Katie Mitchell devising Beauty and the Beast

[♪ lively string music ♪]

>[KATIE MITCHELL] We're trying to work out
how to do a live performance

of "Beauty and the Beast" now
for children aged between 8 and 12.

>[voice on a video of camera]
It was still early in the evening,

and already, [unclear name]
had unwanted guests.

[critter noises]

>[MITCHELL]
Eight people's imagination

working on one simple question,
“How do you do the Beast?”

are going to generate more
possibilities from which to select.

If I set that task for three groups,

I'm bound to have a much
wider range of choice

from which to select the final output
that the audience sees.

[actors growl]

>Whereas, if everything is held hostage
to my subjective artistic vision,

I'm likely to be more limited
in what I can generate.

[♪ whimsical piccolo
and muted trumpets ♪]

♪ ♪

>This workshop will provide
the starting points

for the rehearsal process

and the starting points
for the design process.

[♪ trumpets continue ♪]

♪ ♪

[♪ music stops ♪]

>Well, I've learnt over time
to have a structure

whereby I set simple tasks for groups
and then select outcomes that I like

or just pick and mix
between different outcomes.

is a much more efficient way
of generating material.

[unclear dialogue]

>So each of you maybe have a read through

because that's probably the best
and most efficient way of doing it

and have a go at how to do this.

This is sort of a classic bit
of the fairy story.

So it's really from “The merchant
tied the horse up to the manger

and walked towards the house
where he saw no one

but entering into a large hall.”

We're only looking at his arrival
into the empty palace,

probably equivalent
to about four pages

of quite magical movement
through different rooms.

And for me, it's like an example
of the sort of episodic problems

inherent in the telling
of a fairy tale like this.

Is there, you know,
is there a way of solving it?

Is it a “narrator” that does it?

Or do you do it through action?
Do you do it through—

And it's silent as well,
so there's zero…

Or does he matter to himself or—
I don't know. Good luck.

>[MAN IN GREY] There might be some
coat hangers just lying around.

Can we borrow some?

>[MAN IN PURPLE]
Open the door and-- [hangers clang]

[others laugh]

>[MAN IN GREY] Change the--

>[MAN IN PURPLE]
Yeah, I mean, in a way,

the entrance and exits
could be any way.

What's important is
the play of the changing.

>[MITCHELL]
If possible, I try not to direct.

[unclear conversation]

>It’s more efficient, and it means
that all the conversations are had

around very practical
concrete components—

>[WOMAN IN GLASSES]
I had this idea of—

we looked at the text,
and we're just like, actually--

He thinks the palace is
people or statues; that's all it is.

[unclear responses]

>So what happens if they can—
What happens if they can move?

>[WOMAN IN BLUE]
Where are we going to do statues?

>[MAN IN PURPLE] I think
you should both be [unclear]

on either side of the big
Victorian fireplace, yeah.

[off-screen]
Yeah, great. I think go for it.

>[MITCHELL]
They're very good at acting,

so they'd be the best people
to generate scenes

at this stage in the process
and to test-run ideas

much better than me
or Lucy or Caroline.

[unclear actor dialogue]

>They'd have a very clear sense
of the aesthetics that I would use

to make beautiful scenes and work.

I mean, there could be staging rules.

You just don't do anything
downstage center, for example.

I just find that a bit
sort of flat and dull.

Or there could be a stylistic
or genre rules, you know,

that you might not—

you might act in a sort of Lecoq way
as opposed to Stanislavski way

and they know
I'm not gonna like it.

But it's good that they know me a little.

But it's like just a group of adults
investigating something together.

>[MAN IN GREEN speaks
unclearly as the Beast]

>[MITCHELL]
I just think it's maybe too subtle

for this moment where
we're gonna show them,

so maybe the next thing
we should hear is the text,

the two lines of text between
the Beast and the dad.

It's a devised project,

and Lucy's going to write
scenes for the project.

Lucy doesn't have
the burden of having to write

a new play called “Beauty and the Beast”
that I'm going to direct.

No, she's joining a process.

>[LUCY] So, what happens is.
you go “Hello, hello.”

No one's there.
[snaps] Dumbwaiter.

What do we do? Lay the table.

>[MITCHELL] Even though
my touch is very light,

it is sort of from certain plans and aims.

You'll notice that I haven't let them
stage a scene outside the dining room

for the last four or five days,

and that's because I've made the decision
that that's the staging for the show.

So I've narrowed already their parameters,

but it might look like that's just
a chance occurrence, but it's not.

>It's something...
[♪ plinks piano key ♪ ]

...that's consciously
being evolved by me,

but without it being declared.

[♪ plinks key again ♪ ]

>I'm not someone who believes
in waiting for the unexpected

to yield or generate something.

I mean, we had one
uniquely unexpected moment

in this workshop, which was, you know,

someone who worked in the admin
put on a pink outfit in the corridor

before we were doing
a showing for kids,

and I jokingly invited him in

to introduce the show to the kids
in his pink outfit.

>[MAN IN PINK, enthusiastically]
“Ladies and gentlemen…”

Is that what we're thinking?

[cheers and laughter]

>[MAN IN PINK laughs]

>[MITCHELL] And this became
a character in the piece.

[rhythmic chanting of man's name,
followed by three short claps]

>But, I mean, that is so rare.

you couldn't rely on it
for a split second

as a way of generating material.

>[BEAST growls]
>[BEAUTY] What is it, Beast?

I've upset you and I don't know
what I've done, so please tell me,

and then maybe I can--

>[MITCHELL]
I think that maybe the heart of--

sometimes maybe running
a workshop and maybe directing,

is that basically
what you're watching happen,

you’re, in your head,
programming as the show,

but you're not declaring that,

but you're constantly,
therefore, guiding the actors

in the direction that you're programming

without them necessarily needing
to know that that's the case.

Having a child hasn't necessarily changed
my interest in theater making,

but, of course, the world
changes color when you have a child,

so everything is subtly
and delicately recalibrated.

And I suppose this is a more
conscious active moment

of deciding to use the skill I have
to make things for children.

We just try these different tones
and atmospheres and ideas

and just see which ones they like
and why they like them and why they don't.

And that will really determine
how we move forward with it.

I think they're probably more
challenging as an audience

because I think you have to be so precise.

And what's been really
surprising about this process

and indeed “Cat in the Hat”
is [that] they can accept

a sort of very, very high level of
craft and aesthetic and psychology.

It's much more sophisticated
than we think.

[BEAUTY off-screen]
The ceiling's opening!

>[BEAST off-screen] Oh!

>[BEAUTY gasps] What?

>[BEAST vocalizes]

[BEAUTY and BEAST
slurp food from plates]

>[MITCHELL] Okay. [laughs]

What do you think of that?

>[CHILD 1] It's good, but I don't get it.

>[MITCHELL]
It's good, but you don't like it.

>[CHILDREN 2 and 3] I don't get it.
>[MITCHELL] You don't get it. Okay.

[to another child] Yes?

[CHILD 3] [unclear]
Beauty's turned into the Beast.

>[MITCHELL]
Beauty’s turned into the Beast.

[as voiceover] We're looking for genre,
we're looking for narrative.

we're looking for character.

And you can only really test,
I think, by looking at it.

>[to team] Yeah, well, let's go
to the next stage, I think, don't you?

What do you think, team?
>[TEAM] Mm. Yeah.

[♪ violin music ♪]