I have already seen this play around the same time last year, having said that, it was extremely different, not because of the addition of a guitar player but because one of the actors was replaced by a woman.
Back then, the simple fact that all the actions were done by a man and a woman, instantly gave some sort of romantic connotation to the play, making people's minds turn to ideas of domestic abuse or at least some quarrel between married people. This was indeed understandable and perhaps even commendable, because it shows people have, well, emotions or at least the ability to connect with a case that wasn't their own. The play was very good then but now, having changed one actress for an actor, it's even better because with that simple yet huge change the play has completely broadened its scope in terms of the interpretations of an audience. Combine this with the use of masks to neutralize the actors into not being or having "characters" but being more of an entity, a figure for man in general (perhaps an allegory to a certain extent) that serves as a wonderful canvas for the audience to paint their own or someone's story into, thus making each one's relationship with the play very much personal.
One of the interesting things that popped up during the Q&A session after the play is that the initial pose, "rupture" of the entity in two and the bandages signify some sort of separation of parts of the same person, and thus the bandage to heal the wound. Even though I didn't get that during the actual performance, I thought the pose and the separation and the play coming full circle again represented the addictive, relentless and deeply troubled nature of human relationships that, even though one says he/she will never do it again they end up doing it anyways and thus end up in the same place they began (which as I write I notice, is very much swayed by the previous impression I had of the play, when there was an actress and it inevitably became about domestic abuse), but I can, however, appreciate and observe that when given the idea, which is a very good thing because it shows again how the interpretation of pretty much anything in this play is entirely subjective (now I'm not saying that if some lunatic came to me and said that Hebras was about a man's relationship with his car I could see it, but you catch my drift).
What is most significative and impressive about this play, besides the fact that it appeals to everyone and could hold special meaning to everyone, is the physicality of it all. It's the way in which this concept or idea of human relationships is presented, through fantastic physical movements that make the ritual aspect of the play (the seating arrangement, etc) mesh together and work, because, rituals have been performed for centuries and human relationships have been around for centuries, so ti makes perfect sense to see this play as some form of ritual. This indeed makes me go back to my independent project, about craig's ubermarionette and the effect of body movement in a play. By stripping the actor of any possible form of identification (blank neutral mask) and making him or it (the entity or figure) perform this sequence of movements, they have managed to capture the spirit of the thing, the essence of the physicality of relationships, every movement had a start and an end, which sort of matches up to the whole play itself, I particularly enjoyed how the actors themselves created the threads with their bodies, and i think it was a good decision to leave those to the imagination of the audience, this also leads me to think about Qorihuaman in which the actor created the space with his body through miming, now, it's not the same thing but they do share a concept, in this case, the fact that there are no props or "set design" also helps the audience to let their imagination run free, without any indicator of a time and place or a name or a face, allowing them to paint this empty canvas themselves, I say empty not because there is no substance in this play, because there is, and them some, but because it is carefully done to keep its neutral aspect, to keep the actors hidden in a way that allows them to be so free that through their movement and their faces shielded with the mask, they could be just about anyone.
The music again plays an important role, an atmospheric one, one with excellent performances by the violinist and guitarist, my only observation here is that I much preferred the previous arrangement, with just violins rather than the addition of the guitar. This could very well be due to my flair for the dramatic, but it's just that, there is something special to the violin, it's an instrument that's sophisticated and it can put the audience into the trance that is this play, whereas the guitar added some, although pleasant, pedestrian quality to the play, it's strings sort of reminded me I was in the coast of Peru and prevented me from flying off to far far places. Now, it's only a suggestion and an observation, the play is in no way diminished by the use of the guitar, but, without it and a second violin, it's becomes deeply entrancing in a level one can only imagine and hope for.
I wonder about this play, because, the students who've seen it, have seen it because they have to, and by some of their (immature, yet valid) reactions they wouldn't have particularly chosen to see this play if they were given the choice, so why does one go to the theatre? Is it for the mere escapism of it all? "to have fun"? or is it because people have the urge to see a play that they can connect with? If the latter one, then we have discovered why theatre and culture are so tightly knit together, because that urge to feel part of a community and to seem as if we influence it in some way or the other, is a wonderful tool that any playmaker can (and should) use in order to have their play transcend into the audience's lives. I'm not saying that now, in my everyday life I'll be constantly concerned about my way of handling interpersonal relationships and the threads that join us together, but, I will, occasionally and perhaps even involuntarily, because of any stimuli that triggers memories from this play, dwell into the vast world that is my imagination and my reflexive capabilities and wonder, wonder about the state and effect of the threads in my life, and that, in today's world in which people can seem so selfish, is more than any playmaker could ask for.
