the aesthetic of the second separate group of locations in the show,

I conducted research on visuals of rock concert design and contemporary scenic designs.

A touring production of a ‘Wham!’ concert in 1985, for example, utilized a series of large

13 scale vertical shapes on either side of the stage space. I was attracted to the paper-like feel of the layering effect.17 A 1988 Belgian production of Frederick Handel and John

Milton’s L’allegro, il Penseroso Ed il Moderato presented a stage space which was filled by a series of colored transparent scrim drops and vertical side stage legs.18 However, as sketches developed I found that many of these shapes were too harsh and environmental.

To introduce an element of simplicity and style I began to explore the idea of simplifying the side stage units to basic rectangular shapes but adding front projections to enhance an alter their appearance.

Implementation

As the shape of our central platform began to settle, we moved on to addressing the large remainder of the playing space. I proposed a series of flats, drops, and sliding panels. The inclusion of panels that created a limitless array of heights and stage looks for us to develop throughout the performance without the need for heavy or cumbersome scenic units moving on and off. The idea of sliding panels intrigued Rupert in its simplicity and we began to pursue that avenue further. However, after several discussions with Technical Director Marty Simonsen, we opted to use the overhead rigging system in

Stump Theatre to fly panels vertically instead of attempting to slide them horizontally.

The vertical movement required less extensive rigging, simpler construction, and less expense. The maintenance of subtle shifts became a focal point of discussions and we began to develop the transitions between scenes.

An early idea for the treatment of the panels was to create a series of three dimensional monochromatic floral sculptures on the panels to act as a textured projection surface. The idea of paper flowers stemmed from research into the display of nature in

Romantic German paintings by artists such as Carl Gustav Carus and Arnold Böcklin and the concept of Victorian shadow boxes as a way to preserve specific moments of the past.

The panels were to be covered with black scrim and white or cream colored flowers would be built to adorn them. This monochromatic world represented the strict and unyielding obstacles faced by the characters in the show. The floral elements, then, would provide a sense of fragility to parallel the changes about to happen to those characters.

Director Rupert, however, wanted to lead the team to a more simplified, less distracting, approach to draw on the strengths of the performance and tie us to unyielding dynamic shifts of the space. Practically speaking, the floral sculptures became both a visual distraction and a technically over-complicated element and so they were cut.

Placement for the simplified rectangular panels was guided by the fact that the lighting designer, Jakyung Seo, was utilizing traditional lighting units as well as intelligent fixtures (which require more space in the air for rotation) on nine pipes spread out across the entire stage. This required spacing of one open line set on the upstage and downstage side of each electric pipe housing a moving light. The availability of fly crew for the run of the show – three people– also affected how transitions needed to be staged.

To account for all of these realities , the downstage four panels were kept on individual pipes spaced appropriately from the lighting instruments and the upstage five were consolidated onto two pipes just downstage of the orchestra platform.

The main design element for this production, in the end, was the projections. The other elements provided a variable and controllable background on which the projections were shown to the audience. Images, textures, and videos were used solo and layered to accent the actions and emotions of the performers. Except for some literal imagery (for example, images of school masters’ heads in the schoolroom), all images were stylized by using Adobe Photoshop to downplay the reality and to increase the texture of the imagery. Refer to Appendix E for scene-by-scene digital storyboards which show the configuration of the panels for each scene alongside the selected imagery for that scene.

Refer also to Appendix G for a complete cue sheet and Appendix H for an in-depth analysis of the imagery needs of each scene.

Technical Rehearsals

The preparation for technical rehearsals for this production was extensive. First and foremost, the size and placement of the nine projection panels was a collaborative decision made between myself and Lighting Designer Jakyung Seo. Over a period of two weeks, we discussed many variations of heights and on-stage locations for the panels in order to successfully create projection surfaces without completely blocking Seo’s lighting focus angles and moving light maneuverability. I moved two of the downstage panels further offstage, shifted mid-stage masking curtains further onstage, and shortened the height of two of the panels in front of the upstage orchestra platforms. By shortening those two panels, I was able to provide an opening for Seo to back-light the main playing platform downstage.

We also spent time considering the effect of projections on the space and more specifically on the lighting design. I used digital storyboards (see Appendix E) to communicate my thoughts regarding potential images but these storyboards were preliminary ideas only, initially. We planned as much as we could in advance, including the arrangement of the panels for each scene and the general color and intensity of projections for each moment.

As we approached the technical rehearsal period, the complexity of the projection design and the lighting design foretold an impending period of constant adjustment. One simple modification to the general process involved the way in which I communicated with my programmer, Cyndi Hoffman. Traditionally, all departments use headsets to talk to each other during rehearsals. However, I anticipated the intensity of conversation that was going to happen within the lighting design team and opted out of putting myself and

Hoffman in the middle of their work flow. Instead, we used our own laptop computers to communicate with each other via internet chat. This kept our projection related chatter off of the main conversation channel and allowed us to immediately conduct necessary adjustments.

Technical rehearsals began with a cue-to-cue of lighting and projection elements.

It quickly became apparent that the combining of these two elements in the real space was going to be more complicated that we had anticipated. I had previously worked through the show and noted moments where I felt panels should move and projections should come on, shift, or turn off. I had discussed these ideas with Director Rupert by using the digital storyboards. However, the images in combination with lighting effects

17 were not always what we had anticipated. After two laborious days of rehearsal with the cast present, the design teams decided to come in on Sunday (which had previously been scheduled as a day off) and talk through the entire show, including lighting cues, panel movement, and projection cues , with the director and stage manager. This meeting helped us to synthesize all of our previously individualized plans for how the show was going to look. By the dress rehearsal on that Monday, the fragmented elements came together in a more cohesive visual collaboration.

From Tuesday through Thursday, a day before opening, I continued to adjust levels of color and intensity on the projections, in accordance with lighting design changes and directorial requests. I also worked with the Stage Management team to maintain consistent look to panel shifts and cue placements. At the point of the show’s opening, I was confident we were presenting the best version of our production to the public.

CHAPTER VI

SELF EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION

Self Evaluation

One of my initial goals for this production was to create a scenic design that showcased the relatable themes of the script in a way that helped connect the audience to the action on stage, while also highlighting the contrast between the original script and the modern vitality of the added rock and roll sections. In retrospect, I think that goal was

18 based on a textual analysis that did not necessarily relate to the intricacies of a realized production. The reality of such a performance is that the audience does not need to be aware of the depth of the history of a piece in order to fully enjoy the thematic message of its presentation. I felt that this production was successful in achieving scenery which did not overpower the performance space but was still relevant enough to shape the space and the movement of the performers within that space.

The projection design brought an exciting new element to the production, but again, as a supplement to the text and music rather than an overwhelming barrage of imagery. The selected images successfully provided texture and visual intrigue rather than specifics of location. I was pleased to be able to achieve a final look that I was proud of by using a technology I was previously unfamiliar with. The verbal feedback that I received from members of the audience seemed to generally support the success of my choices.

I did feel a loss of time due to interruptions in communication with the Director after Hurricane Sandy. Because of that, some details which could have helped the sculptural nature of the design may have fallen under my radar. In hindsight, I would have liked to have added more architectural detail to the catwalk unit – for example, a line of half-round molding along the edge to break up the solid flatness of the facing pieces. The panels themselves could have used a heavier paint treatment. The three color overspray and drip technique that I used seemed strong while the units were hanging in the shop. However, once onstage the colors that I had painted on seemed to flatten and disappear under the front lighting. While this was often made irrelevant by the strength of

19 the projection images, any time that the projector was off the panels seemed to glow as large, almost white, blocks of color. An increase in pigmentation of the sprays would have helped to counter this effect. The vertical and smooth movement of the panels created beautiful moments of transition, revelation, and disguise. Yet, the sculptural space was somehow incomplete and the set looked too simple and flat without the help of projections.

Conclusion

Initially, I found it difficult to connect to this piece – emotionally or intellectually.

The music was energetic and passionate but many transitions are jarring and the subject matter seemed at times crass and gratuitous. However, I was able to step back and approach the script from a postmodern vantage point. The intricacies of the juxtaposition of Wedekind’s classic texts with the raw energy of Sheik and Sater’s popular rock anthems created a depth of interest which helped me to reformulate my perspective on the show.

I am pleased with the visual elements of this design and their effectiveness in supporting the overall production. I am grateful for the opportunity to experiment and come up with a successful solution regarding the use of full-stage projections. I believe that this production was successful in reflecting the multiplicities of the show’s settings, and that by doing so on a large proscenium stage we provided an exciting approach to a recently well-known show.

Endnotes

1 Steven Sater and Duncan Sheik, Spring Awakening (New York: Theatre Communications Group, 2007), 2. 2 Ibid., 4. 3 Shearer West, The Visual Arts in Germany 1890-1930: Utopia and Despair (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2001), 3. 4 Ibid., 16-17 5 Carl Niekerk, “Mahler, Rembrandt, and the Dark Side of German Culture,” in Legacies of Modernism: Art and Politics in Northern Europe, 1890-1950, ed. Patrizia C. McBride, Richard W. McCormick, and Monika Žagar (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 31. 6 Patrizia C. McBride, “Introduction: The Future’s Past – Modernism, Critique, and the Political,” in Legacies of Modernism, 1. 7 Marc A. Weiner, “Hans Pfitzner and the Anxiety of Nostalgic Modernism,” in Legacies of Modernism, 19. 8 Sater and Sheik, Spring Awakening, ix. 9 Ibid., xi. 10 Alan Best, Frank Wedekind (London: Oswald Wolff, 1975), 80. 11 Best, Frank Wedekind, 71. 12 Ibid., 64. 13 Caitlin Potts, “Are You the Guy That Gets Naked On Stage?,” Kentwired.com, http://kentwired.com/index.php/latest-updates/58000--are-you-the-guy-that-gets-naked-on-stage- (accessed April 8, 2013). 14 Derek Hudson, Arthur Rackham: His Life and Work (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1960), 46. 15 Ibid., 44. 16 Sutherland Lyall, Rock Sets: The Astonishing Art of Rock Concert Design – The Works of Fisher Park (London: Thames and Hudson, 1992), 8. 17 Ibid., 36. 18 Tony Davis, Stage Design (California: Rotovision, 2001), 144.

APPENDIX A: PRELIMINARY SKETCHES AND MODEL PHOTOGRAPHS

Figure 4. Early Sketch 1 Figure 5. Early Sketch 2

Figure 6. Early Sketch 3 Figure 7. Early Sketch 4

Figure 8. Intermediary Digital Render Figure 9. Intermediary Digital Render 2

Figure 10. Quarter Inch Scale Working Model

Figure 11. Scale Working Model with Sample Projection Digitally Added

APPENDIX B: PAINTER’S ELEVATIONS

Figure 12. Half Scale Panel Mock Up

Figure 13. Floor Sample Elevation

APPENDIX C: COMPLETE SET OF DRAFTINGS

Figure 14. Groundplan (Not To Scale)

Figure 15. Section (Not To Scale)

Figure 16. Unit Details (Not To Scale)

Figure 17. Platform Details

Figure 18. Orchestra Platform Detail (Not To Scale)

Figure 19. Catwalk Detail (Not To Scale)

Figure 20. Panel Details (Not To Scale)

APPENDIX D: CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

Platforms

The first platform to be constructed was the level-down in the center of the orchestra pit. This required the removal of three of the eight orchestra pit units which comprise the apron. Once the units were removed, a built-to-fit stud-wall supported platform was constructed in the opening. Then, a stage deck height plug platform was added on top to ensure the accuracy of the prescribed shape of the opening. This technique required that a slatted faced be created so that the facing of the new areas matched the facing of the architectural areas along the audience-facing edge of the stage.

The facing patches were created using one by three inch strips of pine board mounted on one half inch plywood backing pieces which were then painted to match the remainder of the facing elements.

Figure 1. Sub-Apron Platform

The next upstage unit consisted of custom cut pieces of three-quarter of an inch plywood applied directly to the stage deck. The method of direct application was used to maintain allowances for the fire curtain while also keeping with the aesthetic of increasing heights of platforms as the units progressed in the upstage direction. The three-

37 quarter of an inch ‘platform’ then served to create the visual area of a platform without requiring an increase in height of the next two platforms.

The third, and main, platform was built just off center stage at a total height of sixteen inches from the stage deck. At this height, a single step was required on the downstage edge to allow easy access to the unit. It was constructed using short standard stud walls and four foot by eight foot stock platforms. The hollow nature of construction, however, led to an increase in sound produced by cast members walking on top of the platform. To counter-act this noise production, a layer of homosote – a compressed paper pulp – was added on top of the stock platforms and underneath the final surface treatment.

The homosote layer successfully deadened the percussive effects of the cast’s energetic movements. All three of these flat platform areas were covered with three inch wide one quarter inch thick luauan strips meant to give the appearance of floorboards.

Surrounding the sixteen inch tall platform was a platform constructed on a compound rake which was referred to as the ‘catwalk.’ From the downstage stage right edge, the platform increased in height along the following points: nine, twenty-six, thirty- two, thirty-six, thirty, and thirteen inches. These dimensions show that the highest point of the rake was at the upstage stage left corner and that each of the two downstage edges were set at different heights. The top layer of the unit was constructed as a series of six connected standard construction platforms. The original technical director plan was to create a series of cross-braced legs under the unit for stability. However, as the project progressed and install began, the choice was made to revise the planned construction and instead custom build a series of internal angled stud walls. Along the top of the platforms,

38 a layer of homosote was included for the same sound-deadening purpose as the homosote on the lower platform. The entire unit was then lidded and faced with one quarter inch masonite for a smooth and consistent surface finish.

Refer to Appendix D for detailed designer drawings of these elements.

Figure 2. AutoCAD Three-dimensional drawing of Central Platforms

Panels

Nine panels emerged as the right number for the space to achieve ultimate variety and organization of composition. To avoid the moiré (an optical illusion which causes the viewer to believe motionless objects are moving) effect which often happens with theatrical sharkstooth scrim I researched a variety of scrim-like substitutes before settling on a Rosebrand fabric called Rustica – a poly-blend material with a square weave and not the rectangular weave of sharkstooth scrim. Construction of the box-tube frames for the nine fabric panels began the first week of December, 2012. The widths ranged from three

39 feet to six feet and the heights ranged from ten feet to eighteen feet six inches. Refer to

Appendix D for detailed drawings of these items. The exterior framing pieces were built using one and a half inch steel box tube and the interior cross bracing was built using half inch steel rod.

Figure 3. Panels on Paint Frame

Projections

After assessing options regarding throw distance and available technology, we opted for a front projection position situation in the technical booth at the extreme back of the house. My programmer for this project was Cyndi Hoffman, a first year graduate student with the lighting department. I submitted to her 1024x768 pixel images, which she then manipulated using a software program called ArKaos Media Server. The individual cues were controlled using a Wholehog ® 3 board, with a dedicated board operator for technical rehearsals and the run of the production.

Paint Treatments

The main floor was treated with a mottled beige, brown, and black texture. The first layer required a series of patches of wet-blended sponge effect to be laid in using a light cool beige color. After the first layer had dried, a series of sprays were painted on top using a pump-action Hudson sprayer in shades of black, brown, and sepia. The catwalk was then painted as a transitional space using a grey, black, and beige wet brush scumble treatment with a black glaze lightly rolled over top to mute the patterns created by the base. The level platforms placed just off center on the stage were intended to ground the play in a more realistic setting. To this end, the tops of these units were covered with three inch strips of one quarter inch thick luaun material and painted to look like real hardwood floor boards. The strips were painted using a dry brush technique mixing Rosco Off-Broadway colors: raw sienna, burnt sienna, and earth umber. Before the dry brushed strips dried, a layer of water was painted on top to meld the colors into one varied pigment surface. Once the strips were installed in the space, a white-wash layer was applied lightly over top to give the appearance of a very old floor whose painted layer had worn off over time.

The nine fabric panels were painted in the scene shop prior to installation in

Stump Theater. The panels were temporarily attached to the large paint frame in the shop using custom-built plywood brackets. Each panel received a series of spray paint treatments using a Hudson sprayer and Off-Broadway Rosco colors Chrome Oxide Green,

Burnt Sienna, and Raw Sienna. A “sepia” color was also created by mixing Raw Sienna,

Burnt Sienna, and Earth Umber in a one to one to one ratio. This “sepia” was sprayed

41 lightly over top of everything else to tone each panel down. Finally, a stronger concentration of the “sepia” color was dripped along the tops and bottoms of each panel using a natural sea sponge to give the impression of aged water damage. The last step in the panel process was to add linear suggestions of molding. This was done by adding corners, edges, and sides in a variety of configurations to all the panels in Earth Umber with a cream-colored highlight. The final effect was of a series of older walls which had been disfigured in some way; however, they maintained the original intention of lacking literal architectural elements and instead relying on suggestions of those elements.

APPENDIX E: SCENE-BY-SCENE STORYBOARDS

Figure 21. Storyboard Plate 1

Figure 22. Storyboard Plate 2

Figure 23. Storyboard Plate 3

Figure 24. Storyboard Plate 4

Figure 25. Storyboard Plate 5

Figure 26. Storyboard Plate 6

Figure 27. Storyboard Plate 7

Figure 28. Storyboard Plate 8

Figure 29. Storyboard Plate 9

Figure 30. Storyboard Plate 10

Figure 31. Storyboard Plate 11

Figure 32. Storyboard Plate 12

Figure 33. Storyboard Plate 13

Figure 34. Storyboard Plate 14

Figure 35. Storyboard Plate 15

Figure 36. Storyboard Plate 16

Figure 37. Storyboard Plate 17

Figure 38. Storyboard Plate 18

Figure 39. Storyboard Plate 19

Figure 40. Storyboard Plate 20

Figure 41. Storyboard Plate 21

Figure 42. Storyboard Plate 22

Figure 43. Storyboard Plate 23

Figure 44. Storyboard Plate 24

Figure 45. Storyboard Plate 25

Figure 46. Storyboard Plate 26

APPENDIX F: PANEL SHIFT SHEET

Scene Blocking Notes Q # Panel Movement Q Location Top Orch 1-5 out @ Mid 1 Preset (purple) height 1.1 #1 Mama Who Bore Me Wendla DS of P2 D1 Orch 1-5 in, with L7 Measure 20 “Mama who bore me” #2 Mama Who Bore Me Reprise Cast in from sides, to down D1.5 P2 & P4 Out On visual of 1st girl’s center entrance D2 P2 & P4 back in, as boys set Measure 30 w/ L19 chairs FAST 1.2 #3 All That’s Known Kids on center platform, adults down #4 Bitch of a Living 1.3 Piano DL, Hanschen DR, D3 P2 & P4 Out = FAST End of Greg’s Line, p 21 girls on catwalk #5 My Junk 1.4 #6 Touch Me Boys on center platform then D4 P2 & P4 in Top of song, slowly downstage, D5 Orch 1-5 out halfway. Purple M73 “Touch Me” with P17 1.5 #7 The Word of Your Body Downstage and on middle D6 Orch 1-5 in M36 until end of song platform 1.6 DSR and down center platform 1.7 Boys on center platform, D7 P2 out to Mid 2 position, fast Top of Scene, with L80 girls downstage but enter to allow girls to enter from SR #8 The Dark I Know Well 1.8 #8A Word of Your Body, Reprise Melchi & Wendla DR, boys D8 P2 In & P4 Out During vamp, with L97, center platform & catwalk p61 1.9 Moritz and his father, downstage 1.10 #9 And Then There Were None Moritz down center D8.5 CUT Top of song, slowly over P2 to Mid 1 position M2-9

Mothers at center, boys from

58 sides to down center 1.11 #10 Mirror Blue Night Everyone on catwalk, D9 P4 IN ONLY With L109, at top of surrounding Wendla & song Melchi at center #11 I Believe All In

2.1 #12 The Guilty Ones Group on catwalk, W&M All Panels in Top of Act down center 2.2 #13 Don’t Do Sadness #13a Blue Wind #13b Don’t Don Sadness / Blue Wind 2.3 Boys & girls surround main D10 P1 – P4 to varied heights In B/O before 2.3 platform, Melchi at center #14 Left Behind 2.4 #15 Totally Fucked D11 CUT 2.5

Boys and girls at edge of D12 P2 and P4 in all the way Top of Scene, with main platform, E&H center L164.5 #16 Word of Your Body-Reprise D13 P1 & P3 in all the way Music starts D14 CUT 2.6 #16A Melchior Letter Underscore Melchi DL, Wendla’s bed SR on arm #17 Whispering 2.7 #17a Wendla Letter Underscore Schmidt enters UL on catwalk, Melchi & fight SR, boys exit over catwalk #17b Abortionist Underscore 2.8 #18a Almost Midnight Girls enter from up right 2.9 #19 Those You’ve Known 2.10 #20 Song of Purple Summer Ilse enters SL to upstage D15 Orch 1-5 out together all the Top of song, Go on 1st center, ends with cast down way, slowly line of song

59 across stage D16 P1 & P4 out all the way, Measure 9, with L197 slowly D17 P2 & P3 out all the way, After Melchi’s entrance, slowly “And so I wait” on downbeat

APPENDIX G: PROJECTIONS CUE SHEET

APPENDIX H: COMPLETE SCRIPT ANALYSIS

APPENDIX I: SELECTED PRODUCTION PHOTOGRAPHS

Figure 47. Top of Show

Figure 48. “Mama Who Bore Me”

Figure 49. “All That’s Known”

Figure 50. “The Bitch of Living”

Figure 51. “Touch Me”

Figure 52. Act 1, Scene 5

Figure 53. Act 1, Scene 7

Figure 54. “The Dark I Know Well”

Figure 55. “And Then There Were None”

Figure 56.”And Then There Were None” end of song

Figure 57. “The Mirror Blue Night”

Figure 58. “I Believe”

Figure 59. “The Guilty Ones”

Figure 60. Act 2, Scene 2

Figure 61. Moritz’s Final Moment

Figure 62. “Left Behind”

Figure 63. “Totally Fucked”

Figure 64. “Whispering”

Figure 65. Act 2, Scene 7

Figure 66. Act 2, Scene 9

Figure 67. “Song of Purple Summer”

REFERENCES

Best, Alan. Frank Wedekind. London: Oswald Wolff, 1975. Davis, Tony. Stage Design. California: Rotovision, 2001. Hudson, Derek. Arthur Rackham: His Life and Work. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1960. Lyall, Sutherland. Rock Sets: The Astonishing Art of Rock Concert Design – The Works of Fisher Park. London: Thames and Hudson, 1992. McBride, Patrizia C., Richard W. McCormick, and Monika Žagar, ed. Legacies of Modernism: Art and Politics in Northern Europe, 1890-1950. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).

McBride, Patrizia. “Introduction: The Future’s Past – Modernism, Critique, and the Political.” In McBride, 1-16.

Niekerk, Carl. “Mahler, Rembrandt, and the Dark Side of German Culture.” In McBride, 29-42.

Potts, Caitlin. “Are You the Guy That Gets Naked On Stage?” Kentwired.com. http://kentwired.com/index.php/latest-updates/58000--are-you-the-guy-that-gets- naked-on-stage- (accessed April 8, 2013).

Sater, Steven, and Duncan Sheik. Spring Awakening. New York: Theatre Communications Group, 2007. Wedekind, Frank. Spring Awakening: A Children’s Tragedy. Translated by Jonathan Franzen. New York: Faber and Faber Inc, 2007. Weiner, Marc A. “Hans Pfitzner and the Anxiety of Nostalgic Modernism.” In McBride, 17-28. West, Shearer. The Visual Arts in Germany 1890-1930: Utopia and Despair. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2001.