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)