so last week we did our paucartambo presentation:
day 1:
we were all qollas except for hannarella (she was the very believable chola, blonde and everything.) and bebenorme (he was the bull) and what surprised me the most was how good it actually was, i think this is why in paucartambo they don't rehearse per se (they do have extensive training since they are children) so that the day of the performance they can improvise and be more alert, more energetic, basically what kept going through my mind was DO NOT stop, just don't. therefore the energy in our performance does not die, because, afterall this performance is nothing without energy, and even though i wasn't feeling very well (yes, this is an understatement) i still gave it my all and just forgot about my condition, this leads me to think about actors and what they're supposed to to do: THEIR JOBS, act, doesn't matter if you're dying, if you're dead, if you're pooping all the time, when you get on stage you are no longer you, you are a character with no connection whatsoever to your former "real" self because in the end, the audience doesn't care about your problems, they care about being entertained because that is what theatre is for to them, for entertainment and if you stop acting, the reality of a performance breaks and thus it is ruined. ok, in western theatre sometimes there is an understudy but in andean theatre, there isn't, actors just deal with things and something as simple as touching your mask to just plain stopping obliterates any chances a performance had to be successful.
another very helpful element is the actual audience, their energy and just the fact that they're there changes the performance so much, our energy level rises because instead of interacting with air during rehearsals we actually interact with other people so this is another reason why actors in paucartambo do not rehearse so much.
as far as my job with props goes, i think more candy would have been nice so that the hype of candy falling from the sky didn't die off so quickly.
day 2:
carlos and i were saqras, the first problem was the costume that apparently was wrong for me to bring the white socks we agreed on, however, it isn't about me nor pineda, it's about the performance as a whole and about how, if we don't get organized and talk as a group (because this is not a self directed one man show) the performance goes all kablooey so again i come to the resolution that the play is not for the actors, or for one person in particular, it's a collective effort for the people who come to see it, whether we want to admit it or not.
in terms of acting, i think we were good, however there were moments that i felt were not as appreciated by the audience as we would have liked since the qollas were kinda stealin' our fantabulous saqra thunder, however in the actual festival the qollas and all the other comparsas were each doing their own thing and each got equal attention. mainly because of:
the shape of the "stage" (the plaza and other places in the town allows people all around to get to see the moving comparsas)
the amount of saqras (we only had two and over 5 hyperactive qollas, unfair much? so as much as the energy level has to be high and the interaction has to be great, there still needs to be the respect for the main action of the play, whether it is about the qollas or the saqras in our case.
i think the music elevated our performance to the next level, it gave it that paucartambo feel.
however, what i took from both days of performance led me to wonder about our rehearsal times, and how in paucartambo they don't rehearse a lot yet are taught since they are children, is it possible that we were late? and the only way to capture the paucartambo spirit and overall performance is by training for over 15 years? and if so, this led me to think about acting itself and how different people from different cultures have their own ways of acting and of theatre itself, is it possible to TRULY learn and be able to perform these traditions as if we were born into them? and overall, can you then "learn" how to act?
martes, 30 de noviembre de 2010
lunes, 22 de noviembre de 2010
paucartambo
so in less than a week we WILL present our performance based on the paucartambo festival, we will, i'm serious. and along the way we have encountered some major issues, the first one being that we are not actually IN paucartambo therefore we are "bending" the tradition to fit with our environment and society (basically a way of pleasing our paucartamboknowledge-free audience) however the things we bent are no longer working or weren't put into action at all: for example the saqra costumes, we agreed to make them more colorful and chicha however we have not because we decided to go with the traditional-ish and keep the shape of the costumes but use ones we already have, the ones from la vida es sueño, so when do we have to stop and realize that what we want cannot be done so we must work with what we have? and do we have to change our concept to fit our needs? or do we change our needs to fit our concept? and if so, will this make the play more succesful? because overly produced plays can be quite the charmers with the audience but sometimes they just feel it's too much, like eating a whole cake by yourself so when do we know that we must: a) produce more in terms of design? or b) keep things simple?
another problem we encountered is that during rehearsals (many rehearsals, this does not match the tradition since the actors in paucartambo don't rehearse a lot, however it is understandable since they have been learning the dances since they were born.) we do not bring the energy needed for the actual performance day, however when we rehearsed with the Ib students i felt we kind of fed off their energy (we weren't very energetic when it was just the 5 of us.) so i realize that it's important to rehearse with all the actors, especially when doing something that requires a great deal of enthusiasm and energy so that the actors can feed off each others and so that the director has a clear idea of how the performance is going to look, this leads me to think about how it is important to have all the elemnts of a performance ready when rehearsing (at least the last couple of rehearsals) so that the actors can get used to the new sorroundings and work together with the elements in order to produce a higher quality performance.
so i have come to one conclusion and question, how will we, no more than 10 students be able to represent and convey the amount of energy the paucartambo festival (with definitely more than 10 people) has? because there's only so much we can do especially because some of the attitudes we have been giving aren't exactly positive, does it come from the fact that in paucartambo they do it as a tradition and there is more of a love for the festival? or is it just pure coincidence? or is it the fact that during the rehearsals we are bland but when the actual performance comes we will give it 200% (this is usually what happens in our plays) and also considering the audience's energy we will be able to feed off theirs to?
another problem we encountered is that during rehearsals (many rehearsals, this does not match the tradition since the actors in paucartambo don't rehearse a lot, however it is understandable since they have been learning the dances since they were born.) we do not bring the energy needed for the actual performance day, however when we rehearsed with the Ib students i felt we kind of fed off their energy (we weren't very energetic when it was just the 5 of us.) so i realize that it's important to rehearse with all the actors, especially when doing something that requires a great deal of enthusiasm and energy so that the actors can feed off each others and so that the director has a clear idea of how the performance is going to look, this leads me to think about how it is important to have all the elemnts of a performance ready when rehearsing (at least the last couple of rehearsals) so that the actors can get used to the new sorroundings and work together with the elements in order to produce a higher quality performance.
so i have come to one conclusion and question, how will we, no more than 10 students be able to represent and convey the amount of energy the paucartambo festival (with definitely more than 10 people) has? because there's only so much we can do especially because some of the attitudes we have been giving aren't exactly positive, does it come from the fact that in paucartambo they do it as a tradition and there is more of a love for the festival? or is it just pure coincidence? or is it the fact that during the rehearsals we are bland but when the actual performance comes we will give it 200% (this is usually what happens in our plays) and also considering the audience's energy we will be able to feed off theirs to?
lunes, 15 de noviembre de 2010
Hebras
so, this friday we went to the school's theatre to see Hebras, the new play from our very own Robbie ray (and his theatre group cuer2).
upon entering the stage (yes, the stage, not sitting on the chairs in the audience) there were chairs set up in a circle and the two lead and only actors were already in still picture. this image was very striking to me, they were intertwined and contorted, wearing masks and girdles with two beams of warm light on them. this is a very effective first impression since it strikes the audience, sets the mood and creates the atmosphere it was wonderful because the pose they were in seemed very complicated, thus we are able to recognize the body language and work hence the effort put in is perceivable. so we return to think about a play's first impression, if we want to captivate the audience and have them interested on what's to come then we must be able to make a very strong first impression, giving enough to keep them interested but not too much so that we are able to keep up with this first impression as the play goes on. so can a play succeed if it starts with a weak first impression? and then again what is a good first impression? since too much shock can disgust/frighten and sometimes even offend an audience.so this is where a play's "reality" meets the artifice of theatre, we can do whatever we want but it somewhat has to go according to our audience so that we do not lose them along the way whereas in real life, since we are not presenting anything to an audience, we do not care about what the audience thinks.
in this first pose, a man and a woman were shown, this is key because, had they been two men or two women it would change the overall meaning of the play, this reminds us that the process we put into a play has to go according to our overall message and purpose.
there were no words however the sound of the violins were perfect for the play nevertheless i enjoyed it most when the characters were moving and the sounds came just from their breathing hitting with the mask, this heightened the overall effect for me because the sound variated, when the characters moved most and they became most agitated the breathing sounded like muffled cries and quiet suffering, this was fantastic because it gave the play more tension and made us feel the characters emotions. (when they were on the floor trying to escape from each other their breathing got heavier, when they were calm the sound was almost quiet.) this makes me think about props and masks, they aren't just there to make the play pretty, these are tools an actor and a director can use to elevate a performance to the next level and for me the masks hence the breathing sounds did this, it leads me to wonder if this was done on purpose, i think yes because otherwise the masks would've had a hole on the mouth, or maybe not, hmmmm), overall i am lead to wonder about acting itself and what a fantastic craft it is, we, as actors can portray and evoke the whole range of human emotion with something as small as a sigh, a whisper or a breath so sometimes it is best to keep things subtle (rather than scream out loud this play just breathed.) the masks were also useful because they rid the actors of a face hence we as audience are able to put any face we want on the character and any emotion we want, however this emotion is influenced by the action of a play so figuring out which one to put helps us to understand the message, plot and play better.
as the play progressed the story became clear to me, it was a couple who was in love and they had a troublesome relationship: there was abuse from the man (evident in the "puppeteer" part when he controls her to clean etc.) and these sort of threads that joined them into a never-ending circle were evident as well, when they were laying down and their fingers started to travel along sinuously and when they had each other's hearts on their hands are a perfect example of how things don't have to be there to make a message and an overall performance come through, in fact it's better for an actor to be able to represent these things with their body (one of the reason's why our supermarket performance was successful) and better for an audience because, if done properly, the audience is, well, in awe. so back to props, yes they are very useful but, how do we know when to put them in and when to take them out? doesn't it depend on the kind of play we do? (let's be honest here, this play is not for everyone, the oh-so-fabulous pitucas from lima aren't going to go crazy for this play because their idea of theatre is, i don't know, something ,more like cocina y zona de servicio, something more "real", well i'm sorry to break it to you PTA, theatre is NOT REAL, it is theatre and yes it can be a representation of life but is never real life. so how do we find that balance between what i call a commercial play and an interpretative or more artsy kind of play? so that we don't limit ourselves when putting a play together.
i think rehearsal was key in this play because of the intricate choreography it had, and, well, having no deadline to present the play, cuer2 were able to present this play when they knew it was ready, ripe. but, how do we know it is? because upon watching the play along with the audience, don't directors always get the feeling that something could've been changed or added or removed? and if this is the case for people with no deadline where do people with a, i don't know, from march to june 21,22,23, deadline stand? because the case here isn't that the play is ripe then so it can be shown, it's a matter of the play HAVING to be ready for that time so a director is never going to be free from "what if" feelings/thoughts.
having a play with such simple production elements as this one is great because it allows the audience to focus on the characters and their story and also on the details from the overall atmosphere, ever notice the little particles floating in the air? well when you put a warm beam of light such as the one this play had you create magic for maniacs such as myself, i found myself drifting off watching the particles and seeing the actions from a different perspective, like if i were outside from the action and hence i reflected on the message, because finding myself detached (in a good way) i reflected upon these threads that we sometimes ignore and cease to care for hence they are broken or overgrown so we are stuck (like the couple here) and when not looking into the light i felt more of a part of the action, on an emotional level and technical level because i was part of the stage, i was the fourth wall, so it was this circle that also trapped the characters into, well, their circle of "love" so to speak and this is great because it makes you think about the different stages you can put a play in and their overall effect on the audience and the performance itself. this play was purely atmospheric as well, little things like the breeze the characters gave off when "hugging" the audience brought this play up a notch and enhanced the overall relationship and effect on the audience.
when the play ended the characters were in the same position that they were on in the beginning thus completing this idea of the circle, then we had a q&a session with roberto and the actors, i found this particularly useful (even though i didn't ask anything) to understand the different perspectives and overall understanding of a play from the audience, i found myself listening to questions i knew the answers to (because they were confirmed by roberto) and some i had no idea of, so, when it comes to the message and effectiveness of a performance how do we know an audience (the whole VARIED audience) is able to grasp it? understand it? reflect upon it? and if there were no message how can we be sure that an audience will enjoy a play? (again the whole audience) so therefore what is a GOOD play? because not everybody thinks the same way, so this leads me to think about the once annoying resolution that plays have to have a message and reflect on culture and society, this becomes useful because when applied we are able to narrow the scope of what we can do in a performance and helps us reach our audience in a more efficient way, or does it?
upon entering the stage (yes, the stage, not sitting on the chairs in the audience) there were chairs set up in a circle and the two lead and only actors were already in still picture. this image was very striking to me, they were intertwined and contorted, wearing masks and girdles with two beams of warm light on them. this is a very effective first impression since it strikes the audience, sets the mood and creates the atmosphere it was wonderful because the pose they were in seemed very complicated, thus we are able to recognize the body language and work hence the effort put in is perceivable. so we return to think about a play's first impression, if we want to captivate the audience and have them interested on what's to come then we must be able to make a very strong first impression, giving enough to keep them interested but not too much so that we are able to keep up with this first impression as the play goes on. so can a play succeed if it starts with a weak first impression? and then again what is a good first impression? since too much shock can disgust/frighten and sometimes even offend an audience.so this is where a play's "reality" meets the artifice of theatre, we can do whatever we want but it somewhat has to go according to our audience so that we do not lose them along the way whereas in real life, since we are not presenting anything to an audience, we do not care about what the audience thinks.
in this first pose, a man and a woman were shown, this is key because, had they been two men or two women it would change the overall meaning of the play, this reminds us that the process we put into a play has to go according to our overall message and purpose.
there were no words however the sound of the violins were perfect for the play nevertheless i enjoyed it most when the characters were moving and the sounds came just from their breathing hitting with the mask, this heightened the overall effect for me because the sound variated, when the characters moved most and they became most agitated the breathing sounded like muffled cries and quiet suffering, this was fantastic because it gave the play more tension and made us feel the characters emotions. (when they were on the floor trying to escape from each other their breathing got heavier, when they were calm the sound was almost quiet.) this makes me think about props and masks, they aren't just there to make the play pretty, these are tools an actor and a director can use to elevate a performance to the next level and for me the masks hence the breathing sounds did this, it leads me to wonder if this was done on purpose, i think yes because otherwise the masks would've had a hole on the mouth, or maybe not, hmmmm), overall i am lead to wonder about acting itself and what a fantastic craft it is, we, as actors can portray and evoke the whole range of human emotion with something as small as a sigh, a whisper or a breath so sometimes it is best to keep things subtle (rather than scream out loud this play just breathed.) the masks were also useful because they rid the actors of a face hence we as audience are able to put any face we want on the character and any emotion we want, however this emotion is influenced by the action of a play so figuring out which one to put helps us to understand the message, plot and play better.
as the play progressed the story became clear to me, it was a couple who was in love and they had a troublesome relationship: there was abuse from the man (evident in the "puppeteer" part when he controls her to clean etc.) and these sort of threads that joined them into a never-ending circle were evident as well, when they were laying down and their fingers started to travel along sinuously and when they had each other's hearts on their hands are a perfect example of how things don't have to be there to make a message and an overall performance come through, in fact it's better for an actor to be able to represent these things with their body (one of the reason's why our supermarket performance was successful) and better for an audience because, if done properly, the audience is, well, in awe. so back to props, yes they are very useful but, how do we know when to put them in and when to take them out? doesn't it depend on the kind of play we do? (let's be honest here, this play is not for everyone, the oh-so-fabulous pitucas from lima aren't going to go crazy for this play because their idea of theatre is, i don't know, something ,more like cocina y zona de servicio, something more "real", well i'm sorry to break it to you PTA, theatre is NOT REAL, it is theatre and yes it can be a representation of life but is never real life. so how do we find that balance between what i call a commercial play and an interpretative or more artsy kind of play? so that we don't limit ourselves when putting a play together.
i think rehearsal was key in this play because of the intricate choreography it had, and, well, having no deadline to present the play, cuer2 were able to present this play when they knew it was ready, ripe. but, how do we know it is? because upon watching the play along with the audience, don't directors always get the feeling that something could've been changed or added or removed? and if this is the case for people with no deadline where do people with a, i don't know, from march to june 21,22,23, deadline stand? because the case here isn't that the play is ripe then so it can be shown, it's a matter of the play HAVING to be ready for that time so a director is never going to be free from "what if" feelings/thoughts.
having a play with such simple production elements as this one is great because it allows the audience to focus on the characters and their story and also on the details from the overall atmosphere, ever notice the little particles floating in the air? well when you put a warm beam of light such as the one this play had you create magic for maniacs such as myself, i found myself drifting off watching the particles and seeing the actions from a different perspective, like if i were outside from the action and hence i reflected on the message, because finding myself detached (in a good way) i reflected upon these threads that we sometimes ignore and cease to care for hence they are broken or overgrown so we are stuck (like the couple here) and when not looking into the light i felt more of a part of the action, on an emotional level and technical level because i was part of the stage, i was the fourth wall, so it was this circle that also trapped the characters into, well, their circle of "love" so to speak and this is great because it makes you think about the different stages you can put a play in and their overall effect on the audience and the performance itself. this play was purely atmospheric as well, little things like the breeze the characters gave off when "hugging" the audience brought this play up a notch and enhanced the overall relationship and effect on the audience.
when the play ended the characters were in the same position that they were on in the beginning thus completing this idea of the circle, then we had a q&a session with roberto and the actors, i found this particularly useful (even though i didn't ask anything) to understand the different perspectives and overall understanding of a play from the audience, i found myself listening to questions i knew the answers to (because they were confirmed by roberto) and some i had no idea of, so, when it comes to the message and effectiveness of a performance how do we know an audience (the whole VARIED audience) is able to grasp it? understand it? reflect upon it? and if there were no message how can we be sure that an audience will enjoy a play? (again the whole audience) so therefore what is a GOOD play? because not everybody thinks the same way, so this leads me to think about the once annoying resolution that plays have to have a message and reflect on culture and society, this becomes useful because when applied we are able to narrow the scope of what we can do in a performance and helps us reach our audience in a more efficient way, or does it?
martes, 2 de noviembre de 2010
Supermarket
So for the arts evening a couple of weeks ago we had to present a small performance in representation of the theatre arts department, there was a twist, we had less than 3 weeks to prepare. so straight from the bat we knew it needed to be simple, entertaining and have no other purpose but to entertain the audience (this is extremely rare because out of every performance we do we need to give it more meaning than it actually was intended to have) however when it came to the process and choosing what we could do we were rather stuck, we had no idea what to do so Roberto gave us a tool, inspiration. turns out you could be inspired by something as small as a song?! whoa, what do you know, guess we can do a PPP know!
on a more serious level though, having a song be the inspiration for a performance is a very effective technique and can result in solid performances. songs can indicate many factors of a performance, if the song feels dramatic and strong then the performance could be dramatic and strong, or you could go the opposite and have the music inspire you to do the contrary of what it inspires you to do. so we arrived to "the gift", a song that had a very beachy and relaxed feel to it, hence we came up with what would be our acting concept, being inside gelatin, everything is slow motion and dense, you need to exaggerate your movements and facial expressions so that they can push through the dense gelatin.
however i come to wonder something that didn't occur to me during the process and final performance, we know we are in a gelatin, the audience does not so wouldn't they feel rather overwhelmed by the over the top slow motion and facial expressions? well, the answer is no, in fact, if EXECUTED PROPERLY this effect can be extremely interesting and awe worthy for an audience so we had a challenge, we had to make it as perfect as possible so that the performance wasn't a stinky pile of hoo hah.
when it came to working with the acting concept it was rather difficult at first and continued to be towards the end, slow motion is easy if you are in a gelatin, we weren't therefore we had to keep our balance perfect and timing flawless as well so that one actor doesn't look like he/she's inside a different gelatin and thus ruining the overall effect of the performance.
we needed to resort to the first teachings of theatre we had, working with our centre of energy so that it will maintain balance to our bodies, i found this particularly challenging because there was a part when pineda kicked me on the leg and i had to jump up without jumping (it's impossible to jump in slow motion unless we are in slow motion) and grab my leg (yes, standing in the other one.) in pain. this helped me figure out the very useful artifice of lying to the audience, you see, production elements and concepts and such are irrelevant to the audience (non ib theatre students) they care about being entertained by a good performance (yes they do consider good visual effects that could be provided by production elements but in the end they won't say to their friends "hey, you have to spend money to see this play that sucks because the scenery is SO worth it.") so we as actors/directors or playwrights have to, eventually, adapt our work and ourselves so that it is able to keep an audience engaged so that the performance is successful. little things like the fake "jumping" and over the top facial expressions kept the audience entertained, in fact, the swaying at the beginning also kept the entertained and brought the performance to a whole new level because it kept it from ever becoming static, boring.
the "design concept" (we chose not to go with the obvious Miami theme the song conveyed, so we decided to go with a supermarket since they often have that kind of music.) (sort of?) was chosen to enhance the acting concept, black pants and white shoes (against a dark backdrop) to enhance the effect of our legs moving in slow motion gives the scene a much more fantastic feel, however i would have wished to have this constant in every character, for example arianna's character didn't have any black in her legs, some black leggings would have made the effect more cohesive, however for the effect to be cohesive and successful there needs to be an extensive rehearsal process, something we didn't have.
we had no props whatsoever, everything had to be imagined but still, it HAD to be present, because if the imaginary props weren't clear then the performance will be an utter failure since the audience will not be able to understand a thing. this also proposed a challenge because of littel coordination elements, for example if holding a jar of pickles from the supermarket our hands had to be kepts as if we were holding it, for real, thus we are not able to move our hand or close it because if the jar were there we wouldn't be able to magically put our fingers through it.
overall i think we had a very successful little performance, that as simple as it may sound it turned out to be quite entertaining for the audience (SUCCESS), in fact some people were more enthusiastic about his than they were for past years plays, this leads me to wonder: is it more effective to have a short and sweet performance that will inject the audiene with our message and purpose (yes, we are back to having a purpose and message FOR EVERYTHING) in, shall we say no more than 8 minutes? or is it better when we have a large scale play that lasts 2 hours and sends the same message but it is spread out in a long play rather than 8 mins? what do people really want? and how far can we compromise to give them what they want?
Overall i think it was a very succesful little performance
on a more serious level though, having a song be the inspiration for a performance is a very effective technique and can result in solid performances. songs can indicate many factors of a performance, if the song feels dramatic and strong then the performance could be dramatic and strong, or you could go the opposite and have the music inspire you to do the contrary of what it inspires you to do. so we arrived to "the gift", a song that had a very beachy and relaxed feel to it, hence we came up with what would be our acting concept, being inside gelatin, everything is slow motion and dense, you need to exaggerate your movements and facial expressions so that they can push through the dense gelatin.
however i come to wonder something that didn't occur to me during the process and final performance, we know we are in a gelatin, the audience does not so wouldn't they feel rather overwhelmed by the over the top slow motion and facial expressions? well, the answer is no, in fact, if EXECUTED PROPERLY this effect can be extremely interesting and awe worthy for an audience so we had a challenge, we had to make it as perfect as possible so that the performance wasn't a stinky pile of hoo hah.
when it came to working with the acting concept it was rather difficult at first and continued to be towards the end, slow motion is easy if you are in a gelatin, we weren't therefore we had to keep our balance perfect and timing flawless as well so that one actor doesn't look like he/she's inside a different gelatin and thus ruining the overall effect of the performance.
we needed to resort to the first teachings of theatre we had, working with our centre of energy so that it will maintain balance to our bodies, i found this particularly challenging because there was a part when pineda kicked me on the leg and i had to jump up without jumping (it's impossible to jump in slow motion unless we are in slow motion) and grab my leg (yes, standing in the other one.) in pain. this helped me figure out the very useful artifice of lying to the audience, you see, production elements and concepts and such are irrelevant to the audience (non ib theatre students) they care about being entertained by a good performance (yes they do consider good visual effects that could be provided by production elements but in the end they won't say to their friends "hey, you have to spend money to see this play that sucks because the scenery is SO worth it.") so we as actors/directors or playwrights have to, eventually, adapt our work and ourselves so that it is able to keep an audience engaged so that the performance is successful. little things like the fake "jumping" and over the top facial expressions kept the audience entertained, in fact, the swaying at the beginning also kept the entertained and brought the performance to a whole new level because it kept it from ever becoming static, boring.
the "design concept" (we chose not to go with the obvious Miami theme the song conveyed, so we decided to go with a supermarket since they often have that kind of music.) (sort of?) was chosen to enhance the acting concept, black pants and white shoes (against a dark backdrop) to enhance the effect of our legs moving in slow motion gives the scene a much more fantastic feel, however i would have wished to have this constant in every character, for example arianna's character didn't have any black in her legs, some black leggings would have made the effect more cohesive, however for the effect to be cohesive and successful there needs to be an extensive rehearsal process, something we didn't have.
we had no props whatsoever, everything had to be imagined but still, it HAD to be present, because if the imaginary props weren't clear then the performance will be an utter failure since the audience will not be able to understand a thing. this also proposed a challenge because of littel coordination elements, for example if holding a jar of pickles from the supermarket our hands had to be kepts as if we were holding it, for real, thus we are not able to move our hand or close it because if the jar were there we wouldn't be able to magically put our fingers through it.
overall i think we had a very successful little performance, that as simple as it may sound it turned out to be quite entertaining for the audience (SUCCESS), in fact some people were more enthusiastic about his than they were for past years plays, this leads me to wonder: is it more effective to have a short and sweet performance that will inject the audiene with our message and purpose (yes, we are back to having a purpose and message FOR EVERYTHING) in, shall we say no more than 8 minutes? or is it better when we have a large scale play that lasts 2 hours and sends the same message but it is spread out in a long play rather than 8 mins? what do people really want? and how far can we compromise to give them what they want?
Overall i think it was a very succesful little performance
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)