When I was cast as Greta Ohlsson I was very intimidated by the role because of the emotional and mental energy that the part required in these high-stakes circumstances and how openly religious she is since I myself am not very religious, however, I was excited by these challenges all the same and saw them as opportunities to grow in my preparation. In my previous experiences with preparing for a role, I completed all the work but would end up in a cycle of second-guessing my interpretation of the character. I would deliberate whether or not the circumstances I am building and the choices I am making to the point where it would impede my process rather than aid it. In approaching this work, it was a goal of mine to take the process into my own hands and be more confident in the analysis and choices I have made. Now at the end of this experience, I can look back and say I have made strides in trusting my work. There was one moment in particular that I continue to think back on as a point of progress for me. On Day 13 of the rehearsal process, the director Marc posed the question “Is she actually religious or is it part of an act to remain unsuspicious?” The evaluation of the character and circumstances I had been doing thus far was built around the idea that Greta is religious. I could feel myself beginning to panic that I had been making the wrong choices and that Marc was right when he said it might be more interesting to play. After going through my work and the script again for textual evidence of whether or not she was lying, I was still incredibly attached to the idea that it was not a performance but in fact, a woman with religious values and beliefs that had been tested by the murder of Daisy Armstrong, the deaths that followed, and the murderer Bruno Cassetti getting away with it. I found this to be more interesting and the research I had done, textual evidence, and my own life experiences supported that idea. Previously in other acting experiences, I would have taken on the idea that it is part of an act and begun to redo my work. This time I took a breath, looked back over the work I had done, and thought about the character I wanted to bring to life. This was a huge moment for me in taking ownership of my work and I am extremely proud of myself for that and also the character I managed to create. That being said, I still believe second-guessing and reevaluating when new information is given is extremely important and something I could apply more to building my objectives and actions. I tend to close myself off to possible objectives or actions quite early in the rehearsal process and although I feel I explored a wide variety of actions more than I typically have done, I think I could have explored further, even actions or objectives that I might not think totally align but through exploration might be proven otherwise.
I wanted to make Greta Ohlsson a fully fleshed-out character facing real problems and not just having her as a laugh for the audience because she only ever talks about religion and babies in Africa, which is what I interpreted Ken Ludwig to be trying to do based on the difference between Greta in the book and Greta in the play. I think I successfully achieved that through my work and balance that with that still emerged because of the circumstances and intentions I brought to life. I became very attached to Greta Ohlsson throughout this process. If you asked me if I could play Greta Ohlsson after I read the play for the first time, I would have said no because I saw very few similarities between us, and what the part demanded I thought was a challenge I was not quite ready for. However, I am incredibly grateful that I had the opportunity to bring this character and her story to life. The role has taught me that I can work through challenges and that I can find myself in characters that I never would have thought I related to. It also has made me a better person by reflecting more deeply on my own life experiences and finding a new connection and understanding of religion.