1. My name is James Anthony Zoccoli. People call me JAZ. My formal introduction to theatre came my Junior year of high school. Before I got up on my feet with a script, I thought Shakespeare was stupid. It was also during that time that I decided that I wanted to be an actor...&, more importantly, to be a member of a theatre company. Ten years after that, I walked into Strawdog. Damn near a decade later, I'm still hangin' around. The first play I did here was actually the company's first foray into the world of Shakespeare. We did it good then & we aim to do it even better now. In addition to my exploits on stage, I make what might be called art, write what might be called poetry & have worked in commercials, films & radio. Right now, my primary focus is my voice-over career & writing a solo performance piece. I drink too much coffee.
2. The character that I play in "Richard the Third" is Henry Stafford, the Duke of Buckingham. In the play, he is the right-hand man of the wicked king & is greatly responsible for both the rise & fall of Richard III. In real life, both his father & grandfather were Dukes who sided with the House of Lancaster during the War of the Roses. That fact would have put Buckingham at odds with his cousins Richard, Clarence & Edward, the descendants of York, but his marriage to Catherine Woodville, changed that. You see, Catherine's sister, Elizabeth, was Queen to Edward IV, the ruler after the dust settled. So, that forced him to befriend those in the court with whom he might have otherwise been enemies...& vice-versa. Which is, perhaps, where his diplomatic skills were developed. It has been documented that, due to his lineage (three of four of his grandparents were descended from Edward III), Buckingham may have actually had an arguable claim to the throne himself. This is particularly interesting because there is little evidence to which one can point in the play that explains why Buckingham would be so eager to assist Richard in his ascension by deceiving the people of England & killing innocent men, women & children to whom he was, in fact, related. With that in mind, there is a case to be made for the idea that (secretly) Buckingham was doing a lot of the dirty work & letting Richard take the blame for it, so that once all of the other heirs were removed, he could take advantage of the decimated house of York & use his favor in the public eye to make his move for power. Either that, or he just really wanted to help his Cousin Richard get revenge for all those years of getting picked on by the other kids. Maybe? Maybe.
3. James & Buckingham only intersect at a few fine points. Overall, though, we are quite different. Buckingham makes & breaks political alliances, arranges military maneuvers, deceives the public & puts people to death in the name of attaining a monarchy. I work in the not-for-profit sector & my greatest territorial ambition is to own my own home. So, the parallels are rather few. But, as with any play, there is plenty more to the story than meets the eye. Despite his double-dealing deception, from the clues in the text Buckingham seems to be equal parts empathy and apathy, which are points on the compass I find myself vascillating between, too. I am earnestly empathetic (to a fault, in fact) & always have been, but, at this point in my life, I am also jaded enough to know that there are moments when no amount of compassion matters. This must come into play often for politicians...as it does for physicians, the police & plenty of other people in authority. As an actor, one absolutely has to be opportunistic, which is a trait Buckingham embodies classically. So we got that one in common. He is also a classic illustration of a diplomat. Which is definitely a characteristic of mine as well. (Although, he takes the diplomacy to a level of...could you call it sophistication? Yeah. In fact, Buckingham is sophisticated in the truest sense of the word - downright duplicitous, even.) In addition, Buckingham & I are both pretty damn cool. Ask anybody who knows me, one thing they would probably all say is that I stay sane in crazy circumstances. (Which certainly helps in the world of theatre.) I mean, no matter how horribly awry their plan goes, Buckingham seems to be able to keep a smooth demeanor. I got it like that, too. What else? Oh, interestingly enough, we both happen to be Virgos. So, that's neat. I dunno what it means or how I can incorporate it into my performance, but it's neat nonetheless.
4. The most exciting thing about doing Shakespeare is the also the most dreadful thing about doing Shakespeare. It is the challenge of bringing something new to (or should I say 'out of'?) a text that is so familiar (or, depending on the play, so arcane) & is written in language so heightened (&, of course, antiquated). My goal is always to do something that nobody has ever done before with that text or to reveal something about the character that has (somehow) gone overlooked. Failing that, to incorporate something completely random & anomalous just for my own edification can be rewarding, too. As reverent as I am toward the works of the Bard, I can be equally cavalier when it comes right down to it because enjoying my experience with living in a character is just as important as the life the character was intended to live by the playwright. But, even more important that how I feel or how the playwright felt, to me creating a character with whom the audience will enjoy their experience is key & I'll do whatever I can to make the most of it. This happens to be the ninth production that I have worked on using various permutations of the Folio Technique for approaching the text, which, of course, treat the original printings of Shakespeare's plays with a great reverence & give the capitalizations & (supposedly intentional) misspellings in those first published scripts a tremendous significance to the actor. This approach is another mixed bag for me. It is lovely to think that a playwright could have that kind of foresight & develop a shorthand to assist his actors. It is loathesome, at times, to have to justify your rhythms & pronounciations to the pen of a long-dead poet. However, more often than not, though, his acting cues & emotional clues are amazing, his vision of his characters is undeniably clear & his ability to tell a story with the highest stakes imaginable (as ridiculous as they may sometimes be) is uncanny...& that's my two cents. Thanks for askin'.
2. The character that I play in "Richard the Third" is Henry Stafford, the Duke of Buckingham. In the play, he is the right-hand man of the wicked king & is greatly responsible for both the rise & fall of Richard III. In real life, both his father & grandfather were Dukes who sided with the House of Lancaster during the War of the Roses. That fact would have put Buckingham at odds with his cousins Richard, Clarence & Edward, the descendants of York, but his marriage to Catherine Woodville, changed that. You see, Catherine's sister, Elizabeth, was Queen to Edward IV, the ruler after the dust settled. So, that forced him to befriend those in the court with whom he might have otherwise been enemies...& vice-versa. Which is, perhaps, where his diplomatic skills were developed. It has been documented that, due to his lineage (three of four of his grandparents were descended from Edward III), Buckingham may have actually had an arguable claim to the throne himself. This is particularly interesting because there is little evidence to which one can point in the play that explains why Buckingham would be so eager to assist Richard in his ascension by deceiving the people of England & killing innocent men, women & children to whom he was, in fact, related. With that in mind, there is a case to be made for the idea that (secretly) Buckingham was doing a lot of the dirty work & letting Richard take the blame for it, so that once all of the other heirs were removed, he could take advantage of the decimated house of York & use his favor in the public eye to make his move for power. Either that, or he just really wanted to help his Cousin Richard get revenge for all those years of getting picked on by the other kids. Maybe? Maybe.
3. James & Buckingham only intersect at a few fine points. Overall, though, we are quite different. Buckingham makes & breaks political alliances, arranges military maneuvers, deceives the public & puts people to death in the name of attaining a monarchy. I work in the not-for-profit sector & my greatest territorial ambition is to own my own home. So, the parallels are rather few. But, as with any play, there is plenty more to the story than meets the eye. Despite his double-dealing deception, from the clues in the text Buckingham seems to be equal parts empathy and apathy, which are points on the compass I find myself vascillating between, too. I am earnestly empathetic (to a fault, in fact) & always have been, but, at this point in my life, I am also jaded enough to know that there are moments when no amount of compassion matters. This must come into play often for politicians...as it does for physicians, the police & plenty of other people in authority. As an actor, one absolutely has to be opportunistic, which is a trait Buckingham embodies classically. So we got that one in common. He is also a classic illustration of a diplomat. Which is definitely a characteristic of mine as well. (Although, he takes the diplomacy to a level of...could you call it sophistication? Yeah. In fact, Buckingham is sophisticated in the truest sense of the word - downright duplicitous, even.) In addition, Buckingham & I are both pretty damn cool. Ask anybody who knows me, one thing they would probably all say is that I stay sane in crazy circumstances. (Which certainly helps in the world of theatre.) I mean, no matter how horribly awry their plan goes, Buckingham seems to be able to keep a smooth demeanor. I got it like that, too. What else? Oh, interestingly enough, we both happen to be Virgos. So, that's neat. I dunno what it means or how I can incorporate it into my performance, but it's neat nonetheless.
4. The most exciting thing about doing Shakespeare is the also the most dreadful thing about doing Shakespeare. It is the challenge of bringing something new to (or should I say 'out of'?) a text that is so familiar (or, depending on the play, so arcane) & is written in language so heightened (&, of course, antiquated). My goal is always to do something that nobody has ever done before with that text or to reveal something about the character that has (somehow) gone overlooked. Failing that, to incorporate something completely random & anomalous just for my own edification can be rewarding, too. As reverent as I am toward the works of the Bard, I can be equally cavalier when it comes right down to it because enjoying my experience with living in a character is just as important as the life the character was intended to live by the playwright. But, even more important that how I feel or how the playwright felt, to me creating a character with whom the audience will enjoy their experience is key & I'll do whatever I can to make the most of it. This happens to be the ninth production that I have worked on using various permutations of the Folio Technique for approaching the text, which, of course, treat the original printings of Shakespeare's plays with a great reverence & give the capitalizations & (supposedly intentional) misspellings in those first published scripts a tremendous significance to the actor. This approach is another mixed bag for me. It is lovely to think that a playwright could have that kind of foresight & develop a shorthand to assist his actors. It is loathesome, at times, to have to justify your rhythms & pronounciations to the pen of a long-dead poet. However, more often than not, though, his acting cues & emotional clues are amazing, his vision of his characters is undeniably clear & his ability to tell a story with the highest stakes imaginable (as ridiculous as they may sometimes be) is uncanny...& that's my two cents. Thanks for askin'.
2 comments:
Abigail said...
Hi everyone! My name is Abigail and I am a company member at Strawodg, though i'm currently living in Paris. I was wondering if you could post some pictures along with your introductions. When reading about each and everyone of you, i kept wanting to make a visual association. No pressure, and maybe you're not allowed to post pictures, but if you are, i think it would be a nice touch :) Also, not everyone's names show up in the log-on info, so if people can sign their posts too...that could be helpful. Wow, i sound picky! Oh, well. It's been great starting to know you all! Abigail
January 15, 2008 3:13 AM
Hey jaZ!
Reading your post, I found it really interesting how you mentioned that both you and Buckingham are Virgos. This winter I've really been reading up on astrology and have been surprised by how valid some of its theories are. As you may or may not know, Virgo is an earth sign, which means that they are usually grounded or "cool" in tough situations, like you pointed out. Another thing that is interesting is reading how different signs interact with each other. I think it's just one more neat way to explore character and relationships within a play.
Post a Comment