Interview's reflection

I finally managed to interview Andrea Bassani, an Italian musician (pianist), composer and more recently the founder of its own theatrical cultural association where he runs workshops and small productions.

As he lives in Italy I re-used the form of email for my interview, so I tried to make sure not to fall into the same problems I encountered with my first email interview ( previous post 1- post 2 ).

Skype was my first attempt, but he wasn't enough prepared for that (nor skype account nor mic or webcam).

I tried to be as clear as possible not too waste time (reading) and his time (writing about non-related topics).

I firstly briefed him on what my inquiry is about them moved onto a very informal approach on the interview, explaining to him how his answering should have been as free as possible, not feeling restricted and leading towards whatever he felt the need to perfuse on.

Why did I interview him? What's the link with my inquiry?

I was interested to see how an Italian professional perceive the artistic business nowadays and especially compare the differences between the Italian panorama and the British one. (one I come from, one I want to work on now).

His knowledge on Musical and the American/English culture of it made sense to interview him as he had a good view of the origins of Musical in particular and its landing in Italy effects.

How I managed the data re-collection? 

I thought of re-writing on my diary all the points that were of most interest and that linked with my inquiry, also description of him that makes more clarity when reading (gives an idea of where he comes from and how knowledgeable he is); then organized them in sections in order to reproduced them on my blog as clearly as possible for the reader (tip I got from the last Writing Workshop I attended).

Findings:

He starts his passion for Musical after the production of Cats reaches Italy years ago. He applauds the 'Stanislavsky system' that proclaims the emotions and its realism (Bassani, 2012) and is a progression of techniques used to train actors to draw believable emotions to their performances (Wikipedia, 2012) and rejects the so far mostly used Brechtian method, where a play should not cause the spectator to identify emotionally with the characters or action before him or her, but should instead provoke rational self-reflection and a critical view of the action on the stage (Wikipedia, 2012).

Based on this belief he also starts running small productions of Musicals and Theatrical concerts.

When I asked him what is/are the characteristic/s that a  performer should have nowadays for him, he answered a natural gift and talent for sure, technic, the skill to choose who teaches us and what (not to waste time and energy in the wrong training), the awareness of our limits (strengths and weaknesses) and, most of all a strong sensibility and the ability of get moved and dream to be able to "touch" the audience.

On singing and acting the talent can prevail the technic but on dance he believes that a strong technicality is essential.

He stressed on how in Italy is missing the teaching of "how to live the character" on stage, which is missing from the teachers in the first place.

He links this un-preparation to the large unsuccessful productions that are happening in Italy, due to the standardized preparation that the performers have. Good singers and dancers but that cannot portray the character and act within the song/movements.

So far I understood that more or less the same features and characteristics are asked in Italy as well as here in the Uk. Probably the stress he has on "what teacher to pick and to learn what" has more to do with the limits that training in Italy has; here (UK) you can take a single class and decide where to keep up with your training, in Italy this concept is still not largely available and we return on the factor of being lucky enough to get trained where there are 'good teachers', a subject that I already discussed with in a previous Focus Group with 3 professionals (2 of them where Italian).

He carries on stressing how getting trained in different methodologies creates a better performer to be able to have more knowledge and tools to use in an artistic life.

Italy is developed in Opera, Commedia, Prose, etc..all styles inappropriate to Musical, that's why the artistic professional outlook is still poor.

There are full productions that are based only on singing/ acting rather than dancing and here is where Italy is weak.

Here is where I can see how strongly difficult the introduction of the Musical culture in Italy can be compromised until the training doesn't change methodology. Also the existing little culture of it keeps pushing famous TV figures into the shows to make audience. This has been used in the UK too though, for the past 10 years or so CHICAGO the Musical in London has starred famous UK and American actresses/actors for the principal roles of Roxie Hart, Billy, Velma and 'Mama'...to name few, Ugly Betty's star America Ferrera recently in the show, Ashlee Simpson, Denise Van Outen, American actress's Brooke Shield and Bonnie Langford among others.  So this isn't only happening in Italy, although we should analyze on what scale and how often this is happening here compared to Italy...

On my question What he suggest as skills to keep up as an artist and what he expects to see in a performer auditioning for one of his shows, he answered  EMOTIONS, so for sure the natural talent that he can see coming put. Although, this is a very romantic and objective first answer, he then added that in Italy he sees very talented singers that would be great for a record labels but not for a live show as emotions are rarely portrayed. He prefers the America/English structuring of a musical show, where the Stanislavsky method is favorite, where the voice expresses what the character feels on that moment (A good performer delivers what feels whitin the character and not to show off its vocal abilities).

Another skill he recommends is to be up to date with the latest productions and the teams that put them up. Having a personal opinion on what works and what doesn't and why, gives you a good preparation and knowledge on the business.

Also, for him, working on how to express themselves in every discipline, whether it is singing acting or dancing is fundamental.

Constantly train memory and speed of reaction and learning. Performers with these skills are strongly preferred from casting directors nowadays as long rehearsals can be time consuming as well as a waste of money, two things not much available in the business these days.  

Be available to be part of minor productions to keep in touch with reality, as long as they have something you can take home, it's not worth to dis-learn something.

When I asked him to describe for him the differences between the Italian's situations in Musicals compared to the UK, obviously I didn't mean if Italy is at the same level, we all know that it's not part of the culture and that here is an extremely important facet of the art. What I was curious to know was how the introduction of the musical culture in Italy has been welcomed. How it is seen by the Italian audience and what are the problems that may not leave the shows to become more and more happening.


He strongly affirmed that in the first place we have the TV programs and reality that inject the wrong idea of the musical. A stereotype that bases everything on competition, which os obviously and important aspect of the business but it should be lead by showing who is the strongest but should be lead by the willpower of showing a talent, a passion rather than "winning on someone else". Another problem in Italy is that unless you have a big production and funds to put up a show, the minor productions don't have space of development. Italy also fears the coming of foreign productions and these can arise real interests and passion in the Italians's hearts.
He then admits that lighting, sound and live orchestras are the only sectors in which Italy can be equivalent to the UK.

These last informations weren't very clear to me but most of all didn't have a real connection with my inquiry, they could help to give me a overall picture but I have to admit this was the case where email interviewing creates problems leading the interviewee towards un-related topics.

I decided after this interview to re-interview the same person via Skype (he managed to create an account) so that I can focus more on the matters that he touched that were of most relevance for my inquiry.
Overall I did receive a good amount of qualitative data which I can evaluate in my findings and add them into my reflection; it was interesting for me to understand how the "performer" is perceived abroad and especially in the country I'm originally from.