Gee folks, I was hoping more would see the great hope in that discovery of how the ordinary can become legendary when common sense and a willingness to give are left to operate in a system with some free energy (the idealism and technology of Oz in this case).

Well, Jonathan, all I can say is that seeing hope in that final scene requires the imagination to take the story and relate it to our everyday life.

No different than the legends, parables, myths, fairy tales, nursery rhymes, and all the other forms of storytelling that the human race has had since very early days: a way of understanding, and learning, and surviving.

True. Even as a child I only wished the Lion would stop being such a wimpy coward, the tin man, even I could see, already had a heart, what was the Scarecrow's problem as I forget, Dorothy was pretty hot with the red slippers, and at the end of any rainbow within the story a real life wizard would of been acceptable to me. Una Maravilla! But I suppose then the story's intent and message would of never been born and enjoyed by millions since.

I don't think I was able to identify with much of the character's flaws and pursuits. This desite being a fanatical underdog story collector but their all human and the stories are true.

I like the wizard within those characters though. And I like mine too.

If Big Daddy Cool's storyline takes us through a brief journey leading up to a great ending it would be great if the audience took it as such.

Oh man did you miss out. The real Professor was a million times more interesting than the percieved wizard. I wish he hadn't bothered with the fascade'.

Man great stuff here.

Here is a little more on my specific theatrical problem.

For the last 5-6 years I have performed exclusively as Big Daddy Cool in two different shows: Swingin' At The Roxy and Swing Magic.

SATR is a full blown book musical with multiple story lines. It is a show about the characters and conflicts at Club Roxy. It has been hugely successful and accepted as what it is - a theatrical work. it has even been optioned by a team of Broadway producers to be further developed.

Swing Magic was my solution to the obnoxious costs of a 13 cast member touring theatrical production. I extracted only BDC's story and it became a tight 90 minute music, magic, and dance revue starring BDC & The Swing Kittens. Again, huge success.

Most recently, mostly out of a need to do something creatively fresh for me without forgetting who brought me to the dance, I have begun developing different material as myself and as different characters. Different from BDC - Uncle Eddie Sparks, and Johnny Beyond the beatnik magician. Each of the characters share a common trait in that they are all completely different pieces of me.

So, I've been experimenting to find out what the best formula is. I want to present a full evening show that showcases my abilities as an actor, singer and magician. But so far in my trials I am noticing that when I appear as myself first, then morph into different characters, by the time I become BDC, the response is not near as strong to the material as it has been in the past when it was a stand alone piece.

I am not not cool, or funny or witty. BDC is. To the Nth degree. But I theorize that because the audience already knows that John is a goof, that "The Cool One" can't possibly be cool. He's just John in a suit.

So my idea is to craft a show that introduces BDC's Swing Magic first. An abreviated (30-45 minutes) version of Swing Magic would be the majority of Act I. After they've been completely won over, and after intermission the audience is introduced to John, and then subsequently to various other characters living in my mind...

So, now do you see how the allusion to OZ plays into this? If Dorothy knew that OZ was really just Prof. Marvel, would she have bought OZ?

I'm with magicalaurie on this one. I'm not saying it's not possible to create a show where you transition through multiple characters, but BDC risks becoming "just another character" rather than the central character, thus the character is weakened overall.

I saw you as BDC in Reno last year (dead mic and all). He's quite a character in his own right.

You might be able to craft several different shows, but I wouldn't include BDC in the "ensemble" cast.

An entertainer realy must obey the will of the people to be successful. Try to pinpoint what it is they have a problem with and fix it, but when you get right down to it, it's a crap shoot, isn't it?

He was looking for a brain, Randy. He might have been my fave.

One of the most magical evenings I have ever had didn't have a single magic trick in it. It was Whoopi Goldberg's first one-woman show. She started as herself and showed herself playing several different characters and even told about how she developed these characters.

The one that really got to me was the woman with Cereberal Palsy who showed her true inner self and became a "fully functional person" by acting out her inner beliefs and then, slowly, sank back into the semi-comatose state she started in.

But Whoopi STARTED and FINISHED as Whoopi.

She talked about starting as a street person, about her fight with drugs and booze and gangs and all of that and how she had met and knew each of these characters and how the show was a tribute to them as well as part of her way of pulling herself out of herself.

And, at the end of the show, you saw Whoopi not as the person she was at the start, even though she stood, walked, talked and moved in EXACTLY the SAME WAY tat she had at the opening, but you saw a Whoopi through changed eyes - YOUR OWN EYES.

One of the most magical evenings of my life and not a magic trick in it - or, maybe, the whole evening was magic, but there still was not a single trick in it.

And from that, perhaps we, as magicians, can learn.

One whole helluva lot.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.

Given: BDC stands alone. Think about this one a while.

You have two choices.

A... Just play BDC. BDC works. Don't fix what ain't broken, daddio. Ya ought not mess with what don't need messin' with.

B... Rework your evolution into BDC. My gut feeling guess, without knowing the script or anything else about your other characters that you've mentioned, it that this evolution into BDC isn't clear at all to your audience, or else it is either too contrived or somehow way over their heads. Therefore, it isn't important to them.

Think Superman. We all know Clark Kent is Superman, yet he isn't Superman right at the beginning. He evolves into Superman, and we get to witness his evolution step by step. All along the whole path, young Clark does things that foreshadow the great Superman. And we audience members get to see the foreshadowings, and we thrill at them because we know the final result. When he finally becomes Superman for the first time, we cheer out loud because on the inside we are close to tears.

The big thing here is that we already know that young Clark will become Superman, and that knowledge helps thrill us when we see its foreshadowing.

Is this similar to your story?

Okay, John, I (think) I see where you're coming from.

Suggestion: Look at Jackie Gleason and Red Skelton. Both of them introduced characters into their TV shows that became real persons, even if they were just Jackie or Red with makeup on. If I remember correctly (and I was a kid at the time), the whole schtick was in how Jackie and Red led their audiences into "seeing" these characters "appear" on screen, even if we knew they were Jackie and Red.

I don't have a clue where you could find tapes of their TV shows, but I bet they would be useful to you.

Best.

Whoopi Goldberg's Fontaine is one of my models as well as Lily Tomlin. The suggestion to check out Jackie Gleason & Red Skelton are excellent too!

Since first posting this I am now leaning two directions- Since Uncle Eddie & Johnny Beyond are more minor characters in comparison to the volume of material for BDC, I am contemplating excluding BDC from the ensemble and keeping him completely separate unto himself.

OR, going the Andy Kaufman route and so completely separating each character that the audience is actually in doubt as to whether they are the same person or really completely different people. "Is he crazy? or are all these guys different people?"

Just some thoughts...

Another thought - Red Skelton once did a piece on his show where he was sitting at a "mirror" - really a frame - and in about six wipes of his fingers, put on his clown makeup as a clown, all the while talking about what it IS to BE a clown.

At the end of the monologue, he WAS the clown - silent, sad, funny, poignant and most emphatically NOT Red Skelton.

Tackling something like this might work for you as well.

Just a thought. And I have to treat thoughts kindly as they are in a hostile environment - my head...!

Lee Darrow, C.H.

Know your type and that's half the battle. Cary Grant, Steve McQueen and Humphry Bogart played pretty much the same persona because the studio didn't think the public would want them any other way. It's rumored that Steve McQueen's best performance is locked away in a vault, because he'd gained forty pounds and the studio didn't think it helped to sell the next picture.
Whereas, Brando (along with several other wonderful character actors) was expected to be the person on the page.

Kregg,
That's not the battle for me at all. I am an expert at creating characters, but this application of playing multiple characters in one show is new for me. So my battle is how to do it for the maximum effect.

A friend of mine had a one woman show, in which she recalled roles played over the years. She dug through wardrobe trunks filled with wigs, costumes, scrapbooks, etc..., This allowed her up front transitions into old characters. A strong and clever show.

This would be assuming it works in the first place. Some examples have been given of famous characters that were not to be accepted in any other shape or manner. You do work up to and end as the Tower of Power if I've read this right.

You've stated a marginal acceptance of the developmental presentation of the BDC character. But they seem to love him as the beginning and end of his presentations.

Your exploration of other characters is fine but some characters and acts stand best alone. I say this even without having seen the character.

Randy has a good point. I have never seen your character, either, so I hesitate to talk too much. I suspect the BDC is your biggest and favored character--a character with your best traits writ really big. This bigger than life character is the you that the audience and you would like to be.

Remember that Superman was the real. Clark Kent was the fake. Superman only pretended to have the personality of a dweeb to play Clark. Which one of you would you like in your fantasy to be real--you or BDC? You can play it either way. It is a show.

Maybe he needs to be the star from the beginning to the end, introducing the other characters, including your original self--someone BDC actually likes but from whom he is clearly more evolved. Maybe this would be more a statement that can leave the audience with their illusions intact and still reveal "the man behind the curtain."

What I am saying is that you can portray both characters, yourself and BDC. But you can't both be the star of the show. It may be hard to top BDC. You may not want to have to follow him with your own personality. None of this is real. It is a play.

You can write it really Twilight Zone if you want. Are you dreaming up BDC or is he dreaming you up?

It's not a matter of what the audience prefers, it is a matter of scripting. Don't try to outperform a character like BDC unless you can steal the show from him with an even bigger character.

Character changes need a strong context for the audience to follow. I think perhaps you are breaking their suspension of disbelief at some point or not getting it in the first place.

I've just finished working on the season of "Importance of Being Earnest" by Ridiculusmus, where just 2 guys play all the characters, either in costume or at one point with puppets. Because most audiences know the play and understand what to expect story wise they can follow and appreciate the mad pace of changing characters. It's hilarious. The reason it works is that at no point do the actors let their own personality through, they keep solidly in character no matter how ridiculous it seems. They also have a strong base to work from, I don't think it could work if it were an unknown original script. Changing characters obviously can work, and work well.

Whit,

I think you just hit the nail on the head! And I think you just help me make a decision. Of course this can and may change a year from now, but I think I will keep him completely separate from me and the rest of the characters I am portray. There will be two shows - Larger Than Life starring John Pyka (who also briefly portrays Uncle Eddie and Johnny Beyond) and Swing Magic starring Big Daddy Cool & The Swing Kittens. This will solve the problem completely and may create an interesting marketing opportunity...