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?