Includes all mimetic performances: scenes from play scripts, mime, improvisation, etc. Subsidiary elements such as music, sets, or costumes may be included to enhance effect, but will not be judged except as a bonus in Complexity. Material performed must have a story line. Original material (by entrant or other) may be used if it is completely authentic in style. Material may be written or extemporaneous; in original language or translation. An entry may be an individual performance or a group scene. A performer in a group scene may have his part judged as an individual performance if he submits individual documentation.

Time limits: 5 minutes for individual; 10 minutes for group.

DOCUMENTATION (0-4 points)

• 0:No actual documentation
• 1:3x5 card with any one of the following: country of origin, period of origin, characteristics of style for that period, reference
• 2:3x5 card with any two of the above
• 3:3x5 card with any three of the above
• 4:3x5 card with all four of the above

• 0:No attempt at anything authentic
• 1:Uses "fourth wall" style and has no props
• 2:No "fourth wall" but has props
• 3:Uses "fourth wall" and has props
• 4:Attempts to involve audience and has essential props

COMPLEXITY (1-5 points) Judged on performance, not script.

• 1:Attempts interpretation without success
• 2:Attempts and somewhat succeeds with interpretation and also shows an attempt to block coherently
• 3:Succeeds in both coherent blocking and interpretation
• 4:As well as #3 above, shows some attempt at dealing with difficulties between play's language and outs by using audience/actor relationship
• 6:Succeeds at #4 above and also tries to use features of language to explain meaning and also uses some symbolic gesture

WORKMANSHIP (1-5 points) Based on acting, pacing, use of props and other actors..

• 1:Needs many cues - performance is flat or cannot finish piece
• 2:Needs few cues - some interpretation is evident
• 3:Needs no prompting and succeeds at level 3 complexity, however pacing and props use are not completely sound
• 4:No prompting, pacing and prop use are successful and level 4 of complexity succeeded.
• 5:Shows success at level 5 complexity

• 1:No characterization or business at least no success at same
• 2:Some characterization but no business
• 3:Some characterization and unsuccessful but evident business
• 4:Some successful characterization and fluent gesture and business
• 5:Completely successful characterization and generally successful props use along with gesture and business
• Successful characterization and props use and gesture and business

• 1:Flatly read, prop use nil
• 2:May read but uses gestures
• 3:Script memorized but still in hand
• 4:Good line reading
• 5:No script and successful communication of scene's meaning with physical movement and props
• 6:Successful communication of script to audience based on their completely appropriate response to scene

Entrant must submit 3 typed copies of documentation at registration; documentation must include script (or plot summary for mime or improvisation).

DOCUMENTATION (0-4 points)

• 0:No documentation or very inaccurate documentation.
• 1:Minimum information (time, place, performing style).
• 2:Cites source of material performed: for non-original material, notes source of text. For original material, notes period sources upon which material is based.
• 3:Same as #2 plus more detail; cites scholarship.
• 4:#3 plus support for all business and general approach to staging. Shows evidence that performer has knowledge of period performance styles.

AUTHENTICITY (0-4 points) Judge authenticity of performance, not script.

• 0:Blatantly modern in some aspect: e.g. material performed, treatment of audience, actor/character relationship, or stage use.
• 1:Period approach to actor/character/audience relationship, but many modern elements; weak visualization of scene from text.
• 2:Period approach with minor inconsistencies.
• 3:No inconsistencies in approach; minor business flaws or mediocre visualization.
• 4:Coherent period approach, plus special features interpreted from text into performance: a complete period visualization from an attentive reading.

COMPLEXITY (1-5 points) Judged on performance, not script.

• 1:Attempts interpretation without success
• 2:Attempts and somewhat succeeds with interpretation and also shows an attempt to block coherently
• 3:Succeeds in both coherent blocking and interpretation
• 4:As well as #3 above, shows some attempt at dealing with difficulties between play's language and outs by using audience/actor relationship
• 5:Succeeds at #4 above and also tries to use features of language to explain meaning and also uses some symbolic gesture

WORKMANSHIP (1-5 points) Based on acting, pacing, use of props and other actors

• 1:Needs many cues - performance is flat or cannot finish piece.
• 2:Needs few cues - some interpretation is evident
• 3:Needs no prompting and succeeds at level 3 complexity, however pacing and props use are not completely sound
• 4:No prompting, pacing and prop use are successful and level 4 of complexity succeeded.
• 5:Shows success at level 5 complexity

• 1:Mostly copied, or a very odd reading.
• 2:Good, solid interpretation, but nothing special added.
• 3:Fresh rendering based on insightful perception of text ant its connotations.
• 4:Period, but original. A new and unusual perception of the author's meaning that convinces you that it is within author's intentions, as well as logical to the period context. For mime and improv, which are based on a situation rather than a script, the perception is of nuances in the situation.

QUALITY (1-8 points)

Evaluate the work as a whole. NOTE: This category is subjective; however, the judge should take into account prior category scores, aesthetic appeal, presentation, intuitive response, and other such items not previously addressed.

Entrant must submit 3 typed copies of documentation at registration; documentation must include script (or plot summary for mime or improvisation).

DOCUMENTATION (0-4 points)

• 0:No documentation or very inaccurate documentation.
• 1:Minimum information (time, place, performing style). Cites source of material performed: for non-original material, notes source of text. For original material, notes period sources upon which material is based.
• 2:Same as #1 plus more detail; cites scholarship.
• 3:#2 plus support for all business and general approach to staging. Shows evidence that performer has knowledge of period performance styles.
• 4:#3, plus documentation of theme communication, blocking, prop use, line reading. Discussion of period actor/playwright/audience relationship.

• 0:Blatantly modern in some aspect: e.g. material performed, treatment of audience, actor/character relationship, or stage use.
• 1:Period approach to actor/character/audience relationship, but many modern elements; weak visualization of scene from text.
• 2:Period approach with minor inconsistencies.
• 3:No inconsistencies in approach; minor business flaws or mediocre visualization.
• 4:Coherent period approach, plus special features interpreted from text into performance: a complete period visualization from an attentive reading.

COMPLEXITY (0-6 points)Rank the ambition of the attempt, NOT the workmanship, on a scale of 0 to 6 based on the following:

• character depth
• line reading for meaning
• blocking
• prop use and business
• theme communication

WORKMANSHIP (0-6 points)Rank the success of the attempt from 0 to 6 considering each of the "required" (not "special") features of Complexity

CREATIVITY (0-4 points)Rate the ability of the actor to bring something fresh to the interpretation WITHOUT resorting to rewriting the text. If you feel actor's interpretation is impossible given the text, do not reward it as "creative." The actor must tread the line between copying a prior performance and overstepping the bounds of interpretation.

• 0:Blatant copy of a prior performance, or hopelessly at variance with text.
• 1:Mostly copied, or a very odd reading.
• 2:Good, solid interpretation, but nothing special added.
• 3:Fresh rendering based on insightful perception of text ant its connotations.
• 4:Period, but original. A new and unusual perception of the author's meaning that convinces you that it is within author's intentions, as well as logical to the period context. For mime and improvisation, which are based on a situation rather than a script, the perception is of nuances in the situation.

Evaluate the work as a whole. NOTE: This category is subjective; however, the judge should take into account prior category scores, aesthetic appeal, presentation, intuitive response, and other such items not previously addressed.