I have so many mixed feelings on this topic. First off, I love using monologues at auditions. I feel its an OPPORTUNITY, not a waste of time. It gives you a time to showcase a little bit of your personality before you start reading sides.
First off, auditioning with a monologue is NOT MEANT TO SHOW YOUR ARC OF EMOTIONS. If you try to go through the rainbow of emotions in a monolgue, you have a good chance of looking like an emotional wreck, and you'll look more like someone who needs to be in a padded room with a straightjacket. Yes, your monologue has to have direction, and go somewhere, but its not a conglomerate of emotions on display. You have to find a monologue that fits you. It has to say this is my "type", this is my personality. Its that simple.
Secondbanana (love that name by the way) mentioned something great! He talked about the overuse of monologues. You know what I do? I find interesting DIALOGUE in a scene, and re-write it as if it were just one person saying the lines. Yes, some words obviously have to be changed, but when done properly, it makes the character so dynamic and interesting. And all the while, its a brand new monologue that NO ONE has ever done before! Not only that, but by adding a word here or there that is your own really makes the monologue come to life for the actor.
I feel, as an actor, you should always have 6 monologues memorized. You should have two contemporary comedic pieces, two contemporary dramatic pieces, and one of each in classical pieces. And all of them should be contrasting monologues. That is how you can show your range. If you go to an audition, and they want to see your comedic piece, and you do it, they may say, "great, what else have you got?", and you can either give them a dramatic piece, or another comedic piece that contrasts the one you performed.
I don't understand why people hate performing monologues. I take each piece as a fun challenge to see what I can do with it. I guess it depends on your frame of mind.

quote:

Originally posted by avidactor:

I don't understand why people hate performing monologues.

I wouldn't exactly call it hate on my part. Dislike, possibly...because those of use that have been around a while and have a body of work under our belts are being judged by what we can do in one minute.

and no one has yet addressed the issue of what purpose a monologue actually serves in a casting situation.

quote:

One of the most common tips I've heard is to play the monologue as an actual scene, where the other actor is simply not speaking to you, or is giving you responses that act as obstacles to what you are trying to achieve, thus giving you actions to play.

Honestly, this has really never worked for me. I find that "tricking" myself into thinking that there are imaginary people out there is great for class work, but in the real world of auditioning, etc. it's kind of silly.

Monologues are extremely difficult to work with at first, but the best advice I have is to pick something that allows you to be involved. In the one I've been working on (and recently performed successfully to a theater of people) was one in which I was talking to a guy I like about a story from my past. Simply telling the story doesn't work. Reliving it the experience as I tell the story does work! It makes it interesting and prevents "acting."

In order to relive the experience, though, I had to create it all in my memory through sensory work. And by all, I mean the people in the memory, the instances surrounding the memory, memories from my character's life before I even met the person I was talking about, etc. Once you've done all this work, your subconscious takes over. You may forget lines, you may create your own. That's fine! It means you're probably doing a great job and living instead of "acting."

As for writing your own work, I'd suggest that you not. There are so many well-written plays by theatrical geniuses to choose from, so select from there. Well-written plays will give you an inordinate amount of information to work with, saving you a lot of time when creating the past and the character's dreams for the future.

As for talking to someone, just choose someone you know and talk to that person. You don't have to actually "see" the person, but you should do sensory work to get a feel for the person in your imagination. That will help you to act less and feel less like you're performing.

quote:

Originally posted by KatieD01:

Monologues are extremely difficult to work with at first, but the best advice I have is to pick something that allows you to be involved. In the one I've been working on (and recently performed successfully to a theater of people) was one in which I was talking to a guy I like about a story from my past. Simply telling the story doesn't work. Reliving it the experience as I tell the story does work!

I think this is a very good piece of advice. In real life if you are relaying a story to someone, you naturally attempt to try to set the stage, relive the scenario, in order to try to give the listener the feeling like he was practically there. So this is something I think we probably all naturally do.

I'm not a big sense memory proponent. It takes me out of the relationship and puts me in my head. All that sense memory stuff started with Stanislavsky, didn't it? The funny thing is, from what I've read over the years, Stanislavsky was never an actor, or I should say, I think he was more a lover of the technique and an educator.

Having studied extensively for years at Strasberg I must admit using method (or I should say) when actors let you see them using sense memory OF COURSE it looks bad..I think the use of sense memory or any technique is invisible.You do all that work prior to actually performing your work.
And trust that all the homework, your choices, etc. will be conveyed in the deliverence of your work. it's when actors are demonstrating their SM that it looks obvious and it feels fake to the actor themselves no doubt.

quote:

Originally posted by avidactor:
auditioning with a monologue is NOT MEANT TO SHOW YOUR ARC OF EMOTIONS. If you try to go through the rainbow of emotions in a monolgue, you have a good chance of looking like an emotional wreck, and you'll look more like someone who needs to be in a padded room with a straightjacket. Yes, your monologue has to have direction, and go somewhere, but its not a conglomerate of emotions on display.

That's a really good observation.

A monologue is a moment in the life of a person, and if there is one, clear direction what this moment is about, then it comes across stronger.

quote:

Originally posted by captain54:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by avidactor:

and no one has yet addressed the issue of what purpose a monologue actually serves in a casting situation.

The purpose of performing a monologue at an audition, in my honest opinion, is to serve as a tool to show type, and skill. Yes, you can give someone a side, but that person hasn't had any time to explore the text as a prepared piece. Show, doing well with a side could show:
a)this person has great instincts and great luck
b)this person has the ability to read in a professional sense (as an auditioner)
Now a monologue can show:
a)what a performer can do with a rehearsed piece
b)what type this person portrays themself
c)how the actor approaches a script, given the time.
d)how an actor can move as the character withouth a script in their hand.

So there's a lot of purpose for a monologue. Sometimes, cd's just want to see what ya got up in that noodle of yours. People want to see how you as an actor perform. They know a monologue is already prepared, so they know they're getting a polished piece where they see what you can do with a given script. Ultimately, it helps them see how you tackle your work when given the time to have it fully prepared.

But a lot of acting are dialogues. Reacting to others. It's hard to be alone out there on stage. But some people are great alone. With others, they can't work that well. Think that's a fault in the whole audition thing?

I presume most people posting on this are on the east coast?

Since I moved from New York, the only times I've been asked to do a monologue was were for agents or managers (and that was rare).

If you audition for the kind of TV work people get when they start getting any auditions at all for TV, you'll more than likely get something like the following:

quote:

SERIES REGULAR: Are you sure you didn't see someone come by here?

YOU: Pretty sure.

SERIES REGULAR: I mean, I saw him turn the corner.

YOU: Sorry. Didn't see a thing.

Do you what you can with that. But you may get homesick for your monologues.

Oh, and people pay hundreds, even thousands, of dollars to "workshops", just hoping they'll get called in for these two or three line roles. Really.

quote:

Originally posted by Truthie:
But a lot of acting are dialogues. Reacting to others. It's hard to be alone out there on stage. But some people are great alone. With others, they can't work that well. Think that's a fault in the whole audition thing?

The ones that are great alone are the ones who treat their monologues as if it were a scene, a dialogue. If you treat the monologue as if it were part of a greater whole, then it becomes more vibrant. This is what I was getting at earlier.

quote:

Originally posted by avidactor:

quote:

Originally posted by Truthie:
But a lot of acting are dialogues. Reacting to others. It's hard to be alone out there on stage. But some people are great alone. With others, they can't work that well. Think that's a fault in the whole audition thing?

The ones that are great alone are the ones who treat their monologues as if it were a scene, a dialogue. If you treat the monologue as if it were part of a greater whole, then it becomes more vibrant. This is what I was getting at earlier.

Yeah! You're making a great point here!

Endowment and all the visualization, too.

quote:

Originally posted by Truthie:
But a lot of acting are dialogues. Reacting to others. It's hard to be alone out there on stage. But some people are great alone. With others, they can't work that well. Think that's a fault in the whole audition thing?

This is an interesting question. I dont think auditioning is the cause of bad scene work. I would hope the problem runs much deeper than that! There are some actors who are great auditioners and awful performers, and there's the exact opposite as well. I have to say, that even though every incident is seperate, its most likely a matter of misused technique, or lack of technique. If your a good 'monologue technician' and a bad 'scene person', chances are you lack experience with scene study and communication. But, I like the question! It may pose other answers that I'm interested in reading.

quote:

Originally posted by avidactor:
There are some actors who are great auditioners and awful performers, and there's the exact opposite as well. .

I like that. Not the fact, but the observation.

Some are really good in faking.

My dayjob is in advertising, and we have to fake all the time. I mean, to get an account (an ad job) you have to present your ideas. And sometimes you just pump up the little bit that's there. Or you just dont give a f** about the job, but you want the money.

I'm sure, same in acting. An audition isn't the whole thing, but the promise to do the whole thing.

There are serious guys that are so serious they don't dare to promise what they could do standing on one leg.

And then there are those flukes, who can't even... you know, what I mean, and they have no trouble in promising.

The world is a zoo.