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.