The Winning Essay
Our Winning Essay as written by Praetoritevong
Entertainment, and what it means to you
It would be no great exaggeration to say that entertainment is my life; as a professional actor, and semi-professional magician, I have been in the industry for most of my life, and as the late Dai Vernon would say – I wasted the first few years. Entertainment is defined by the Cambridge dictionary as a performance or activity which keeps people interested and allows them to enjoy themselves. At its simplest, this is true enough; however, what has always drawn me to entertainment, to perform, is the perhaps idealistic notion that at its most potent, it can, quite simply, touch and enrich our lives, and more importantly, the lives of the people we perform for. Entertainment is a means through which people can enjoy themselves, certainly, but entertainers sell themselves short if this is all they do, if this is all they strive for. So, good entertainment for me means striving for that touch; A few moments with an entertainer can amend a person’s thinking for life. The magnitude of this statement cannot be emphasised enough. Of course, good is subjective, so personally, good is simply realising the potential of entertainment. This implication is the basis of this essay, and it is, for me, the meaning of entertainment - its significance. Firstly, the will examine the key factor involved in bringing this amendment about, in all types of entertainment. Secondly, it will examine the statement in the context of theatre, and finally, in the context of the art of magic.
To amend a person’s thinking is by no means easy - in fact it is almost impossible – but the potential is there, and we have the tools, if we choose to utilise them correctly. Derren Brown has written essentially that magic is the anecdote waiting to be told in a decade’s time. Of course, it is easy enough to watch a video of Tamariz, or Vernon, or Banachek, or Ricky Jay, and it is easy enough to imagine and see that this could be true. In fact, I would take it even further. But allow me first to quote a passage which underlines everything I do within the industry, irrespective of the field. It originates from a series of lectures given by Peter Brook, compiled in The Empty Space.
"When a performance is over, what remains? Fun can be forgotten, but powerful emotion also disappears and good arguments lose their thread. When emotion and argument are harnessed to a wish from the audience to see more clearly into itself - then something in the mind burns. The event scorches onto the memory, an outline, a taste, a trace, a smell - a picture. It is the play's central image that remains, its silhouette, and if the elements are highly blended this silhouette will be its meaning, this shape will be the essence of what it has to say. When years later I think of a striking theatrical experience I find a kernel engraved on my memory - two tramps under a tree, an old woman dragging a cart, a sergeant dancing, three people on a sofa in Hell - or occasionally a trace deeper than any imagery. I haven't a hope of remembering the meanings precisely, but from the kernel I can construct a set of meanings. Then a purpose will have been served. A few hours could amend my thinking for life. This is almost but not quite impossible to achieve." (pp. 152)
It perhaps becomes more obvious now from where my thoughts derive, and they have yet to be, and shall be, expanded upon. The biggest aspect of bringing this about, is orientating entertainment around the spectator. It sounds obvious enough; we perform for other people, and therefore these people should be our focus. And yet, given the potential literally at our fingertips, we must be wary, since entertainers do have such power. The power of an actor to control his spectators’ emotions virtually at whim is unmatched anywhere else. When we think of the last movie we enjoyed, that made us feel something, well, it was no accident. It is the work of an actor, who desires his audience to feel, and yes, he entertains in the course of doing his job, but he has also achieved so much more, because all human interaction depends upon feeling, life is governed by feelings, our actions are governed by feelings, and meaning is governed by what we feel. This is what the entertainer has in mind – the feeling of his spectator. And this is what must be questioned, and considered. I wish to add that it would be misleading to imagine that entertainment must be serious in order to have lasting effect. Can comedians affect the way we feel? Of course. Comedians walk a particularly dangerous path; I recall watching an extremely competent ventriloquist, who, in the course of his act, made light of a few people, and finished by suggesting that anyone who took any offense should commit suicide. Of course, it was a joke, it was entertainment, but in my opinion it was not very good entertainment. One spectator did happen to take offense to the act, and personally, I found myself instantly disliking the performer as well. In that moment, the ventriloquist failed to entertain. In negatively affecting the feelings of his audience, he failed to entertain. Of course, most people had a great time; he was a witty guy. But entertainment is more than making most people laugh – not if we take an admittedly high ideal such as the goal towards which I strive. And I have not wanted to see a ventriloquist since, either. But the goal is certainly possible through entertainment; in striving to achieve it, and hopefully through our success, we touch upon what I feel is the holy grail of entertainment, to amend a person’s thinking, to change their life, no less. In doing so, it seems that we must cause a process of feeling, thinking, and questioning, and that for me is the epitome, the very essence, and meaning, of entertainment – and to do so, we must focus on our audience.
Good entertainment in the context of theatre means creating, essentially, an experience, a scorched memory which achieves the essence of entertainment. Theatre is perhaps the closest man can get to real mind control. Given a good team of actors, for the duration of the show, spectators literally will feel exactly what the entertainers want them to feel. It is for this reason that I have always preferred portraying villains. A hero will always be liked. He will always be cheered on, and carries the hopes of the audience. And when he wins, everyone is happy. Of course, this is an oversimplification of the situation; but consider the villain, who is shrouded in more ambiguity. Does he have redeeming qualities? Is he human? Is he ironic, or perhaps pathetic, or perhaps funny, or even likeable? There is so much freedom of interpretation. Theatre, my first love, embodies what I feel is most powerful about good entertainment; it can affect the emotions of the audience. It makes them feel, and feeling, as discussed before, means everything. Good theatre entertains, it allows people to enjoy themselves, but through this experience, more can be achieved. The way in which we live our lives can be questioned, if the emotions of the spectator can be invoked in such a way that makes them think, and feel, and therefore, question why. Ouisa Kittredge in Six Degrees of Separation asks, “How do we keep the experience?” An experience is not simply an event which has happened; it is more potent than that. Experiences are what we carry through our lives. Experiences are what define our lives. And when we think back on our lives, on the good times, it is these experiences which live. Well, as Brook says – the experience does not have to be remembered in its entirety. What is important is the kernel – that a kernel from the experience engraves itself, because then, the experience has significance; it has life. And when a meaning is constructed from the kernel, then we have something beautiful, we have constructed a new set of meanings for our life. What previously was not there now is, and in this act, we have amended our thinking. In doing so, we have fulfilled the ultimate goal of entertainment and struck at its very essence.
(To Be Continued)