Description
We keep working on our first PPP (based on Paucartambo's celebration for Mamacha Carmen).
However, many aspects were changed... starting from the concept we had thought for our play, and the new ideas that appeared.
Analysis
Why did our 'first concept' had to be changed?After discussing that we wanted things to "turn upside down" in the school, we planned to have "Pachakuti" as a concept. However, a concept is a phrase that helps you GUIDE, organize, and give COHERENCE to a play, and should include a verb. (e.g. death is at the centre, life is at the top- A matter of dissection)
For this reason, our new concept could be something along these lines:
- "Chaos is necessary in order to have Order"
- "The creation of Order needs Chaos"
- "The creation of Order depends on Chaos"
- "The Order created turns around Chaos"
- "Chaos leads to Order"
The new vision is a "take over" of the kiosk (and kidnapping of Salim). In this case, People at Newton think that everything is in order, but chaos is needed to create a balance [and order] in the food prices at the kiosk.
After discussing our idea, we had two main things to decide.
1. If our acting space was going to be the Churchill patio or the actual kiosk:
Role: the role of acting in Churchill was to have a bigger space and to use the theatre, as it was part of our first vision //VS.// the role of acting in the kiosk is to have a similar space to Paucartambo's (crowded), to perform in a different space from past years, and to catch the attention of more people as we know that most students from upper school would be around that area.
Effect: Probably Churchill would not create the wished effect, as people wouldn't enter the stage, and it would be a huge space for only around 7 actors (actions wouldn't be completely appreciated) //VS.// Crowded as Paucartambo, people would be forced to be near the actors and watch every action. It is also innovative and surprising.
How: In Churchill we would need to CALL people to enter the acting space, while in the kiosk we don't need to. However, we must do exaggerated actions to call the attention of everyone (so that they don't prefer to buy instead of watching our performance) - [I'm sure that "random" people with costumes, masks, and music is already "eye-catching", so calling their attention isn't a real problem]
Learning: When deciding things for a play (e.g. the acting space) we need to GO and see how it is- what does it offer us. The kiosk would let us interact with the people, giving our performance the "Paucartambo effect of crowds".
2. If we are going to use the real Salim:
element -> using real Salim
role -> tries to establish a close relationship with the audience and 'the school staff' in general
effect -> it would catch the attention of many, as we know that people enjoy when school staff act
how? -> Salim would have to agree being carried, tied to a chair, etc.
VS.
element: using 'fake' Salim (e.g. a Saqra or Majeno)
role -> to make obvious that the person being kidnapped is SalimAfter discussing our idea, we had two main things to decide.
1. If our acting space was going to be the Churchill patio or the actual kiosk:
Role: the role of acting in Churchill was to have a bigger space and to use the theatre, as it was part of our first vision //VS.// the role of acting in the kiosk is to have a similar space to Paucartambo's (crowded), to perform in a different space from past years, and to catch the attention of more people as we know that most students from upper school would be around that area.
Effect: Probably Churchill would not create the wished effect, as people wouldn't enter the stage, and it would be a huge space for only around 7 actors (actions wouldn't be completely appreciated) //VS.// Crowded as Paucartambo, people would be forced to be near the actors and watch every action. It is also innovative and surprising.
How: In Churchill we would need to CALL people to enter the acting space, while in the kiosk we don't need to. However, we must do exaggerated actions to call the attention of everyone (so that they don't prefer to buy instead of watching our performance) - [I'm sure that "random" people with costumes, masks, and music is already "eye-catching", so calling their attention isn't a real problem]
Learning: When deciding things for a play (e.g. the acting space) we need to GO and see how it is- what does it offer us. The kiosk would let us interact with the people, giving our performance the "Paucartambo effect of crowds".
2. If we are going to use the real Salim:
element -> using real Salim
role -> tries to establish a close relationship with the audience and 'the school staff' in general
effect -> it would catch the attention of many, as we know that people enjoy when school staff act
how? -> Salim would have to agree being carried, tied to a chair, etc.
VS.
element: using 'fake' Salim (e.g. a Saqra or Majeno)
effect -> amuse the audience, surprise them - actions should be fun
how? -> As we are working with someone we know, more "exaggerated" and funny actions such as "tying upside down".. hitting with a waraka.. etc.. can be done.
learning: Working with someone from the school staff (or inviting an actor) doesn't always work, because in this case, if we want to perform exaggerated actions that would catch the attention and amuse the audience, it is better to work with someone you know and would agree to do everything possible to achieve this.
Connections
- Was our concept always used in "A matter of dissection"?Although the concept organized and gave coherence to the whole performance (thanks to our director), I wonder if it is difficult sometimes to apply it in every single aspect of a play. For example, in our case, the props, scenery and costumes. They didn't really "convey" that concept, but had other design concepts that organized them (e.g. the colour scheme) .
- The Churchill patio would end up as a "western stage" (audience in one side and actors in the other), such as the ones used for A matter of dissection, Más pequenos que el Guggenheim, Mades Medus, and many plays that depend mainly on their scripts. However, plays such as Sin titulo: tecnica mixta, show us that it is a very interesting experience for the audience to move around the actors, and in this case the actors have to adapt to the space in that moment (more creativity needed).
*breaking the fourth wall always catches the attention. - In A matter of dissection, our first game had to be changed after we PROVED it. This is why things always need to be "checked", and if something does not work, it needs to be changed.
- It is essential to create an ORGANIZED CHAOS in our performance (e.g. the one in "La cocina"), in order to convey the idea of necessary chaos, but.. without creating a real one (we need to control our presentation and the audience like the Maqtas do in Paucartambo)
Reflection
- A concept should be a phrase (including a verb) that gives coherence and organized a whole performance.
- Is is difficult many times to have ALL the aspects from a play exactly linked to the concept? For this reason, the design concepts should have coherence with the main concept, and should work to organize the other elements.
- Before deciding things for a play, they need to be PROVED... e.g. the acting space, or our game in A matter of dissection. As I mentioned in a past entry, theatre is created "standing up and proving", and not sitting down and discussing ideas.
- Working with people you know is always an advantage in theatre, as it is social and depends a lot in communication and "connections" between the actors. Working with someone such as Salim wouldn't give us the freedom to do whatever our imagination tell us with his character.
Would the students (our audience) have an idea of what we are trying to represent, or should they be taught a little bit about Paucartambo before?
Maybe to be more explicit, we could use the idea of having a "big poster" telling them "where we are" (CLICK):
"Paucartambo les da la bienvenida a su fiesta patronal"
.
..And my final question is: robbie, would you please direct us?
hahaha.. I suppose you don't want to, but I hope we achieve one of our main goals for this performance ->("reinvindicarnos") and demostrate that through team work and cooperation we will be able to create an enjoyable performance.Maybe to be more explicit, we could use the idea of having a "big poster" telling them "where we are" (CLICK):
"Paucartambo les da la bienvenida a su fiesta patronal"
.
..And my final question is: robbie, would you please direct us?
As this is a play without text, and based in something we have seen... would working without a director be easier (than for example in the school plays or one act play)?
Do students (in general) enjoy more plays without scripts?- Or plays which have as a purpose to entertain and amuse.
Would they feel interested and stay there to see us? Are the music, masks and costumes enough to catch their attention?
Do (most) people in our society go to theatre to relax, have a good time, and not to analyse or watch tragedies.. or plays with "heavy themes"? Is this why comedies and plays with "light topics" are more "successful"? How could this be changed?
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderEliminar