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?