Stimuli and the game

Description:

This week in class we were analyzing the stimuli (symphony 25 – Mozart). I am going to talk about this and how it links to final performances when from the stimuli develops into a play.

Analysis:

When we start to analyze the stimuli we get to the idea of the mirror… For me the mirror developed into the idea of a person as a reflection of other people. When I get to this idea I started to think that every action in theatre must create and effect, it must have a role, to be interesting… because if not, why is it there?

In “Hebras” for example the stimuli they had developed into a whole play. I suppose that from the stimuli the director get into different visions but not all of what jumps in our mind can be put into performance because if we put a scene, an action without a purpose without a game then is not interesting.  A scene I liked a lot in this play because of the use of the body was when one of the characters was like locked in a reduced space and made breathing sounds as it get frustrated because he was trapped, all his movements had a lot of energy and also the second character was looking at him… The actor that wasn’t trapped didn´t disappeared, was still in character. All in a play develops from a starting point, the stimuli. In this case for example the scene that developed from the stimuli wasn´t boring as it created an effect. It made me feel like I was trapped to because of the light focusing the actions the actor made and also the absence of dialog but the breathing sounds present create tension in the audience. Also the game with how the audience was located surrounding in a circle the stage link the audience with the actors and you feel comfortable to give the sense it most linked to your life experience to the actions the actors made.

All this scene and the position of the audience created different effects in the audience but had a purpose, it wasn´t there without a purpose. When analyzing the stimuli this is why the ideas that came into your head must have a role and create an effect so the audience connects with the play because If this link between the audience and the play isn’t there then there is a void between the characters and the audience making the play really boring, actions and words are just there but don’t create any effect if it doesn’t connect with the audience, and art is something collective and it depends on the audience take something as art to BE art.

Connections:

Now analyzed this scene I can compare how the stimuli develop to approach something as there was a connection with the audience and not just random actions done without a purpose, like in “Mades medus” that because the audience didn’t connect with the play it turn up to be vague as words were just said and the audience didn’t really get the effect of the actions done.

Reflections:

If a vision must have a game to work in a play, then why we first develop the vision and then the game?

Musicos ambulantes, Staff room, Hebras and STIMULI

Two weeks, one blog. So last week we were doing the analysis of the stimuli, practice for the PPP. We also went to saw 2 different plays “Los musicos ambulantes” and “Hebras”, we saw as well the form IV students performing “the staff room”. The characterization was what I most liked in “los musicos ambulantes and “the staff room”. In “los musicos ambulantes” the voice and the different ways of moving and breathing helped to build the character. In “the staff room” the characterization was also well developed. What differs from the characterization from each performance is that in “Los musicos ambulantes” as characters are not stereotypical, each one has different movements and way of talking, walking, which is not stereotypical this is why I think it has been worked from the outside to the inside (like Grotowsky). In “The staff room” I liked the characterization as the voice in various characters was developed, they use different peach and entonation or accent that their own. The way of walking of various characters was also different that their own and this helped to represent the different characters. Although they had a good use of the body to represent the teachers I could notice that because they are coping (not just using like stimuli) a teacher I think they have been working from the inside to the outside, as the characters they represent already exist in most of the cases and they act like them.

In Hebras what catch more my attention was the exploration of the body. The actors had a perfect control of their wheight so that when they do the different movements and fall they don’t really fall down. They control all the body. The different movements where eye catching and although words weren’t used the body was so well explored that the different position, movements, were enough and really clear to express the different feelings and moments there are in a relationship between two persons. In my opinion this two people could be wife and husband, brothers, mother and son, etc. Although first it seems to be a love couple I realize the actors as they are using a neutral mask don’t define who is who and each one depending on their experiences and ideas causing different effects on the audience.

Well getting back to the analysis of the stimuli. Sometimes when we are starting to do plays we forget that by a stimuli we need to visualize a play, not a plot. If we do this the play will develop from the stimuli but will not be represent the stimuli. For example in los musicos ambulantes and hebras we can’t have clear the stimuli as is not showed but for example in “the staff room” each actor chose as an stimuli for their character an actual existing teacher of the school or of a tv serie. I think the analysis of the stimuli wasn’t done well as the teachers they chosed weren’t developed by the actors but where copied.

Well after visualizing a play, we need to look for patterns in the stimuli. This is different for the different kinds of stimuli. In music the patterns will depend on the sounds as this is its form. In art will depend on the lines and colours as this is its form. These patterns give ideas which are used in the stimuli analysis.

Finally we have to think, what questions am I going to explore? How? This will lead the stimuli to an experience which with the audience is going to connect with creating different effects. An audience always need to connect to the play at the end because art is NOT INDIVIDUAL, has to be social, cultural, is a convection, it depends that the audience takes something as art to be art.

Depending of the different forms that are explored the different arts are formed. As mentioned before the exploration of sound is music, and for example the exploration of movements is dancing. But then what is the form of theatre? It can be the exploration of humans so the form of theatre will be humans but this is controversial because in music for example for playing the guitar we explore the movements of the fingers which is part of the human body, in dance also the movements are exploration of the humans. We could say maybe then that art is not concrete so the form of theatre could be something more abstract, as in literature tha form is words and words are not concrete. But if not, is theatre not art? And if its art, which would be its form? Is a question which I have been thinking of a lot of time but I still cannot find the answer, I think no one has.