[Flowers for Mara] Family schisms at Gen Con
Emily Care:
Hi there,
At Gen Con, I got the chance to play Seth Ben Ezra's game A Flower for Mara. This game is played in the form of an improv play in four or five acts, greatly influenced by Jeep Form. The story takes place just after the death of a woman, Mara, in a family who was important to all the members, in good ways and difficult. The players act out what happens in the family as everyone tries to come to terms with her loss, what she meant to them and what ways their life and they may now change.
Who and how
In our game, Seth was the Director (the gm essentially) for seven players: myself, Marc, Dre, David, Dave, Tobias and Steve. The characters were Mara's parents (played by Steve and Tobias), her brother, sister, husband and child (Dave, David, Steve and Dre). I played Mara. Not a ghost, but the memories of her in the other characters' minds. The relationships between the family members and mara broke down along generational lines: the players of the parents each chose a Competitive relationship, the siblings and husband, Devoted, and the child was Bitter. Seth, they were chosen after they said the word, did you place them based on it, or had you decided already?
Playing Mara was challenging and amazingly fulfilling. She can speak directly to each character one at a time, when a scene focuses on them. Each Mara is different--reflecting how the character experienced and remembers her. Mara's goal is to be remembered, no matter what. So you can use the characters fears and insecurities, weak spots and warm memories to tie them to her. I said some of the worst things I've ever said in that game. brr.... Hopefully the other players will forgive me some day. :)
Seasons of Grief
The play begins and ends with a speech at the graveside, opening and closing the curtain. Then the first scene took place at the meal following the cermony. The players were just beginning to firm up the relationships between the family members...but, oh, I forgot something very important. We chose how Mara died as a group, and the group agreed to suicide.
Yeah. Intense.
The acts are played out in seasons. We watched the father try to break through the mother's intense self-denial and guilt, though the relief he felt at having Mara gone was biting. Brother and sister struggled with their own grieving, feeling like they were the only ones who loved her: the husband running as hard and as fast from the family and Mara's memory as his feet could take him. The daughter's struggle to come to grips with the loss were heart-rending. I'll never forget the scene at the grave side where Dre had her travel across the country to say good bye ("my therapist told me I should come here"), which she did--but held on to the flower of her mother's memory even after the scene.
Letting Go
The memory is represented by a real flower that each player holds in their hand until they feel the character is ready to put it down and move on. At the start of the game, each person--director and player of Mara included--write down a real event or memory that they grieve. And when it comes time to put the flower down, they share that grief with the group. They can pass on this, by holding on to the flower, but apparently no one has so far. I started, since I played Mara, and shared a memory of a family member passing and having strife rip through the family afterwards. This reverberated through the game in different ways.
This was an amazing game. I'd love to play again, as one of the family members. It was intense and stretching emotionally and narratively. Thanks so much, Seth.
best,
Emily
GreatWolf:
Thanks for writing this up, Emily!
Quote from: Emily Care on August 21, 2008, 11:58:37 AM
The relationships between the family members and mara broke down along generational lines: the players of the parents each chose a Competitive relationship, the siblings and husband, Devoted, and the child was Bitter. Seth, they were chosen after they said the word, did you place them based on it, or had you decided already?
I had decided already. The idea is that the assignment of roles and the choice of relationship type are done blindly and simultaneously. That way, the characters are created by a combination of an objective relationship (e.g. father) assigned by the Director and a subjective relationship (e.g. competitive) chosen by the player.
Quote
Playing Mara was challenging and amazingly fulfilling. She can speak directly to each character one at a time, when a scene focuses on them. Each Mara is different--reflecting how the character experienced and remembers her. Mara's goal is to be remembered, no matter what. So you can use the characters fears and insecurities, weak spots and warm memories to tie them to her. I said some of the worst things I've ever said in that game. brr.... Hopefully the other players will forgive me some day. :)
I mentioned your comments about this to Gabrielle and Raquel (the other Mara "veterans"), and they said similar things. There's something emotionally violent about the role that can be really rather...um...what's a good word? Striking? Cutting? Intense? Something like that....
Like the bit where Thomas broke into the old family home to see where you'd killed yourself, and you scurried into the middle of the floor and sat down like you were in the bathtub. That scene really stands out in my mind.
Quote
Letting Go
The memory is represented by a real flower that each player holds in their hand until they feel the character is ready to put it down and move on. At the start of the game, each person--director and player of Mara included--write down a real event or memory that they grieve. And when it comes time to put the flower down, they share that grief with the group. They can pass on this, by holding on to the flower, but apparently no one has so far. I started, since I played Mara, and shared a memory of a family member passing and having strife rip through the family afterwards. This reverberated through the game in different ways.
I thought that this game was going to be the first where someone actually didn't put down his flower. As it was, Tobias only relinquished his flower at the very last minute, and that almost by accident, it seems. I may be reading into his performance here, but I think that he was just playing out where the character went, as opposed to actively angling for an opportunity to put down his flower. So, when he realized that he had found a place to do it, I think that he was almost as surprised as the rest of us. At least, that's what it looked like from where I was sitting.
Quote
This was an amazing game. I'd love to play again, as one of the family members. It was intense and stretching emotionally and narratively. Thanks so much, Seth.
I was glad to have had the chance to play with you. In particular, I was glad that most of the group took the opportunity to spend time post-game talking about our experience. I really do think that the post-game debrief (or the "after party") is an important part of engaging with the material.
Something in particular that came up during that discussion was the place of laughter in the game. For all that this was an intense game with serious subject material, I also found (once again) that the players could actually laugh and enjoy the experience without disrespecting the material. In some ways, I felt that laughing was required in order to respect the material. This is a significant difference from Swedish-style Jeep, according to Tobias, where such out-of-character interaction is generally frowned upon. But, at least for us, I thought that it created a safe environment, a place where we could interact with some difficult and emotional issues together. And, as a result, I do feel like we were closer to each other as a result of this shared experience.
Crazy, huh?
Steve Segedy:
I found that laughter was a bit of a defense mechanism- many of the situations were intense, and some of the things said demanded a release (maybe even a scream). So sometimes I laughed because I was nervous, and sometimes because people were just cracking me up.
I hadn't read anything about Flowers for Mara before the con, so I wasn't really sure what I was getting into. After we started I thought "damn, this is heavy- do I really want to do this?" But then I remembered that that's how folks initially react to Grey Ranks as well, and I know from experience how much fun that game can be. I stuck it out with, and I'm glad I did.
Seth, I think you said elsewhere that you felt a connection with the other players for the rest of the con. I completely agree. I only knew a few of the folks there when we started, but I feel like I know all of you much better now. Special thanks to Emily for doing such a good job playing Mara!
Emily Care:
Thanks for hanging in there, Steve. I loved what you brought. Your character was such a contrast with the rest, who kept wrangling with one another. And the parallel that you brought in with having been saved from suicidal thoughts by Mara when you got together made her death all the more ironic.
Seth, Gabrielle, Raquel and I should form a club (or support group? :). Really it was an intense and fulfilling experience playing her. There was so much material ready at hand, like the scene in the bath tub. I was so glad I could encourage Dave's character not to end it*, since he had chosen to have a "protective" relationship with Mara, that he protected her. I think it was that scene where I said "I"m your guardian angel." And he said, "No, you're not" and laid down the flower. *chills* In a good way. I still can't believe I actually nudged some characters towards suicide toward the start of the game. Those and some of the things that I said to Tobias as the Mom and Dre as the daughter still make me shudder.
[blockquote]I had decided already. The idea is that the assignment of roles and the choice of relationship type are done blindly and simultaneously. That way, the characters are created by a combination of an objective relationship (e.g. father) assigned by the Director and a subjective relationship (e.g. competitive) chosen by the player.[/blockquote]
This is brilliant. The patterns they formed created a terrible and compelling picture of the family in this set up and it would be completely different each and every time. It makes me want to play again all the more.
Tobias Wrigstad:
Quote
> As it was, Tobias only relinquished his flower at the very last
> minute, and that almost by accident, it seems. I may be reading
> into his performance here, but I think that he was just playing
> out where the character went, as opposed to actively angling for
> an opportunity to put down his flower.
Yep, that's exactly right. I had given up on the way I wanted to
play it (Emily kept making Mara this bitch, see) and so I gave up
on putting it down. Then something that Emily said turned my last
monologue into this "I will sacrifice myself for the sake of your
father, and thus be better than you" thing, after which I realised
that I had finally "won" and overcome, in a very bad way, the
grief. It just didn't feel right for the character to keep lugging
that old flower around after this moment.
Quote
> Something in particular that came up during that discussion was
> the place of laughter in the game. For all that this was an
> intense game with serious subject material, I also found (once
> again) that the players could actually laugh and enjoy the
> experience without disrespecting the material.
Yes, I had the exact same experiences with Doubt. It seems that
when the subject matter is really serious, and not just a serious
story, people do this on/off thing quite naturally.
Quote
> This is a significant difference from Swedish-style Jeep,
> according to Tobias, where such out-of-character interaction is
> generally frowned upon.
No, that's not really right. I was saying that I would have
preferred for there to be less fun stuff and more of the intense
stuff. I would have liked less tension-relief between the hard
parts to really feel them.
I totally agree that laughter has a natural place here -- as the
dual of those other experiences we were searching. I just would
have liked to have less of it.
On the issue of jeepness, we try to set things up so that there is
a minimum of out-of-character interaction, but this does not have
to mean no out-of-character interaction at all. In Doubt, for
example, there is generally quite a lot of it, but we've tried to
keep it down, e.g., by making scene orders and having brain
storming sessions before the game starts.
In the Doubt text, I talk about the play testing where my players
ended up talking a lot out-of-character about how to avoid saying
the wrong to your partner, for example when having an orgasm (tips
included always referring to your partner as sweetie, etc. and not
by their actual names). My realisation as a GM at this point was
that this was part of the game, this was what I wanted in the
game. What I didn't want was e.g., people talking about the
previous scenes ("man that was a lot of fun!"), talking crap ("is
there a game on tonight?"), etc. I think I should not have said
out-of-character, but "out-of-game-focus" or something like that.
In the end, this is a personal preference thing. The
out-of-character thing should really be tied to how I see most
forge games (or worse, like D&D and Vampire) is being played --
people discussing the game rather than playing their characters.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page