ACREEDORES

Description

On May 29th, we went to see a performance proposal of August Strindberg's play "Acreedores".

It was really interesting to see on stage the work of one of the playwrights we have studied in German Expressionism, and I say it was a performance proposal, because I believe the play was written as a more...realistic play, but the way it was performed wasn't realistic at all. It clearly showed how a direction concept can transform a play and create an innovative experience for the audience.

Analysis

The concept and the vision were clear. The director and actors wanted us to focus on the use of the voice -and sensuality evoked by this- of the actors, rather than focusing on a complex set design or big body movements. It was interesting, and a clear example for a practical performance proposal, but...why did we all fall asleep? Would that make it a "unsuccessful" play?

I believe it wasn't, first of all, because it was an innovative/creative experience for me as a member of the audience. I felt attracted by the proposal at first, and by the effects that just the voice of the actor (if explored and developed) is able to create. The voice can change an entire mood, an entire scene. However, I believe the action started to become repetitive, and instead of creating new moods, the 'sensual' mood was kept...which, with the dark stage and distance of the audience...made us fall asleep. I say distance, because I  assume that if the distance between the actors and the audience was closer, more intimacy would be created and maybe more concentration from us. There was an intimate 'atmosphere', but I believe it existed mainly between the actors and not between us and them, or maybe it was 'broken' after some time. Maybe the play was too long for having that direction concept, and maybe it would've been a much more enjoyable experience if it lasted around 20 minutes. Why? because the audience also gets tired, especially if watching the same actions, with the same lighting and set design ALL THE TIME.

Connections

ROMPER LA PIEL: a written play is something completely different from the staged play. One of the roles of the director is to adapt the play in a process where it may be cut..it may be changed... mainly according to the direction concept. In Romper la piel, the text was completely different from what happened on stage. Everything on stage denoted oppression and overwhelming for the main character, and there were many changes even in the script when it was said by the actors. Theatre is therefore a process, and a play changes "in the making" and does not only rely on the written text.

This idea of the direction concept also reminded me to an extent about PROYECCION PRIVADA and LA FALSA CRIADA: the idea of having a concept is that there should be a coherence in the play, and these two were plays where we couldn't find it. Things were put on stage 'because they looked nice'. In Acreedores, at least, I believe the concept was followed as the actors focused all the time in their voices. Maybe it didn't look 'nice' after a while but there was coherence in the way things were happening.
ROMPER LA PIEL also showed us that the final concept can be created during the process. The new concept that came out "did not cancel the previous one, but was the next step towards the way in which it was expressed on stage"'- Rob :)

Reflection

The purpose of a direction concept is creating coherence in a play. Different concepts will be able to create completely different approaches to connect with the audience, and different proposals to put on stage the written play. Oriented by this concept, the text will not be equal to the final product, as it is what HAPPENS on stage what transforms completely the audience's experience. The fact that we fell asleep does not mean that the  play was "wrong". It followed a concept, which gave it coherence, but maybe lacked that intimacy wanted WITH the audience. Moreover, the play was extreeeeeemely long for that proposal. Would more changes in the lighting and in the 'mood' have made the play more dynamic for us? I would like to see if how the play works in a stage such as the one used in "HEBRAS" or in the scenes between Dysart and Alan in my PPP. Does an introverted acting style require a smaller space?

PROYECCIÓN PRIVADA: putting things on stage because of their EFFECT and not just "for the sake of it"

Picture showing "simple body sequences" in the play

Description

On friday april 12th, we went to see "Proyección Privada. Directed by Gilbert Rouviere and starring well known actors such as Jimena Lindo, Norma Martinez and Miguel Iza. The comedy shows television as the main aggressor and "pretext of escape" in human relations.
It conveys (as we agreed in class as a possible concept) the idea of consumption from the two sides. People's  consumption of TV and the TV's consumption of people and relations.

The director tries to use different modern(ist?) conventions and techniques. However, they do not necessarily respond correctly to an exploration process to achieve an interesting effect and response in the audience, but seem to be there because they are "modal" tendencies in occidental directing.

Analysis

Some examples of this techniques or conventions could be the following:

Theatre of the Absurd:
It is absurd that the man does not know the name of his own wife (influence from Harold Pinter here), and doesn't even know they don't have children. The play is a comedy, so absurd jokes as these could work at the beginning, but when they become repetitive the audience gets bored and sees them as (may I use spanish) chongos monses.

This teaches us that we don't have to underestimate the audience. If we keep making "easy" jokes in comedies the audience will eventually get bored, because there aren't 'hiden' messages or things there to analyse.
If you want to make an absurd play, I believe you need to make sure that EVERYTHING there is absurd, including the set design and acting. However, not everything in this play was "absurd", and some things such as set design even TRIED to be "realistic" (as for the walls and the couch). However... this 'mixture' didn't work at the end. If the jokes worked in the audience only at first (as in my case), maybe they should have done them only when the man appeared to be drunk, in order to give coherence to their use.


Theatre of images:
With the body sequences and the use of masks, the play tried to transmit the idea of dehumanization (due to technology and routine). However, this sequences were definitely repetitive and boring for the audience, as they didn't show us interesting choreographies or movements but extremely simple sequences that became monotone.

Theatre "of images" requires a different type of work, that has a purpose and a visual impact in the audience. However...The only effect the "dream-like" scenes in the play created was sleepiness.

Connections

A matter of dissection: I remember telling our director that the audience probably wouldn't understand our jokes, but he always told us we should never underestimate them. Theatre should make you think and analyse. It shouldn't give you everything, it shouldn't underestimate the audience's capacity and intelligence.
The slapsticks in this play were sequences that matched with the play's mood and style, and were there for their EFFECT and not just because we wanted to use the technique. We realized it is common for comedy, and it was used because of its contribution with dynamism and amusement for the audience.

Confesiones de Ana Correa: The body sequence made by Ana Correa when representing Yerma did have a purpose and clear effect on stage. It achieved to cause SENSATIONS (such as the fetus) in the audience not only because of her body expression, but thanks to the sound effects and the textures used.
Here, strong imaged did have an impact, while the body sequence used in Proyección Privada was monotone and "effect-less" in the end.

La falsa criada: Here, items and scenery were placed on stage just because they "looked nice", but didn't really work all-together. They were too fixed (no imagination expected from the audience), and didn't follow a concept.

Reflection

As a director, if you choose a technique or convention on stage, you should put it there because of the EFFECT it will cause in the audience and not because it is common or "modal". 

Directors should always give coherence to plays with a:
1. Direction concept
2. Acting concept
3. Design concept

And should look for techniques that join together or work for the play's style, without using them "just for the sake of it".

Could we establish a (kind of) concept for the techniques used in a play? 

Moreover, as we are also learning in the school play rehearsals, different actors have different advantages and ways of working, and it is one of the roles of the director to exploit them to the best limit. (If you have actors that can't certainly perform complex body sequences, don't try making simpler ones just to have a sequence in the play.) The obstacles we find (even in our actors) should not be limits in the end.

Music as a key element for exploration

Description
The school play rehearsals are progressing, and this week they were our main focus.
On tuesday 9th, I was in charge of the three "Geist" groups. As always, we started with warm-up activities that involve concentration and energy, and then they were divided into three groups. Boys would continue developing their "zombie-like" characters, and girls had to develop other scenes.

It is impossible to work with so many at the same time... for this reason, Thursday's and Saturday's rehearsals were better, as I could concentrate in just one group (the boys from the blue dream).
We reviewed the body sequences and started working on the actual scene, but I noticed that one element was key for their character exploration and development: Music.
Analysis
Music is able to create different atmospheres in a play, and evokes different emotions in its listeners. For this reasons, I believe it is an essential element to focus, explore and develop a character.
On Thursday's rehearsal, I noticed that the boys were further more concentrated in their characterization after I made them 'reflect' and analyse the movement of each part of their body with the help of music. While they were working and moving, music was also helpful to remind them of the scene's atmosphere and the mood they should transmit with their movements.

I've noticed Music allows them to transform the inner emotions into movement and clear intentions, creating a deeper characterization than if they just imitate the movements I tell them to do.  

On the two last rehearsals, I've asked them to work and focus in mainly three aspects: body movement, face expression and breathing, and when they achieve to do it their characterization really improves. Why? because not only the music but also breathing helps them transmit the character's intentions. Some have tackled successfully this three requirements, although my main concern now is for them to "stay in character" through the whole scene, and not just when its their turn to move or speak. In order to achieve this, we shall continue practising characterization exercises, and maybe use (low) music even when they are saying their lines.


Connections
A matter of dissection: music was used to explore each character's rhythm and poses. I remember it allowed me to concentrate and by following the rhythm of the music find the intentions and clear body expression for my character.


Kioskotambo: This is a clear example of how music evokes different movements and different moods in a character and a play. My character's movements were based entirely on the music, and as it was joyful my character was as well. Music guided me to transmit the Maqta's emotions and be able to interact with the audience.

La bruja de Kókoro: I believe this is the character in which I have explored breathing the most. I consider it to be the basis of my characterization, as it allowed us to create a tense mood during the whole scene.

When I think about the characters in this year's school play, the witches from Miyuki always come up to my mind. We need to explore face exaggeration,  distorted movements and heavy breathing, which were aspects that this characters had.


Reflection

Characterization is a process that progresses, but the acting concept can be highly influenced by music.

Should we try playing music (in a very low volume) during most of the scenes even though characters are speaking?
Music evokes immediate feelings in actors, which help them to explore and develop their character. It remembers them of the atmosphere they should create and the mood that the scene should have, and allows them to explore  different ways of achieving this. I say different ways, because I have learned that most times actors can't do everything you want them to, and the role of a director is to be sensible to what an actor can give. (This connects with my last entry) were you 'accommodate' to what you have, and explore other possibilities in your characterization if you couldn't achieve the expected ones.

In this process, music can work as a guideline or "dorsal spine" to allow you explore different possibilities, without going away from the main aim.
However, when do we know if an actor needs to prove other possibilities, or just needs to keep exploring and trying the wanted one?

This week I thought of Theatre as the nucleus of all the arts: it involves visual arts in the design, dance in the coordination of the actors, and music transforms its atmospheres and allows its actors to explore.
If music explores sound.. sculpture volume and painting colours... what does theatre explore?
Theatre is a mixture of all the arts in order to represent mankind in different ways, can the "form of Theatre" we were looking last year go along these lines?

"Esto es lo que hay" - obstacles or advantages?

Description

After a week full of "school play planning" and rehearsals, Theatre has taught me something new. You have to work with what is there; what you have. Do not loose time 'dreaming' with something that isn't there.
We may ask ourselves if not having something you would like to is really an obstacle, or an opportunity to let your imagination fly.

This week, we've had discussions on how we want the play's lighting and scenery to look like. I realized that we don't have a perfect theatre, neither the "perfect lights", and that the majority of our lights have the poorest quality existing. Furthermore, we can't afford to create a play with all the materials and textures we imagine (such as metal and leather), and with astonishing shadows, projections and scenery elements.

On the other hand, I've been working with the SCHREI in the school play rehearsals, and I should say that I had some positive and some rehearsals that I could call negative for me. I will analyse what needs to be done better, and how can we use this great group of children (which could be seen as an "obstacle") in favour (as an advantage) of our play. 

Analysis

Instead of complaining about them, we should ask ourselves how can we use our theatre and our lights as positive obstacles rather than problems:

Different kinds of spaces need different kinds of plays, therefore, a big stage such as ours needs a visual play rather than a play based on its text.
How can we achieve a "visual play"?

Different kinds of spaces need different kinds of plays, therefore, a big stage such as ours needs a visual play rather than a play based on its text.
How can we achieve this?
First of all, we need our dialogues to be short, and try to make monologues as interesting and dynamic as possible. We can use techniques such as “counter points”, organized and “summing up” chaos, and different poses in their long speeches. The main characters should grab all the audience’s attention in their monologues by conveying a tense atmosphere with their clear poses and bulging eyes.

This “concept” of tension could lead us in achieving the visual part of our play: Tension not only in the characters, but in the set design. 
Our theatre might not have the best acoustics (and microphones need to be used) but its great space gives us the opportunity to have tall objects as part of our scenery.  Elements such as a tower, different levels and big furniture couldn’t be used in a small theatre, and wouldn’t help us achieve the idea of distortion and (distorted) proportions on stage.
Furthermore, the use of diagonals and disproportions in the way they are built will cause tension in the atmosphere, catching the audience’s attention  and giving the impression of being falling apart/down (as the main character).
Moreover, we find the obstacle of not having an unlimited budget for our costumes, materials (and “textures”).  We would love all the scenery to be made of real metal and leather (only), but in reality, our budget wouldn’t let us. This is where we have to use our imagination to use these textures as much as possible, as we now know that different textures really transmit different feelings on stage. Metal in the working places will give a cold (prison) mood, while leather transmits the idea of phoniness and “wanna be bourgeoisie”. Alternative textures for scenery could be black & white wood (as brown wood would transmit warmness) and “plastic” clothes rather than balmy materials such as the “polar” of Down to Earth’s animals. For costumes, we can have a contrast between the bourgeois and the oppressed workers, with different textures such as "warm clothes" for the upper classes, and "cold" simple clothes for the lower class. As we've said before, we can use clothing from past plays such as Shadow Queendom and school shoes to overcome the obstacle of limited budget.

On the other hand, the SCHREI (aprox. 35 children) may not be the most experienced actors, but for this reason they should not be an obstacle for the play's success. We have the advantage of having characters for "mass movements", which will fill up our big stage, create impact in the audience and rhythm in the play. 

In order to achieve this, training for coordination is essential for them. For this reason, I've been working on choreographies and games where they have to communicate with each other and act as a team, so that they know that they are not individual characters but a "collective  character" in the play, which demands them to be concentrated, full of energy and as I said before, coordinated above all. 

Connections

For a matter of dissection, a small stage demanded smaller scenery elements, but a play that could be based on its text and not mainly on the visual part. It was essential that the audience understood the jokes characters said, but this was only permitted by a small stage with good acoustics. We were only 7 actors, but had the idea of more than 7 characters. Here's were our imagination used this "obstacle" to create our play's game.
Every game has its rules, and this rules pose limits. With a small amount of actors, we were able to create a dynamic play with more than ten characters, seeing those limits as an advantage that allowed us to move the play forward.

In Shadow Queendom, another game was created due to the "costumes obstacle". We learnt that costumes do not always have to be completely developed, but just one item or prop is able to turn on the audience's imagination as it did in "El valle oscuro" thanks to the same game for character changes.

However, in "El valle oscuro" textures could be considered unsuccessful. Real wood wasn't used, the model's materials weren't stetically pleasing, and the make-up missed quality. A similar situation took place in "La falsa criada", which was focused in having a "nice" scenery rather than scenery that worked in terms of setting and acting. Costumes seemed fake, as well as the "fixed" scenery used. 


Reflection

Every play has limits and obstacles, but you must see those limits as an advantage that allows you to move forward rather than as a disadvantage.Limits let our imagination fly, and should work as catalysts in the creation of innovative games and concepts.
We need to use the advantage of having a big acting space to have tall scenery elements, which help us transmit tense vibrations that catch the audience. On the other hand, it is key to avoid having "fake textures", and avoid pretending to imitate one texture to another. Each material transmits different moods, and instead of wanting to imitate we need to take advantage of the moods that each texture can give us.
As well as textures, "mass" or collective characters give us different atmospheres. The SCHREI will add rhythm and VOLUME to the play, but this will only be achieved through coordination and developed body expression.
This is why more communication exercises between them will be realized, and sequences which allow them to develop deeply their characters' physicality (such as the zombie poses Roberto did).
I need to analyse and research about more activities for my group. How can I develop interesting rehearsals which contribute completely with the success of mass characters in the play? Do I have to develop characters from the inside as the "older" groups are doing, or should I keep developing characters from the outside -as my group is made up of younger actors (which will be a greater visual part of the play)-?

Confesiones de Ana Correa -

long time no see dear blog...

Ana Correa in the center: Bernardina, Ashaninka woman and nurse (characters) surrounding her.

Description

“In the world of the theatre, the one-man show is perhaps the closest thing to having it all, a supreme test of assurance and ability, of magnetism and charisma. The format is both seductive and frightening; there’s no one to play against, to lean on, to share the criticism. But, for an actor, the prize at the end of a successful solo performance is not only applause but also acclaim-unshared”
 -Enid Nemy

"Confesiones de Ana correa" is a one-person show, where the actress tells the story of her life, and the appearance and importance of different characters interpreted by her during it.

The scenery is divided in two sections: a square in the middle is marked with tape, and an area at the side has different props and items.

The actress wears different costumes, which appear one under the other when she takes them off after representing a character . The first costume represents a nurse wearing a mask (similar to Paucartambo's), the second one is the costume of a poor woman who sells prints in the town, followed by Bernardina from "Santiago", the teacher, the washerwoman inspired by "Yerma", and the Ashaninka woman from "Sin Titulo".

For her, there's no need to go backstage "to be transformed." This operation of costume changes is continuous  until we see herself:  a person of flesh and blood, the actress, the human being, the citizen, without fictions. It is her who has offered us her testimony, her confessions. 

Analysis

The division of the scenery creates two levels of reality in the play. In the center, the audience sees a level of fiction, while a level of what we could call "realism" is perceived on the other side.
This teaches us that in a play, there can exist different spaces and areas of the stage working in different ways, because the space is transformed by the attitude of actors.
Single items, such as a desk, or candles, are able to transform the space completely, without the need for developed backgrounds or scenery.

On the other hand, lighting, as well as different textures can give different moods to the scenes. This year I've realized more than ever the effect that a single texture has on stage, and the great contrast between a metal for example, and a piece of wood, or plastic.
If you want a warmer feeling, wood would be better than metal (which conveys coldness in a better way).
In "confesiones", textures created completely different atmospheres. A wooden, old desk for the teacher's scene gave an 'old' resonance, while the plastic used for the washing scene was a texture that in my opinion, cannot be replaced by other in order to have the same effect. The plastic's texture gave the impression of the baby's placenta, and the sound produced by it, accompanied by the ocean SFX and blue light created all together a scene that was impressive for the audience, presenting a very strong image.

About the acting...I learnt that dynamic characters catch greater attention on the audience, and scenes can't be too long, specially if they are monologues. 
The audience would of course find the teacher's scene much more interesting and dynamic than Bernardina's monologue. The rythm of the scene can't stay the same...it has to change.. a conflict has to occur for it to be interesting.

Connections

• "El valle oscuro"- different settings are created although the scenery isn't realistic at all. Planks and a model of the valley are used to 'locate' the audience, and work to activate imagination.
• This activation is also created by "divided images", where the audience visualizes two separate things, which join in the audience's mind (for example- the echoes in "El valle oscuro" or a sound that gives us a hint of a place or location without showing it.
• Shadows -in expressionism for example- could also work as a divided image, as the audience completes the complete idea on their mind.
   
• In "a matter of dissection", cloth was needed to gave a hospital impression, while in "split" metal transmitted a colder atmosphere.
• Costumes can also transmit the idea of a divided image...as we did in Shadow Queendom with single props or elements over a black base. It is a rapid way of changing characters, and allows the audience to use its imagination in order to identify them.

Reflection

Over the last week, the idea of the images that aren't on stage but are created in the audience's minds catched profoundly my attention. The magic of theatre appears when the audience is able to see on stage something that isn't there, but until what point should we take this in our school play? shouldn't we use as much props so that the audience figures out things with the actors' actions? Does this work for every type of audience or space? I mean, maybe it wouldn't work as well in out theatre as it does in Yuyachkani's smaller stage, where the audience can watch with details each action.
If the magic of theatre appears when the audience can see something that isn't really there, then why are props used in all of our plays? should we think about being more "abstract" ?

Different kinds of theatre need different ways of relating with the audience

Description

This week we finished reading the pre-expessionist play "Spring awakening" (German: Frühlings Erwachen), read about set design, and ...planned... to watch the performance of "Desarraigos" by a colombian theatre group.
Although in the end I couldn't assist the performance, what we discussed in class about it had a great impact in my understanding of theatre and how it works.
Desarraigos was a non-dramatic play, while Springs awakening is a dramatic one. What would be the different challenges or requirements of these works?


Analysis

While dramatic plays attract the audience's attention mainly by telling a story (which has a climax and a solution or ending), we asked ourselves the following question:

how to attract attention in a non-dramatic play?
and this immediately reminded me of the activation theory, which tells that people will seek activation through different types of stimulation, including novelty, complexity, variation and uncertainty. And underactivation will lead to boredom.

Dramatic plays have the characteristic of attracting our interest with a certain plot, but as non-dramatic plays don't have a clear story, the director needs to propose an innovative way of connecting with the audience:


Different kinds of theatre --> need a different relationship with the audience


For example, a non-dramatic play should always look for a different kind of scenery, as the form of the stage has a great influence in the connection with the audience.

We usually don't pay as much attention to the set design as to the acting, but one of its main function is to focus the audience's attention in the actions.
For this same reason, the creation of the stage is not a matter of having nice scenery but having scenery that WORKS and contributes in the actions and purpose of the play (dramatic or non-dramatic).

Connections

KIOSKOTAMBO: 

I was worried about the audience's understanding of the story, but then realized that telling a STORY is not the ONLY aim of theatre. 

People in Paucartambo do not needed to believe but to feel connected.

It can say something else without telling it in a conventional way, as we can see in non-dramatic plays, where it is clear that HOW (the way or form) actions are shown have a greater importance that WHAT is being told. 

Lo más resistente:

Plays (especially non-dramatic) need to be innovative and dynamic
- avoid being repetitive.

As well as Lo más resistente, Desarraigos was a non-dramatic play -a series of imagines- that lacked variation. In both plays the lights achieved to change the mood, but after one point the audience knows what will happen after the actions keep repeating.

Hebras:

Hebras teaches us that non-dramatic plays need to have different stage conventions. A circle around the stage, for example, creates the mood of a ritual and a close connection with the members of the audience. The stage used for Desarraigos did not work as it was a different kind of theatre, presented in the traditional western convetion.

Sin título:

This is another non-dramatic play that teaches us the importance of novelty. Each scene is different in terms of characters, stage form and actions. Changing places contributes in dynamism, as they also did in La Cocina.

La falsa criada:
Static and fixed sceneries do not help in Theatre. La falsa criada focused in a "nice' scenery rather than in a scenery that worked in terms of setting and acting. 

Reflections

Different kinds of theatre need different ways of relating with the audience, specially in non-dramatic plays, where the audience is not connected by a plot that intrigues them. Here, novelty, complexity, variation and uncertainty are essential.

In dramatic plays, we "suspend" the disbelief in order to feel connected to fictional situations, but in non-dramatic plays this connection needs to be created by being innovative!

Even if the play is a dramatic play, scenery and set design need equal importance and attention. Scenery contributes a lot in the connection established with the audience, and MATTERS as much as all the elements present. We shouldn't give more importance to one than to another.

Do promenade performances work for all kinds of theatre? -Is this the best form or convention to establish a close connection with the audience?

Is Hebras considered a promenade performance??

Should we never put on stage non-dramatic plays presented in the Western conventions for audience? Does this 'convention' create an immediate wall or psychological separation between the actors and the members of the audience?

Is the connection created by breaking the fourth wall as STRONG as the connection created in a promenade performance??

K I O S K O T A M B O

Description

With this year finally ending, we had our performance inspired from Paucartambo this week, which was presented on three consecutive days.
It required lots of physical work, and although I found it really fun to do and perform, many questions about the audience in theatre appeared in my mind just after the first day, and finally after all of them...

Analysis

Why was a great part of the audience not understanding the story??

The first thing that came into my mind that day was that probably if theatre "comes to people", without them wanting to go and watch it, they won't certainly pay much attention on what is really happening.

Unfortunately, the majority of students aren't so interested in theatre, and do not have the analysing and judgement skills that "the more theatre you watch and the more theatre you do" gives you. 

This is a major difference between the audience in Paucartambo, as they go there wanting to watch the performances and the different characters, while here, many (even including teachers) didn't have a clue of what we were doing. Therefore, in theatre, the reaction of the audience always depends on their culture and expectations.

I'm not saying students did not enjoy the performance, because they did, as cultural elements for all of us were included, such as the popular music, posters with things they usually say, dancing, and something similar to a "Pinata" in the end. Obviously most of them enjoyed a change in their monotone school life and breaks, and the atmosphere of joy that all the elements created together.

Connections

Maybe, for me, something similar to what happened in "A matter of dissection" is happening. 

The audience did feel amused with our play, and did have fun, but maybe if we reflect deeply about it, the expectations or aims we had weren't completely successful (at least in my case).
In AMOD, it was mainly in terms of characterization. Here, it was mainly the connection with the audience; as I had imagined it to be as "close" as the connection created at Paucartambo.

However, the students were shy, didn't want to dance or follow the tricks, and weren't "open" to jokes such as people in the Virgen del Carmen celebration.

Reflections

• What could have we done to improve the performance and mainly the connection with the audience? One of the students told me "maybe you should have told people what your stimulus was, so they could understand what was happening".
  Another one told me "you should have promoted it with posters"... but I think that it was a good way of experimenting another type of theatre, which reaches people who aren't looking for it.
• The way you understand a play will always depend on your knowledge and culture, but I think that the more you know about a subject or art (e.g. theatre) will make you look at it in a completely different perspective.
  
  I don't know if this is a comment I should make in my blog, but at the end of the performances I felt sorry for the students who don't care about theatre and did not have the capacity to analyse deeply what was happening (which wasn't a complicated plot at all)
  
  What can we do about this situation? I know I am not an expert in theatre, but I would like everyone to know about it and feel interested as  we are.
  
  Are "promoted" performances generally better understood than "surprise" performances?
   Why do people have so much trouble understanding an easy plot?
  
   Can you achieve all your expectations, or will you always ask for more after a performance (even though the audience enjoyed it)?
  *(as if making theatre and plays was an endless cycle)