ps44
| Москва |
Creative appearances of Bulgarian Javor Gyrdev in Moscow are fruitful yet unexpected. His hermetical «The Pillowman» by Martin McDonagh, arrived for a one night appearance in a glass cube in 2004 to bring the present day Irish humor to Russia. In March of this year, the first night of a Spanish play «Grönholm Method» in the Theatre of Nations showed Moscow the future this city is about to embrace.
«Grönholm Method» by Ferrera, directed by J. Gyrdev. © 2010 Ivanov / Theatre of Nations
Posterus
Игра в карты
Робер Лепаж отказывается от технологий на фестивале Луминато в Торонто
Mercatura

Maya Pramatarova: How would you describe your method?

Javor Gyrdev: I will answer by using one of Socrate’s words – maieutics, which is a midwife art. I supervise the labor – “the essence is delivered” and later on I organize my research. I study industriously, patiently and painlessly what is present in the souls of the people I am working with. On my part, I conscientiously reveal what is in my heart. Finally, we present our findings to a third group of people. Naturally, I use my favorite method of efficient analysis. It always helps me, even when I am working in a strictly post-dramaturgic context.

M.P.: You work with a team (a scenographer, a composer and actors). Does it mean that your method differs from the model of a dominanting director?

J.G.: It does. It is the consequence of what I was taught in the theatre – directly or indirectly – by the directors that belonged in the avant-garde of the ‘80s (who I liked a lot at that time). Generally speaking, avant-garde of the ‘80s was defined by a strongly pronounced dominant director. Therefore, it was something I did not want to follow – but, this was not because it was a bad method. No! Just because it was the method of our fathers and I was going through a phase where I was experiencing Oedipus anger – I was willing to do anything but this. My self-identity was being formed by denial. Directors in the ‘80s (most of them) did not believe in formalism. Perfect, formalism it is! It was what I would work with. Besides, it was my natural inner aspiration. Later, of course, this process subsided. When I was sure that I had succeeded in my profession and torments of self-identity had disappeared, I realized that the differentiation of form and content was a sign of backward thinking, and I started to develop qualities of a psychoanalyst. Now, my priority is working with emotional compositions and various forms of «declassifying» inside meanings of a text.

Stage director J. Gyrdev. © 2010 Elena Lapina / Theatre of Nations

M.P.: In all your productions scenograghy dominates. Would it be correct to call your constant collaboration with artist, Nikola Toromanov, fundamental in your directing method?

J.G.: It would be unfair not to mention Daniela Lyahova (especially when looking back in the past). In fact, it all started when we were university students – with the anticipation of a cheerful future full of hopes and perspectives (it was the first half of the ‘90s in the previous century). In fact, in the ‘90s and up to 2001, I always worked with those two stage designers. At that time, we were like a nomadic tribe that was moving from place to place. That traveling holiday lasted for the whole nine years, because I started working with Daniela and Nikola (Ficho) in my second year at National Academy of Arts.

«The Bastard» (based on Shakespeare and Dürrenmatt’s texts, 2001) was my last performance which visual decision was developed by this scenographical duet. Later, it turned out that my wish to work with the both of the artists was an impossible budget «art luxury suite» so, I had to work with them separately. Now, I mostly work with Nikola Toromanov and rarely with Daniela Lyahova («Life Multiplied by Three», «In the Air»). Both of them have worked as artists for films «Zift» and «Zincographer» that are now going through a preparatory phase. Meanwhile, Daniela became a leading scenographer in the Theatre Workshop «Sfumato» - this is a theater of my teachers, Magrarita Mladenova and Ivan Dobchev.

As for the method and the dominant feature in my work, on one hand, they appeared contrary to the circumstances offered by life, while on the other hand, under the influence of the hard inner pull of all of us to emmigrate aesthetically. At that time, it was an instinct to step aside from the reality that defined the beginning of the change and that influenced our work. In particular, I was mostly interested in the form than that of the human parameters of dramaturgy. I badly needed visual material and passionately strived for Eisenstein’s «montage». Nikola (Ficho) and Daniela turned out to be the very people who could help me with that.

M.P.: Is there «an optimal quantity» of artistic means for each specific performance?

J.G.: Yes, I think there are some optimal quantities of means. They are exactely what I need for any given performance. I believe in «Occam’s razor»: if there is something that you can remove, it must not be there.

M.P.: How has your work in the cinema influenced your method in the theatre and on the contrary, how does your work as a theatre director affect the cinema that you produce?

J.G.: It is a complex question. Surely there is a great influence from both sides. But, it is still hard to say how it is expressed. This is something I have to figure out yet.

M.P.: Why did you pick one of Gordi Galceran’s plays for the Russian audience?

J.G.: To show them what to expect – it is a hint of Futurism.

Jordi Galceran Ferrer is a playwright, a script writer and an interpreter. He started writing for the theatre in 1988. He writes in Catalan and Spanish. The play «Grönholm Method» was written in 2003, and in 2005 the director, Marcelo Piñeyro, made a film «The Method» (The Goya Award for the best film script, The Award for the best screenplay of the Spanish Script Writers Society, The Audience Choice Award of the International Festival of Flanders in Ghent).

M.P.: What was it like to work with Russian actors?

J.G.: My first experience with Russian actors was exeptional for me, because it refuted my expectations of the irrationally sensitive nature of the Russian actor. Thankfully, it turned out that I worked with extremely precise people who knew how to convert the given tasks into organic stage action perfectly. Moreover, they would comprehend and fulfil them by different means, making me a director with many options. The actors built my confidence so that I could make minimal decisions instead of using soley director methods.

M.P.: What did you get from your work with Edward Albee («The Goat or Who is Sylvia», Ivan Vazov National Theatre, Bulgaria) – a dramatist who is very dominant in his work with directors?

J.G.: I have learned how to move along a narrow path of interpretation, achieving the optimal result of a performance’s richness.

M.P.: You have fulfilled your dream of becoming a director and after that you joked that now you are living without a dream. What motivates your power in the arts now?

J.G.: A strong desire, boredom and irresistible melancholy because of the fact that someday we will all be gone.

«Grönholm Method» by Ferrera, directed by J. Gyrdev. © 2010 Ivanov / Theatre of Nations
http://post.scriptum.ru
к театру пространства и времени
Вторник, 16 Января 2018
Repertorium
Exportatio
p.s. в блогeps в вашем блогe
p.s в новостяхps в ваших новостях
Oris
Scriptum