Growing Into a Role vs. Getting Worn Out

[jdtp12]

Posted: 1/20/11 at 8:34pm

I was just curious, when someone is doing a role for a while, do they normally grow into it vocally or begin to worsen from fatigue?

It seems like I remember reading comments about Jennifer Damiano growing into her role in N2N as the show went on, but on the opposite end people were saying how rough Alice Ripley was towards the end of her broadway run in the show. Which seems to be more common in shows?

[steven22]

Posted: 1/20/11 at 8:50pm

Alice definitley got worn out towards her end of playing Diana on broadway. Loved her as Diana every time I saw her (all 6) but she changed each time.

[esparza 333]

Posted: 1/20/11 at 8:57pm

I think it all depends on the role and the actor's technique. Your voice can either grow more used to a score and can ease into it or and this is the case with roles that are vocally demanding (such as Diana in Next to Normal) you can grow fatigued. Also depending on how a singer sings a song and whether they strain, or don't breathe properly etc. your voice can grow tired. I am not saying Alice Ripley has bad technique, in her case I think it is more because Diana is an extremely difficult role. Like Emily Skinner said there are some shows you just can't sing 8 times a week. Patti struggled with Evita due to the demands and her technique.

[romgitsean]

Posted: 1/20/11 at 11:33pm

"I am not saying Alice Ripley has bad technique"

No, it's okay. You can say that. I mean it's true. That doesn't make her a better or a worse performer (although she's not my personal favorite), but she has stated herself (don't ask me to quote directly) that she has a very hard time maintaining healthy voice habits naturally. Arguably though, Idina Menzel has horrible breath technique (as you can hear her gasping for air frequently on the Wicked OBC) but still manages to be a tour-de-force.

But your example of Patti...well...she just kindof screams rhythmically, does she not?

[HummingAlong]

Posted: 1/21/11 at 12:06am

I think it has a bit to do with one's training as an actor (knowing how to develop roles, especially when originating them - and then for each actor to keep finding new facets of a character in a frozen show) and then a ton to do with work ethic and personality. How willing is this person to put in the work in order to find new facets of their character, making it perpetually new enough for him or herself to "grow into" or develop each night? The person has to be willing to look for new things and not let their character grow static, and i think the actor's personality and willingness to do so plays a huge role. Also - if an actor is not drawn or inherently connected to the material at all, that makes the above much much harder to do...which is why it's a JOB and they are paid to do it...(the life is not often as glamorous as it might seem. Fans of theatre latch on to their favorite productions and think that actors have just the coolest job ever. But remember that to pay the bills in between the amazing, soul-feeding jobs, actors often have to take gigs that aren't as easily connectable and take a lot more work to keep fresh and new and exciting! It's a job, alright!)

[bwayguy22089]

Posted: 1/21/11 at 4:49pm

I think it depends on the performer and the role. For example, vocally demanding roles where the actor/actress rarely leaves the stage usually results in the performer becoming more and more vocally worn out. This seems to be more true for performers originating roles. Alice Ripley as Diana, Idina Menzel as Elphaba and Laura Bell Bundy as Elle became more and more (noticeably) tired. They were kind of the guinea pigs. Now, the actresses who play Elphaba in Wicked rarely sign on for more than 6-8 months (whereas Idina played the role for more than a year). However, having seen all three of these performers throughout their runs, while their voices became more tired, their acting got better and better.
Updated On: 1/21/11 at 04:49 PM