Kioskotambo

Description:

This week was KIOSKOTAMBO presentation. I think that there are things in this performance that worked and didn’t work so I’m going to analyze them.

Analysis:

The presentation was well accepted by the audience, so they were enthusiastic with it. People laugh and go to see it on day 2 and 3 after watching the first performance. I think that this was because it is very dynamic and the music also gave joy to the performance. Also because it was a story, so people wanted to know what happens next. It was also something different than usual so people get interested, and because it was talking about the kiosk. The kiosk was something which the audience could connect, they were identified with this and by the laughter in the first day, and they get to protest.

Although there was a good response of the audience I think we fail on “turning the cholito in the inside”. The audience liked the performance but they didn’t get that “cholito” to come out. I think this was due a lack of interaction with the audience, and in the third day when there was more interaction people was more interested in the food that in the performance.

The third day was the one that get the best response with the audience. I think it was because the interaction of it and because of the food. Although many people in the audience were most interested on the food, there were other that didn’t really wanted the food, but wanted to interact with the characters. For example they didn’t wanted cookies, but just a little candy so they get to play with the characters.

Regarding my personal performance, I found that sometimes it was too repetitive, and I know I was an “image” but maybe I could change it and made clearer what this image represent, because it wasn’t very clear what I represent. Also I was many times counting on the others to take me around with the chair, as we rehearsed but in day 2 they didn’t so I felt lost, I didn’t know if I should move my self or should stay in a place with the “image”.  I think this take presence to my character as I was confused and insecure on doing the actions.

Connections:

Paucartambo:

In paucartambo as in the performance people like to interact with the characters and call them so they can play with them. Also in the bosque people get enthusiastic on receiving something, because of the actual fact of receiving than because of what they are receiving. Also between one day and the other in paucartambo the audience after seeing the beginning they are always waiting to see the next performance, but not because there is an story that must be followed but to see the performance and get to this “carnaval” atmosphere.

I think that here the interaction with the audience is better because although it isn’t rehearsed, they have experience on it. They know how to do the jokes and how to approach the audience. Also because the performance is longer, for example in the first day the audience is “afraid” of maqtas and qollas touching them and joking with them, but in the next days the audience claim to interact with them and want them to get carried, “kissed”, hugged, etc.

Reflection:

I think the performance generally was good, but because we didn’t had rehearsed too much and we lacked experience, we relied too much on improvisation, so many times actions were insecure. In paucartambo celebration the different dance groups don’t get to rehearse with the audience, or exactly what they are going to do, but they approach to the audience better than we did, is it because they have experienced this many times? Or is there other reasons too?

Kioskotambo

Description:

Some weaks ago i wrote i blog and i ended with the question of how can the actor adapt to the space.

Analysis:

The actor can adapt to the space with acting. For example in big spaces the actions will be big while in small spaces actions don’t need to be so big. Also exaggeration in needed for big spaces and very clear movements. In a smaller space the actor would need also to be more stationary while in a big space the actor would have to move a lot around space so the space doesn’t “eat” the actor.

Connection:

Paucartambo: The saqras had an open space and for this they had to do big movements as in the roofs they could be lost. The mig movements helped to define the PRESENCE of the actor as they catch more attention.

Analysis:

Another way of adapting to the space is by lighting. Lighting can help to focus something in stage so if the stage is big then a light that focus something will transform the space, only the space where the light is being directed to will be like the new stage. Also the colours will transform space so that it gives the appereance of different hours for example, or something “magical”, or maybe to create an specific mood, the atmosphere (the abstract space) is transformed too.

Connection:

In the poem “theatre” by lila the space was made smaller as there was only one or two actors, the space needed to be smaller to create the effect they wanted and the actions focus on the actors and as there weren’t many scenary props then the space look even bigger.

A Matter of dissection: As there was only a table and a door the space to the center look small but to the sides it look big because the table was at the middle, the actors needed to be near the table but at the sides it was empty. So that the space didn’t look as it wasn’t well balanced the lights help to reduce this space to the sides (like the walls that reduce to the sides in la falsa criada)

La cocina: Here the attention was dragged into the couple by putting in a dim light all the stage but focusing a brighter light only to the couple. Here the space for performance was reduced and give the sensation as this was the only thing happening so it can gives the sensation of intimacy if you focus the light of something.

Analysis:

Props; The use of props, which prop is chosen has to be with the space. A small prop in a small space occupy more space than a small prop in a big space. If there is only a small prop in a big space it doesn’t mean it would not cause any effect or that attention may be lost, but it may be used to be ironic, funny while in a small space a small prop would be use because a big prop in a small space will occupy to much space. So here we can see how the props, their meaning can change depending on the space, it can make the use of the props sometimes ironic.

The position of the audience. The position in the audience will give different relationship between the actors and the audience. The position will have on affect then in the use of space.

Connections:

Hebras: The position of the audience makes the space smaller as is surrounding so that the space where the actors are is between the audience. You can see as an audience more audience too. The position also stablish a connection not between the actions but it gives PRESENCE to the audience to, it helps to find and have that presence as an audience too.

Reflections:

The space can be adapted in many ways but each way will affect differently. Maybe psicological as maybe fisical, putting more or less focus on something. The presence is something that we can see directly linked to the use of the space, but how in paucartambo the actors have so many presence. Sometimes is difficult to see the acting because of the other people in the audience trying to push you back but the presence of this actors is given. How?

Analysing the acting

Description:

This week while reflecting on German expressionism we saw that the acting is one of the most important things, the body expression. We went to see “Elektra y Orestes”, and I focused in the acting of the chorus.

Analysis:

The acting in the chorus: The chorus represented the salves, the low social class who worked for Clitemnestra and Egisto.

Body orientation – The chorus mostly faced the audience and this gaved the effect that there where talking to you, as they are the “conscious voice”. When the chorus enters the stage in the first act they do not face the audience, this gave the effect of entering without calling the attention so the stage presence decreased (also because of the lighting). Then sometimes a part of the chorus faced the audience and the others were giving the back, this gave an effect of two choruses, this helped to give dynamism to those big texts.

Postures and displacement – The chorus posture was as if there were pulled downwards, with the head to the floor, this helped to build the character of servants as they looked as tired and miserable. When the chorus spoke this postures where changed, there were more straight and the force was in the foot, as they move and do like dance steps producing sound and rhythm, this increased their stage presence and change the focus of the character from the servant to the conscious voice.

Connections:

Regarding body orientation, it’s very contrasting the use of this in “La Madre” In this case the body orientation made the audience to feel as if the the woman was approaching to other people in the backstage, towards the “scenary” or if looking to the front to the audience, so giving a personal reflection.  This helped to make the play dynamic and so the long texts didn’t get boring (as in Elektra & Orestes maybe because the long texts where repetitive and didn’t add much more interest in the story, there wasn’t “suspension of disbelief”)

Reflexion:

Although the acting was good, the sensations, impulse and movements weren’t felt in the audience, as if there was no connection with the audience. Was this because the long texts? Or can a long text play can still work nowadays? Maybe long texts can still hook up the audience if found a good game, but this performance played with the chorus, and if this was its game, although was good didn’t hook up the audience. 

Analysis main square paucartambo

Description:

In my research I lack analysis and was most description. When I read this I found that in the part where I talked about the main square there was many things I could reflect on and I didn’t. Why is staged different “scenes” in the main square? What does this mean? What facilities or difficulties this brings?

Analysis:

Why is staged different “scenes” in the main square? What does this mean?

In the main square we can find staged the bosque, qonoy and guerrilla. We can say that the main square is the most important place in the town. Is where all the streets come together so then what is staged here can show a place where it comes together the roads from the mountains and the roads from the jungle.

What facilities or difficulties this brings?

Most of the actions in Paucartambo celebrity are performed in the streets and the audience places on the sidewalk but in the main square there is the facility for the audience to be INSIDE the mains quare so there is more space for the audience and the audience can stay in a same place instead of going around the town in the streets. It gives facility to see the performance.

In the contrary as there is more audience and the main square is bigger is more difficult to control the audience and this is why fire is used, also there are more maqtas when the performance is staged in the main square as there are more people in the audience. Also the actions are repeated around the main square, so all the audience can see the actions but this is not a problem as the actions are very repetitive.

Analysis:

I wonder if there is another meaning for the use of fire apart of opening up the space for performance, it can be that to give the carnival atmosphere of joy, but does it represent something?

How can the space be adapted?

Description:

Some weaks ago i wrote i blog and i ended with the question of how can the actor adapt to the space.

Analysis:

The actor can adapt to the space with acting. For example in big spaces the actions will be big while in small spaces actions don’t need to be so big. Also exaggeration in needed for big spaces and very clear movements. In a smaller space the actor would need also to be more stationary while in a big space the actor would have to move a lot around space so the space doesn’t “eat” the actor.

Connection:

Paucartambo: The saqras had an open space and for this they had to do big movements as in the roofs they could be lost. The mig movements helped to define the PRESENCE of the actor as they catch more attention.

Analysis:

Another way of adapting to the space is by lighting. Lighting can help to focus something in stage so if the stage is big then a light that focus something will transform the space, only the space where the light is being directed to will be like the new stage. Also the colours will transform space so that it gives the appereance of different hours for example, or something “magical”, or maybe to create an specific mood, the atmosphere (the abstract space) is transformed too.

Connection:

In the poem “theatre” by lila the space was made smaller as there was only one or two actors, the space needed to be smaller to create the effect they wanted and the actions focus on the actors and as there weren’t many scenary props then the space look even bigger.

A Matter of dissection: As there was only a table and a door the space to the center look small but to the sides it look big because the table was at the middle, the actors needed to be near the table but at the sides it was empty. So that the space didn’t look as it wasn’t well balanced the lights help to reduce this space to the sides (like the walls that reduce to the sides in la falsa criada)

La cocina: Here the attention was dragged into the couple by putting in a dim light all the stage but focusing a brighter light only to the couple. Here the space for performance was reduced and give the sensation as this was the only thing happening so it can gives the sensation of intimacy if you focus the light of something.

Analysis:

Props; The use of props, which prop is chosen has to be with the space. A small prop in a small space occupy more space than a small prop in a big space. If there is only a small prop in a big space it doesn’t mean it would not cause any effect or that attention may be lost, but it may be used to be ironic, funny while in a small space a small prop would be use because a big prop in a small space will occupy to much space. So here we can see how the props, their meaning can change depending on the space, it can make the use of the props sometimes ironic.

The position of the audience. The position in the audience will give different relationship between the actors and the audience. The position will have on affect then in the use of space.

Connections:

Hebras: The position of the audience makes the space smaller as is surrounding so that the space where the actors are is between the audience. You can see as an audience more audience too. The position also stablish a connection not between the actions but it gives PRESENCE to the audience to, it helps to find and have that presence as an audience too.

Reflections:

The space can be adapted in many ways but each way will affect differently. Maybe psicological as maybe fisical, putting more or less focus on something. The presence is something that we can see directly linked to the use of the space, but how in paucartambo the actors have so many presence. Sometimes is difficult to see the acting because of the other people in the audience trying to push you back but the presence of this actors is given. How?

“To what extent do the arts help us to see the world with new eyes”

Description:

This week i was Reading the unit of perception in the TOK book, and i arrive to the question “To what extent do the arts help us to see the world with new eyes”

Analysis:

Theatre has a social/ritual function and there is always a representation of something more. Theatre can represent something in reality or our daily lives without showing something new but saying it in a different way. 

In history theatre has helped to express and entertain so for example irony in theatre has helped to make fun of something and see it with “new eyes” as it helps to criticize.

Many times there is a message behind something we see and we think it’s only for entertainment, but what theatre focus is more on how we say something rather than what we say. The form is more important that the content I think.

For example in the schools plays or the one act plays the story is pretty simple and we don’t focus on the message we want to transmit but we focus on the game, on the structure, and other theatre techniques and what is going to see good, what is going to catch the audience attention rather that what are they going to learn, because we can have a simple story as the one in “matter of dissection” and we can develop this and end up being a good play without seeing something with “new eyes”.

Connections:

Paucartambo: In Andean theatre we have seen that irony is used to make fun of authorities mainly. This was a different view of the authorities as in those times the authorities (wayras), the conquers were the ones that where “right” and they were the ones that rule so the takis help to show them in a different way, so with new eyes.

Interruptor: In this play we can see how technology instead of making people to get together to get further apart. This is done in a comic way using irony again. Here we can see technology with new eyes, not as we normally do and that we say that technology helps for different relationships but makes us loose those relationships.

Yuyachkani: This theatre group works a lot with seeing the world with “new eyes”. It shows as different side. For example in “los musicos ambulantes” we can see how the theme of discrimination is tackled. Also in “sin título – técnica mixta” we can notice how Fujimori is not represented as the one who helped to destroy the terrorism in Peru, as a hero, but he is represented as someone that didn’t respect the human rights and didn’t accept his guilt. So here we can see how theatre helps to see things with “new eyes”

Reflection:

There are many critics to the world we live on, to our authorities and to ourselves, but we can also see that the focus on theatre is the form rather than the content. In theatre does showing something with “new eyes” is rather a possibility than the purpose? So rather than theatre purpose to be: “showing something with new eyes”, I think the purpose of theatre is entertain. But as we aren’t showing ourselves in stage, we don’t see the actor but we see the character in stage is easier to criticize and as theatre gives the possibility to catch the audience attention it is also a good opportunity to show another view of something.

the use of the space

Description:

This week we discuss about Paucartambo PPP. The main discussion we had was about the space.

Analysis:

As an Andean theatre convention the space would be open. In paucartambo the celebration takes place in a whole city and each “scene” adapts to different parts of the town. The main difference that made this impossible to us was because we way less actors. Only 7. How many people act makes a difference on how much space and how would the space will be used. The function of the space is the function each actor gives to it. The magical thing about theatre is that actors can transform something into another. The same happens with scenary. As the space infront the school theatre is too big the actors would look to small, will be “lost” in the space. The presence of the actor is essential in theatre as without actors there`s no theatre, so what impression would it cause a big space in which the audience can’t find the actors.

The space on the kiosk was different. We had different spaces, the one at the sid of the kiosk in which we could act but what was more interesting was the roof of the first floor, there was space around the kiosk, like roofs in which we could also act. Although this doesn’t look like paucartambo city the thing is transform the space. The infrastructure of this gives the possibility to maintain many of the space conventions. As first we want to “take” the kiosk this would be like a guerrilla and the space gives the possibility of acting in circles, as in a “ring”. This can also be done in this space so that the audience can give a better view. This space makes it possible as it isn’t to big so if actors disperse in this space the actor can have a presence.

The space also makes it possible to do the bosque here. The space around the kiosk, the roof of the first floor could be used for the bosque. It is like a fixed plataform and infront of this the audience would be situated. Infront of this space, in the first floor many people will be present at the time of performance so the “bosque” would have a good response as the audience here could be easily attracted and even more if the space for performance is this one as is a place where usually nothing happens, people haven’t notice.

Connections:

A matter of dissection: The space we used for this place was reduced. It all happened around a table and the table made the space even smaller. What made the space smaller was also the morgue’s door. Another thing that helped was the lights, as it was focused then we could also reduce the space to the sides. This strategies show how space can be modified by how you distribute scenary, so as there were few actors the space could be reduced using this strategies.

La cocina: The space for this play was big, it even had a second floor. The kitchen first floor space was reduced by the tables and other kitchen furniture. This helped to form the feeling of disorder because it made the space to feel like overcrowded. The second floor by the lights was reduced and this had a different atmosphere than in the first floor. This made that the same space have different atmospheres.

Hebras: The performance space for Hebras is round and the audience surrounds as in a ring the space for performance. This play shows us how the actors adapt to the space rather than the space for the actors. The open space without any props required of big movements as in Paucartambo.
La falsa criada: In this play the space was adequated to the actors. I think this was a big problem for the performance as no imagination was left, no creativity all was to concrete. Here we can see how the space was adapted for the performance rather than the performance to the space. I think that this shows how when we leave no chance for the actor to adapt to the space and just adapt the space for everything the actor would need takes out the theatricality, in the way that no room for the audience interpretation is left, also we have to think that theatre is not like a movie, although it can be similar scene changes need that space sometimes remains abstract rather than making it explicit so scene changes would be easier.

Reflection:

The space can be adapted for the actors and the actors can adapt to the space. The space can be adapted by the use of lights, props, furniture, etc. But how can the actor adapt to the space? In Paucartambo we see how the organization the actors have, acting in rows or in circles and doing big body expressions for example, but are there any other techniques?

Also the fact that is better to remain a scenary abstract may help for the performance, but we can't leave things unclear, atleast we need to suggest it so how will this affect the performance? I think that for the kiosk for example we would need it to do it abtract but because of "salim" and the fact that the protest in day 1 with the cartels making reference to the kiosk will help to carify that what the maqtas will rob in our performace will be the kiosk. So if we arent having a concrete kiosk we may have a tent, as in "La Guerrilla" in Paucartambo.

Concept

Description:

This week we started with Paucartambo’s PPP. We started with the analysis of the stimuli and arrive to a concept.

Analysis:

Looking for a stimulus was the first step; we started looking for something that could be analyzed. As we all had different ideas everybody looked his way, but finally we all decided that our concept could be discrimination.

In Paucartambo we saw how the “other” and the “Yo” struggle with each other to finally join. We saw how this problem applies to our world. We wanted that the idea our play was going to be about could relate with the audience. As Paucartambo showed their identity we wanted to show ours, we wanted to show how we are.

We started looking for a problem we could show, what was going to happen in our play. We thought in the struggle for property. In our society we always see problems between two groups because they want to be the owners. We thought that this problem was applied in CONGA for example. We wanted to represent this problem first but it would be trying to change the world, or making them reflect in a theme that for many isn’t important. We wanted to make something that take more part of the identity of the audience, the people from school.  So we started saying that for that the “property” should be the school.

Who is the “yo” who is the “other”. That was our next question. Students and teachers? We thought that the students could fight against the teachers so that they ruled in the school.  We also get to the idea of presenting three parts, as in Paucartambo 3 days and the last one would be  “la guerrilla” that would be when the problem would be resolved. After thinking on this we had our vision.

The students will be studying and the teachers will treat them as how education was before. All the injustices and the “dictatorship” there was. The students will then reveal and take the school. Finally the order would be reestablish but in a more just way.  From this we got to our concept: “Pachakuti: The world upside down.”

This was once again another case in which there wasn’t a fixed order. As the game sometimes comes first this time the vision came before the concept. After arriving to the concept I felt a relive. I think that arriving to the concept is the hardest part. What needs more analysis. Production can take a lot of effort but getting to the concept I think is the more challenging as it has to make since, everything in the play has to go around this. The story, structure, design, etc.  

Connections:

La falsa criada: We could find a concept for this play, and this was evident in the presentation. There wasn’t any coherence between the desing elements, the direction and the acting.

A matter of dissection: The concept for this play was “Live at the center, death at the top” This concept could be only understand by the ones in the group. The idea helped for our vision and later for the presentation, here the concept wasn’t applied much to the design because it was difficult to apply that idea for thing like music, costume or make-up, but we could apply it to the scenery.  How did this worked if the concept wasn’t followed?

Reflections:

A concept is what makes the play coherent, but if a concept isn’t follow then can there still be an order? What I think a matter of dissection followed although the concept wasn’t present in most of the design elements we still made an effort so that the design elements had coherence with each other, a connection between them. The costumes followed for example the color scheme, the music would be the same in the start and at the end of the play. A think that a concept makes easier the coherence inside a play, but if the concept cannot be followed or applied in an specific part of the play then we still have to put order into the play. The order is what gives coherence and so that when you watch the play you don’t feel that what you are seeing have nothing to do with what have you seen before in the play. 

play structure

Description:

This week we discuss about how doing a play review and went over La falsa Criada. When we talked about how to analyze the structure of the play and that this was important to see how the play works this really caught my attention.

Analysis:

In la falsa criada the scenes seem to be short, because of the entries but it also have some long scenes like the first one, or at least it feels long as the actions are slow and without a clear intention. In general La falsa criada short scenes help to give dynamism to the play and this works, because although it doesn’t follow a direction and design concept it at least have rhythm.

In A matter of dissection we divided the play in beats, this made the “scenes” even shorter. The beats were also marked by the exits and enter of a character as each character will change the situation in a way. This really helped to made the play fast and “digestible” because as the situation was always changing and the change of characters was fun we could catch the audience attention. Also it didn’t get boring as short scenes and fast changes help.

Another play would be shadow queendom. This play had longer scenes, this had another effect than the plays above. The long scenes gave the possibility to play with the audience perspective because they needed longer time to realize what character was the audience representing and how they are. Because just knowing the name of the character wasn’t enough but a longer time was needed to show how does this character relate with the other characters and how much information they know. This wouldn’t be able with short scenes as they would not found the “connection” with the character the audience was representing.

Connections:

How long and short scenes are relate to our daily life, we can see that sometimes and hour passes as minutes, or sometimes minutes passes as hours. When there are many changes it would feel as time has passed quickly but if we are doing the same thing without variations it would feel as it is very long. This is how audience sometimes perceives time in plays. A scene may be short, but if things don’t change may seem long. In the other hand a scene may be long, as in shadow queendom, but as new information is given, the space is used in different ways, characters enter and leave, etc., it may seem short.

Conclusion:
How a play is structure sometimes seems not relevant, and we don’t give much focus onto this so later is difficult to analyze as we need to play close attention to decide when a scene starts and ends. Although it seems no relevant how long or short a scene is and what makes it fast or slow may be one of the main reasons of why a play work as this influence if the audience will keep interested or not in the play. So until what extend does the play does the connection with the audience rather than the structure?

One act play!

Introduction:

This week we presented the one act play and then reflected about the process and the final performance.

Analysis:

The process is the background, the other side of the final product, the play. We worked for some weeks on this presentation so at the end everything would be ready. Is amazing to think that everything started from a cloth that look as the ones that “widows” use. Then we developed the idea of a widow and a morgue, it all started from this stimuli. Then we developed the game, this  I think is where most creativity is needed, innovation. We started with the game of being In a row and each side of the actor would be a different character and when the actor would turn, facing the other side then the other character would be presented. We left this idea as the lack of interaction between the characters made it difficult to follow and be interesting for the audience.  The game that is supposed to make the “connection” with the audience was working all the other way around so we changed the game. The game was now to two characters per actor and that the costumes would change for each character. This game has been use in other plays but in another way. The advantage of having used this game before is that we knew it would work.

In the making we realized that the script was too long but without adding nothing to the scene, there were just words without any purpose. The script must be done again. Writing the script again I think it was one of the biggest challenge someone could have as we have never done this before, it was new, and not easy.

Then the characterization I think was what we most worked in more. We had to do two characters so we expore a lot the way of walking, the voice, physical characterization and this for one character needed to be contrasting from the other. The characters needed to be very different so presenting two characters by one actor would work.

The voice is always one of my greater challenges, in this play and in shadow Queendom I had difficulties founding the voice. Although I loved the voice of the grandmother and think that was a great voice I think that the one from the administrator was not good enough. It was new and I found the voice of my character exploring my stimuli for the character but as it wasn’t my voice sometimes I lost it. As voice changes depending in the mood and the administrator had to be mad and then more calmed when I had to perform as I was desperate or mad and shout I think I lost the voice, the type of intonation of my character and when this moments passed and I had to talk calm again it was difficult to return to the voice of the character.

Then in the making what we worked a lot was on the actions, in the rhythm. A play without rhythm and slow gets boring and hard to watch. What I liked to hear after the play was that the audience didn’t want it to be over. This mean that the audience liked to watch it, they enjoy it. One of the main reasons what that things happen fast, the other was the laughter. The rhythm must be always fast, but there needs to be variation between slow ways of talking as the doctor, nurso and fast ways of talking as the grandmother, boy.

The final performance had something that weren’t planned as we could prevent every accident. The funniest accident was that the boob of “nurse” felt. This accident had a very good response from the audience. It was hard not to lose concentration in this moment as it was VERY funny but when you are In character and you know your character wont laugh and get into the mood then is more easily controlled. Stefano at the end said “get me knew implants” this line was clapped by the audience as it was very funny and showed a great management on the character as the response was fast and get within the character personality and the mood of the play.

Connections:

The final performing and the process remind me to the process of making shadow Queendom. We focused in different things and give priority to the use on puppets rather than characterization in this play and this was the main difference of the process of the play and this was showed in the final project.

Although it was different the process followed the same scheme. Stimuli, concept, game, vision, etc. This scheme is what helps to have an order in the process and every previous stage links to the next one and this makes it fluid. When everything was ready to be put on stage was where both processes differ as the priorities changed.

Reflection:

Some time ago I posted “a hole that is never full” this was an entry that talked about how a play had always room for improvement; how we never could say that the play was finished. In this play it was different because although we needed to improve the rhythm I felt that it was finished because of how we managed and knew the play very well, and we also had all the props.

So now I think, can a play be declare finished? Maybe when a play can´t be improved much a play can be said to be finished, when the actors know and manage the play so that they even can do it backwards, when all the props and scenery are ready.  But this doesn’t mean that it cannot be improved.

Play Review - La falsa criada

La Falsa Criada was presented last Tuesday in the theatre of Larcomar. The play consisted of two acts. The plot of the play is about a woman that dresses as a man to see if the man she is going to marry is good enough.

My hypothesis is that characterization helped more than stage elements to perform the women dressed as a man.

To start with I’m going to focus in the physical characterization. This character who dressed as a man had the same costume, until she reveals is a woman, but even before she acts as a woman. In terms of costume it was a feminine but still was from men. This enhanced help with the performance of the woman dressed as a man because the costume was for a man, but it was still feminine. All though this element presents ambiguity it still help because a change of cloth wasn’t needed.

The hair and make-up of the main character was untied and short, and she didn’t used make-up. The physicality wasn’t much developed in this aspect, but still gave the “uni-sex” style so that the character could be seen as woman and man.

Moving more into internal characterization we could start with the way of walking. The walking of the two characters, how they stand up for example was one of the elements that more distinguish the man and the woman character. Anyway, what makes more the difference between them was the voice. The voice for the male character had a lower peach and was lest sweet than the woman voice. This two elements, voice and way of walking was what most distinguish the man and the woman.

Going into stage elements I’m going to start with props. The most important prom for the main character would be the sword. The man was always, as part of the costume even, carrying a sword. This sword although was well used by the character, and show that the woman had a dominance after all with this weapon, give masculinity to the character as the man fights and this is very stereotypic of men, they fight. The fighting with the sword helps trick the other characters in the play to make them believe he is really a man.

Another stage element would be the lights. The most important moment for the lights will be the change, the revelation of the character to a woman. The lights enhance this moment making the difference between the woman and man characters greater. It 3mphasizes the idea the man is just fake.

The music helps to enhance the same moment that the lights, but as the style of the music is not coherent it makes this transformation to loose importance. The music is also used in the play for the beginning and end of the different acts, or played and singed by the “servers”, but this doesn’t help for the performance of the woman dressed as man.

 The scenery situated us in different parts of the town; in the house, in the outsides, etc. This didn’t linked really with the idea of of the woman representing a man, but help more to situate the play.

In conclusion the voice and way of walking is what most construct the character of the woman representing the man. The other stage elements don’t really mark this difference and are either there for other theatrical purposes, as for example entertain or make it fun. 

Concentration

Description:

This week we rehearsed for the one act play, I understood how important concentration in rehearsals is.

Analysis:

Rehearsals require a lot of concentration. Many times actors have problems in life and is difficult to make them away. A character doesn’t have the same feelings than an actor. Although in theatre we SEE the character, and we don’t need their thoughts, if the actor things of something in the moment when is performing the character then all this transfers also in the physicality to the character. The character needs of full concentration to be complete. It’s not just how the character walks, the face expression and the voice. The character lines don’t come out of the bloom, when the character says something is because they have been thinking about, and when the character is in silence they still have a personality and have reactions, which might be not said but thought. These thoughts are the stimuli for the reaction showed in the physicality of the character. How it looks at another character, how his breathing change, how he moves…

This week I, as an actress, felt that concentration was more difficult to achieve that in other opportunities. This is why this week I understood the importance of this. As I couldn’t concentrate I found difficult to find my character when I didn’t said a line, and being in stage saying a line is much easier than being on it without saying something.

Connections:

Many times in school plays as actors aren’t professional and haven’t been trained by a long time, they haven’t developed concentration as professional actors. This I think is the reason that many kids, for example, in Shadow Queendom asked for lines, because they think that if they don’t talk the character they have isn’t important or they cannot develop a character. But the character rather on the lines it says (because that would be literature), relays on the intentions it have and how the actor conveys it to the character.

Reflection:

The intentions of a character comes from the thoughts of the character, and an actor needs to be fully concentrated to think as the character and no longer as the actor, so the intentions the character have don’t show the feelings from the actor, but rather the ones from the character. Now I wonder, until what extent can the actor think as the character, because the director will give you advices and you have to accept them not as the character but as the actor, and it may be the case that you are “in character” and you receive the direction. 

Music for a play....

Description:

My production task for the one act play is music and sound effects. This week I had to do a ppp for this.

Analysis:

The sound and music in a play needs to be coherent with it. You cannot put a track because it sounds good, or choose a certain sound effect because it’s cool. The music and sound has to have coherence with the concept of the play. At the beginning I really didn’t understand how music could follow a concept, but then I understand that different sounds will have different effects, different meanings. The rhythm should also transmit different sensations, and the instruments used also. So then I thought for example in the connections each sound had with the play, and if it didn’t then I looked for something more connected with the play. So then the concept for the play is “death at the center, life at the top”. This concept was difficult to apply it to music so I developed a different concept for the music, “suspense and rhythm” so then the sounds I looked for had to have some suspense, must be creepy… and as the instruments for the autopsy are metallic I developed this to found metallic sounds for the autopsy instruments.

The music for the ritual part is the most difficult for me. I imagine the ritual with “tribal” music, with drums for example, and I found some of this music, this linked to the concept as it has a lot of rhythm and it’s kind of mystical and this creates suspense in a way. The problem I have is that I don’t know if it is justifiable to have this kind of music because the music I had at the beginning is more “classic”, and as the mood in the play, although is black comedy, tends to be “sad” as there is a dead person and we are situated in a morgue I don’t know if its justifiable to use “tribal” music in a part of the play or if it breaks up with the concept and it would sound messy as different genders of music are being used.

Connections:

In the school plays the music used is always the same gender for each play, so for example in shadow queendom it was like classical but for down to earth it was like jazz, the instruments used where also the same.

In hebras for example the music used is played by gitar and although it changes of rhythm it is the same gender.

Reflection:

Although I could found some classical music from the same gender than the other music I propused I think that the tribal music for the ritual gives a different effect so then; can the mix of music genders be justified in a play?

One act play on the make

Description:

This week we start working on the one act play, we had some difficulties and had to change the game and start all again.

Analysis:

A proposal for a game is difficult to find, it must be something interesting and new… The game for the one act play seem to be very interesting, but I had my doubts about it in the beginning because of the limitations it gave, like face expression or not having characters face to face. I thought that as we had the game since the beginning the script could be done in a way that it all fit so the game could work. As we start rehearsing we realized that the game didn’t work, instead of connecting with the audience it create a barrier.

Ideas don’t have limitations but to become something true there are always limits and restrictions. The game as theory sound very good, it gave the possibility of a double character and it sound visually very interesting. The truth wasn’t like that, depending on the position of the audience the two sides of the actor’s face could be seen, but still this wasn’t the major problem. As some actors couldn’t see face to face each other, although they don’t directly talk to each other as there wasn’t a connection between the characters there wasn’t a connection between the audience either. I understood that if in the scene one character shows uninterested on what the other character says and ignore it, so will the audience.

The new game is simpler and this made the play lighter, we could relate each other more directly and this helps to keep a connection with the audience. The next thing we had to change was the script, when I wrote up my scene I stick up with the short lines to create dynamism, but while acting and reading the whole script I found the short lines and a story is not enough in a script. A script needs to have actions, and the big problem is that in the whole script the same actions were repeated. The characters repeated the same lines and didn’t add anything more into the scene. This repeating and repeating made the play boring. At the beginning I thought we had to complicate more the story to have something to tell but while actually improvising with the outline clear I understood that the script doesn’t only show the story, but the personality of each character. Then for the outline and plot of a play can be really simply and still each line of the script adds something as it shows something about the characters, builds up their personality.

Decisions on the game for a play gives the opportunity to explore different possibilities with space, time, characters, the forth wall, etc. but this choices also give limitations.

Doing the ritual scene was great fun. I love how theatrical this is. I think this scene is a great opportunity where I can apply the “segmentation exercises” I learned in the Grotowsky workshops. I think it also gives a great opportunity for the use of the space as different movements like “choreographies” can be made.

Connections:

The limitations the games remind me to the costs of creativity in shadow queendom. Because of the use of puppets and masks we had to face different limitations too, but the limitations we had in shadow queendom as the lack of face expression could be compensated with body expression in case of wearing a mask or with the movements of the body of the puppets and the intentions in the voice.

Reflection:

Short lines make the script work, but what about the long monologues, or the Greek theatre scripts, what makes them work? I think that for Greek theatre the long lines worked because of the audience, the audience as the words where very important, but what about the monologues? May it be because it’s just in a certain moment? And anyways what makes a script with long lines work? Or because of the audience at these times they will not work, as in “Mades Medus”?

Yerma and the game

Description:

This week we went to see “Yerma” a play written by Garcia Lorca, in the theatre AAA, the play had an interesting game, one of the characters, “Yerma”, was represented by three different actresses, sometimes two where in the same time and sometimes one.

Another interesting proposal was the scene when Yerma and Victor have relations and this was represented by still pictures and there was a sound record being played which narrated it.

Analysis:

The game of the play was obvious since the beginning, and I think this was something good because if not it would be very confusing. The game catch up the attention of the audience as there was always one actress being the “strong” image of the character, I mean the one that do the main actions and said the most important. The other two actresses who accompany the first one help the text to rely in the actions, body expression, postures, face expression which they adopted. This technique made the script to be more theatrical as the actions showed what the text meant.  

Some of the parts in the play where very slow and I think this made the audience distract. Maybe in this parts because the script was dense and had a lot of symbolisms the game could be better used. So that the text could be “digested” better the actresses instead of adopting a fixed posture they could mime the text.

The still pictures help to represent in a very “theatrical” way the situation which cannot be put into scene performing the actual action. These technique catch up my intention because the position of the body and the forms the 4 actors create where strange and the attention was caught by the beauty of the different postures and how the body could represent those images but also because of the curiosity to understand this “constructions” with the human body.

The lights in this scene created intimacy but I think there where to dark so the still pictures couldn’t be seen with clarity. The lights are an element in theatre which are to help the performance but if these are use incorrectly this lights will be a barrier, a problem, instead of a helpful element.

Connections:

The game we are developing for the one act play I think helps to catch the attention of the audience, but I think we need to explore this game to be able to look to the advantages this have and in what it could help. The game will be very helpful to represent various characters, but is this all? Is there any other advantage that can be taken from this game? Now that I try to think in one I can’t find one, I think this would be founded during the rehearsals as we explore the game.

The game used in the school play this year help to show the story from different perspectives but it also help to tell a part of the story telling it only to one character so this help the audience to know the story but to keep it hidden to other characters. It also helped to explore the puppets as the difference sizes of puppets would be used depending on the perspective.

The lights used in “La cocina” in some scenes used to focus the important characters but without stopping the actions of the other characters, so in the dim light actions will continue to happen and with a light that was focused to some characters the subplot will be introduced and will give information about the story without stopping the other actions.

Reflection:

A game is there to relate the audience with the play, but when the game doesn’t, it means the game didn’t work? Or was it “abscent” for that moment? The game pruposed for the one act play give us limitations on face expression and also meeting up two characters represented by the same actor, will this create any conflict? Or because the game came first and then the story it will be easy to go beyond this limitations?

ballet de londrina as theatre

Description:

Baller de Londrina! On Thursday we went to see some contemporary dance; a dance group from Londrina did a “contemporary ballet” dance called; “La consagración de la primavera”

Analysis:

The body exploration for this kind of dance was impressive. The control of the center of energy so that movement started from it and so energy could flow through all the different limbs.  Every movement done in the dance had a lot of energy and also different poses like the one in the photo, which shows coordination and balance.

Although this ballet is not theatre, there was something being represented. It was about the sacrifice of a virgin. To transmit this story a lot of body expression was used, but to make it clearer there were other elements which helped.

First the costume; costume was important. The costume for all the dancers was a “nude” translucent skinny full suit. These costumes allow the body to be free to do different movements and be flexible. Also as it was translucent, it showed purity. The ropes which covered the different dancer’s costumes made them eye catching, and the main dancer was covered with more ropes than the rest, this may represent more innocence as she was the virgin who will be sacrificed. The ropes of the main dancer at the end are stained with red representing the blood of the sacrifice, these visual elements helped to make the sacrifice clear and to highlight the main character.  Is costume important in all performances?

Then the sounds made by the stomping of the bodies with the floor and the breathing sounds. The stomping sounds created an aggressive environment in the dance, also it made the audience feel pain, although the dancers where protected with knee protections, the sound made and the movements by themselves made the audience feel uneasy about the pain the actors must have been enduring. The breathing sounds express how exhausted the character being represented by the dancer was. For example the virgin uses breathing sounds to express she was exhausted when the men pull her and chase her, also the breathing sounds she uses express the fear she had of being sacrificed, and the pain she feels.

Finally the music was the essential element in this performance. The musical piece by  Stravinsky had very rapid sections and also some tranquil ones. The rapid parts expressed the angst in the movements the “virgin” makes when she was attacked by the men, in the more tranquil parts intimacy between the male and female characters was represented with different movements.

The sounds and the music both complement each other to create different moods during the performance. Both create different rhythms which the body movement followed.

Connections:

In Hebras the body expresses everything, although it is not a story being told but different moments in relationships being represented, Hebras and this ballet are both telling about different situations with body movements only. The breathing sounds in Hebras are also used to express the fear and angst of the character when trapped. In Hebras costume is very simple as is in this performance and there is the presence of partial nudity.

Reflection:

To what extend does dance relate with theatre? Both are an exploration of the body, and if behind a dance there is a story being told, then what is it? Is it dance in theatre? Or is theatre in dance? In this ballet performance we found costumes, as we do in plays, also a plot, an exploration of the body, sounds, etc. Therefore, is it just the way it develops? That from the music we get to the movement in dance, and that in theatre the movement may be accompanied with music (but doesn’t develop from it)

What makes this dance different from a theatrical performance? Can some contemporary dance which tells a story be considered theatre?

Body exploration and expression

Description:

Long live mathilda! This week was SHADOW QUEENDOM!! Finally after all those weeks of puppet making, mask painting and rehearsals the play is done. During the week, the puppets, masks, props, scenery were ready. Just a few “fix up here” and “fix up there” were needed. We focused more in the scene changes and the performance. We also did the dress rehearsal and finally the REAL performance.

Analysis:

During the last months we built up everything for THESE three days of performance. As we were getting nearer to the “deadline” I thought there was too much to do, and “little time to achieve it”. From the production point of view I wasn’t worried, puppets were finished, masks were too, there were very few things to improve, but as an actress in the play I was really worried. The last and first scene weren’t ready; some actors didn’t even know their lines.

Knowing the lines is something basic, you need to know the script in order to imagine the character, to be confident to explore while rehearsing the voice and movements of the character, because if you don’t know the lines you cannot go to the next step. I think that the big problem was that the script was sent too late, also there was little initiative of some actors, and without initiative you cannot move forward. It was very frustrating that because other actors didn’t know their lines the work of the other actors was affected. A performance is a group activity as each character reacts to the other. The action, movements a character does is the result of a response to another characters action or 
movement.

Fortunately everybody learned their lines in the end, and the final performance “looked” as if we had finished it a long time ago. The play looked good at the end, complete; but I think that all though we didn’t have much time because of the requirements in production, the script IS the priority. Production tasks must be finished with time so that actors can rehearse with the props, (and in this case puppets and masks) but what is the point of rehearsing with these if the script is not finished, or if even though its finished actors don’t know the lines? I think that if in the beginning the director put more importance in the script, the acting would also improve, as actors could pass lines and explore their movements and voice in their houses or rehearsals. In my opinion the problem with the script was one of the greatest reasons for the lack of characterization.

Another reason for the lack of characterization which lowered the acting level of many actors was that each actor couldn’t explore one character in-depth, as each actor had to explore not only one character but maybe 2 or 3 and even if the character was the same in different scenes, due to the game of the play the character had to change as-well. And … these are the costs of creativity………

With the puppets the problem with characterization was almost the same, many actors did make a great job with vocal characterization but in the physical exploring of puppets, as it was something new to work with, it wasn’t developed as much. The movements sometimes weren’t clear, or sometimes puppeteers just moved the puppets with any clear intention, only with the purpose that it doesn’t stay still, instead of making the puppet look real and transmit intentions with their body expression.

Where I think my acting skills were better was in the shadow puppets scene. In this scene I really explored the movements of my arms and gave a lot of vivacity to the character. The movements also where coherent with the text and precise, they had an intention behind… I think this was due to the working out of the movements with the actual lines we were going to say. I think that in order to have intentions along with what you say, it is better to say the lines first with choreography and then take some movements out or add new ones. This gives more intention to the movements, and it is easier to have precise movements with this technique in my opinion, as they are fixed and are easier to remember. So that the next time you do them they remain the same.

Connections:

In “Mas pequeños que el Guggenheim” characterization was very good. The actions each character did weren’t just precise but each character developed the way of moving depending on the personality. The voice, the movements, the posture of each character, built up their own personality. The audience could pick up the personality of these characters from the physical part more than from the dialogue. It looked as if the dialogue was a complement to the movements and not the movements being a complement to the dialogue. The actions transmitted more than the words.

In “Hebras” for example no words are said, but all the body expression expressed a lot. The audience could recognize feelings, moments, imagine a whole situation without words, just with the body expression.

In “La cocina” for example I think the acting was not very good due to the lack of this body expression. Many characters looked the same, the voice didn’t have much intonation so the “important” words weren’t highlighted or the intentions weren’t clear. To understand what the characters where feeling or how they are it was very important to listen to the dialogue as the body expression didn’t transmit much.

Reflection:

I think that what makes a play attractive is the movements a character does, or even if the character doesn’t move much, the posture and intonation that is given to the words is what makes it attractive. So then is the "game" really what makes the connection with the audience, or is it how attractive the expression of the characters by the voice and physical characterization is? Maybe is the mixture of both...do the plays which don’t have a game make the characterization unreliable as the audience doesn’t “connect" with the play, or is a good characterization enough for the audience to "connect" with the play?