One Act Play- check ✔

Description

Another finished process this year...
Our One Act Play: "A MATTER OF DISSECTION" was finally presented this wednesday 5th, and although we had a 'troublesome' process, the result surprised and filled us with satisfaction.
The HARD process has been described in past entries...
«You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs»
but the question here is, why did the final result turned better than expected?

Analysis

Having time to prepare the stage is always a great advantage.. and after having some possible obstacles (such as traffic) we had the opportunity to do it. This is the first aspect  that contributed to have 'a good final product'.
Although jitters were present before the performance begun, when we entered the stage they were transformed into adrenaline, and this energy was one of the great differences between the performance and other rehearsals. We all transmitted high energy, and were focused in what each one had to do.
For the first time we were completely concentrated on stage and backstage (nobody said a word during the whole play), and we helped each other as much as possible.
In my case, there was another major difference between that day and the rehearsals: I was able to 'connect' with my characters and create 'internal monologues' in my head while other actions were taking place on stage.
The conditions (acoustics) of the theatre allowed us to present a play with a lot of dialogue, but the play wouldn't have been as successful without good intonation and vocalization.

However, not only what happened that day created an entertaining and amusing experience for the audience. We achieved to create intelligent & elaborated jokes, and a variety of characters which definitely made people laugh.The play was dynamic, thanks to aspects such as short lines, sound effects, the use of slapstick and THE GAME, which included TRANSFORMATIONS which surprised everybody.

Connections

*"Shadow Queendom" and this play have demonstrated me that a play cannot be created from one day to another. It implies a lot of creative and team work, because every aspect (stimuli, game, direction and design concepts, production tasks, etc.) has to be given the same importance.

*(Especially for a commedy), dynamism is essential in order to interest the audience. "Mades Medus" could be considered an opposite to "A matter of dissection" in the way that it had very long dialogues and little action taking place.

*Each "aspect of production" should link with each other, (for example. the colour scheme in our play). And if you use music and sound effects, this should also be coherent with the rest of your play:
1. In "La falsa criada" classic music (which was connected to the setting, characters, etc.) was used all the time, but using "tribal music" at the end was not a good election in my opinion.
2. When we saw a performance by "Ballet the Londrina", dancers had different hair styles and colours, and tattoos that dis-concentrated the audience.

*You should not underestimate the audience's intelligence. Lines should not be explicit, and jokes have to be elaborated: like in "Más pequenos que el Guggenheim".

*Different plays depend on the stage where they are presented: Our one act play couldn't be successfully performed in Newton's big theatre, as "more VISUAL" plays work better in a theatre with poor acoustics and great spaces.


Reflection

Although according to our director our group lacked unity, communication and organization, we managed to present a decent (in my opinion great) one act play, thanks to hard work and the instructions we received and finally followed.


...If something is going wrong in a play it shouldn't be ignored, and changes (and limits) can lead you to a great creation."The end justified the means."

Do mistakes (that are fixed) on stage always work and help the play in a positive way?
*Once you have a good start and gain the audience, you can do anything*

Now that this process is over, I wonder if working on our next performance will require the same amount of work... or working in open spaces without dialogue will give us "more freedom" in the creation process.

"La falsa criada" [Play review]

"The worse enemy of a bad man is the one who is just like him" - Marivaux
 Lelio receives a lesson from a man who seems to be just like him. A brilliant idea from a lady who showed to be stronger and more intelligent than the way women in her society were expected to be. 


"La falsa criada" is a play written by the French novelist and dramatist Pierre de Marivaux.
The Peruvian director, Alberto Isola, had always wanted to stage it (since he read it for the first time studying in Milan), and it is now being presented in "Teatro La Plaza" at Larcomar.
The cast is conformed by six different actors, representing:
Trivelino - Miguel Iza
Frontino - Alberick García
Barón - Alejandra Guerra
Lelio - Leonardo Torres
Arlequino - Christian Ysla
Condesa - Norma Martínez
The play is divided in two acts, and the plot goes around the decision of a noble lady to dress up as a man in order to discover who the man she was going to marry really was. "El barón" becomes Lelio's intimate friend, and by doing this, the lady achieves to save her family's fortune, and punish Lelio for his attitude towards life and women.

According to my hypothesis, variety and dynamism in the play are created thanks to aspects and moments inspired /extracted from Commedia Dell'Arte.

Firstly, some types of characters in commedia dell'arte can be compared to some characters in La Falsa Criada.

Clearly, Arlequino is inspired in the Italian character Arlecchino, which was the most famous servant, who tried to trick his masters (often failing), and was very quick, acrobatic and limber. 

Lady "lover"

Arlecchino

In the play, Arlequino is one of the most comic characters. His purpose is to entertain and amuse the audience with his silly jokes and personality. In the end, he tries to trick the masters in order to receive a reward, but his clumsiness is stronger than his wish for money. Although characters do not wear masks as in Commedia Dell'Arte, the face, body and voice expression used by this character are essential in order to achieve the funny effect in the audience.

On the other hand, the "condesa" may not be exact but can be compared to the typical lady/"lover" in Commedia Dell'Arte. The lovers had high status in town (sons or daughters of rich families), but their status was slightly lowered because of infatuation.
In this case, the condesa belongs to a very high status in society, and shows to be rich and "spoiled", as Pantalone's daughter in Commedia Dell'Arte.
She is almost carried away by unreasoned passion and love for the Barón, and almost accepts to loose an amount of money if she can stay with the man she loves.

Finally, although they can be very different, a comparison between Lelio and Pantalone can be done, because Pantalone was obsessed with money, very high on the social ladder, and lusts for women all the time.
In La falsa criada, Lelio does not care about women feelings, and is obsessed with the idea of having more money and a higher social status. On the other hand, he has a huge ego like Il Capitano, and as well as him, behind his front of courage he is actually a coward.

This diversity of characters which can be very similar to different characters of Commedia Dell'Arte contributes to the dynamism and essence of the play.

Finally, other moments that help to make the play more interesting and dynamic are the moments where artistic elements such as singing and playing instruments are included, as they were in Commedia Dell'Arte.
Trivelino and Arlequino are key to create comic scenes such as the one where they compose a song and sing it on stage.
Another very funny and important moment performed by one of these characters is the representation of a conversation between the Baron and Condesa, where the changes in voice, face and body expressions imitating each character are essential to create a dynamic and amusing scene.

For all these reasons, a  direction concept for this play would maybe have been inspired in Italian Commedia Dell'Arte, or in Italy around the year 1801.

Although the play may have slow moments, aspects such as music that doesn't work much, and may be very long, it does work to an extent, thanks to moments such as the ones explained before and characterisation in some of the actors.

In conclusion, variety and dynamism in the play are created thanks to aspects and moments inspired /extracted from Commedia Dell'Arte such as the characters, music elements and comic moments (with body, voice and face expression replacing masks).
As Alberto Isola mentioned, it is a play that seems to have been written to be presented in our days, as it touches themes that are still present in our society.
They play shows the determination and power of women, who should fight for their rights, free will and welfare.

PPP + dynamism?

Description
These weeks we've been concentrated mainly in our one-act play... which will be presented in only 10 days (matameee)

As the PPP is one of the tasks we have to do for the IB, we are using our play to practice and learn how it must be done (while planning and making sure that every aspect is right for the play)

On the other hand, we keep practicing and creating, and this was an important week, as we finally thought about an ending for our play.


Analysis 

The Practical Performance Proposal, as it name mentions, is a proposal where you need to explain CLEARLY a play that you want to create.
It should be very detailed, and explain the reason for choosing every single aspect of your play. (include diagrams, not a few examples but 'everything')

One of the things that should be included is the play's aim. The purpose of this play is to entertain and amuse the audience as it is going to be presented in a school festival.
But, how can these aims be achieved?

The play needs to be DYNAMIC: including short texts, counterpoints wherever possible so that all characters participate all the time, a variety of ''eye-catching" characters in the same stage, and... Slapstick!

Charles Chaplin: known for creating laughter by using slapstick

We learnt that slapstick (a type of broad, physical comedy involving exaggerated, boisterous actions (e.g. a pie in the face), farce, violence and activities which may exceed the boundaries of common sense), is a great way to 'accomplish' laughter in the audience.
In my opinion, it is one of the funnier and best parts of the play, as the characters exagerate their actions, and the 'problem' they have will amuse the audience, making it funnier and more interesting thanks to the background music -> Magic Mamaliga
Another aspect that will help us create a dynamic play is the fact that it will develop around one central issue rather than around a 'whole world'. The central issue is the situation taking place around the whole body : Each character has a different aim and situation, but this corpse is their connection.

Some characters may have connections (nurso and nursa,
bad wife and her son, priest and good wife, etc) but all of them
are connected thanks to Mr. Mcrobbie's death.

...+ Connections

1. Music, choreographies or sequences of movement always help to create dynamism in a play. The choreography in "La Cocina" is a clear example. The rythm marked by the actors in unison and the organized chaos built up created sensations of stress and fatigue, but 'woke up' the audience,entertained and interested it. 

2. Other way of creating dynamism is breaking the fourth wall and refer the audience. In some parts of "Los Músicos Ambulantes", the characters talk to the audience and play with them. (The music and dancing present in the play are also key elements to create entertainment)

3. If according to Theatre historians slapstick has been present in theatre since its beginnings, it is clear that it is a technique that has always worked to amuse the audience.
"Beating the devil off stage, for example, remained a stock comedic device in many otherwise serious religious plays. Shakespeare also incorporated many chase scenes and beatings into his comedies, such as in his play The Comedy of Errors. "

4. According to Julio Cortazar, 'the short story wins by knock out'. Our play, like the short story, develops around one central issue, and this makes it more interesting.

5. Dynamism can also be created when actors walk near the audience, such as in "Miyuki y Los tres demonios "with the hanamichi, or the ghosts in "Shadow queendom", or Sandra's character in "Its all bussiness"

Reflection/ Final questions

As the creation of a play is a hard process, being specific and detailed (PPP) is very important in order to create something clear and that seems organized and well-planned (for example> cholour scheme in the costumes). 

You have to focus on the purpose of your play, and if it is a comedy, find all the ways possible to entertain the audience. Think about what you would like to see on stage.. what would make you laugh?
It should have well-elaborated jokes and situations. Watching and reading other plays may give you more ideas.


What other techniques could be included in our play to make it more dynamic? Does the use of music always help to catch the audience's attention? Will all types of audience enjoy black humour?

c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n

"Becoming a character, as it is colloquially termed in theater, is more than stage make-up and reciting lines. It is the purposeful altercation of one mannerisms and appearance to mimic a very specific sort of person." 1

Description

one act play one act play one act play
only 17 days left, and so much to be done...

This was a "characterisation week". We did some fisical work (mainly based in rythm) which helped us to develop and 'deepen' our characters.

On the other hand, we continue practicing the scenes and editing ->(our director)
However... we don't know yet how's the play going to end


Analysis and Connections

"They say, "Don't judge a book by its cover." But that is exactly what an actor must count on. Because of mass media influences, certain physical attributes are linked with different behaviors." 1

As I always mention, the creation of a play (including it's vision, concept, game, characters, etc.) is not an easy process!
I've learned it is important to "go forward", and avoid changing things in the play that had already been decided or created.

The creation of a character isn't easy either, and as this play concentrates a lot in changes in characterisation to amuse the audience, we've done some exercises in order to know our centre of energy + how (and at what rythm) our characters walk, stand up, and breath.

Although I like my character, it has been hard for me to perform it, as many times I forget about being "sweet" and keep using a more "stereotyped personality". In order to solve this, I will start using Jessica Rabbit's voice as a stimuli. [Jessica's Famous Scene]

On the other hand, I think that my other character (the priest) needs to be further developed, and as I want it to be the opposite from the mean wife (to create a greater surprise in the audience), I decided that my stimuli will be the Chameleon.

"Any actor worth his salt should learn a variety of accents, voice types and voice patterns. Not all thirty-year old men have the same style of voice."  1

Finally, it is essential to know the importance of the internal monologue for characterisation:
"But these things cannot be accomplished without one more task: how does the character think? Understanding the noetic tendencies of a character is the key that unlocks the rest of his personality.Identify the cognitive processes of a character; the likes and dislikes, dreams and failures - what is rational and what is irrational. Create the person that should be represented." 1

---

• In plays such as 'La cocina' and 'Más pequeños que el Guggenheim', we were able to see very different types of characters in one stage, and that was one of the things which mainly catched my attention and amused the audience.
  Different accents and personalities (such as Chiclayo and the "bad boy", or "el albino" and Sunday) demostrate that contrasts and good characterisation were essential, as it is going to be in our play.
  On the other hand, (depending on the play's concept) the scenery and design does not need to be extremely elaborated, because if characterisation is well-developed, the audience will concentrate on that and find it very enjoyable (like in 'Más pequeños que el Guggenheim').
• Our method and approach in characterisation reminded me of a class where we discussed about Stanislavski:
  "In Stanislavski's technique, the actor would perform a physical motion or a series of physical activities to create the desired emotional response for the character. Emotions were considered to be formed from the subconscious, so this technique allowed the actors to consciously target and control their subconscious emotions through movement. For instance, if an actor needed to weep, he could sigh and hold his head in his hands, a physical action that many who are crying instinctively do." 2

Reflections/ final question

*It is very important to mention what I've also learned this week:
when you are acting, you DON'T IGNORE what is happening on stage, in order to keep the energy. [It is essential to maintain a high energy]

*If you want a deep characterisation, you need to analyze and develop (psychologically and physically) your character. This isn't an easy process.

*in the creation of a play, lines (better if short) need to be acted and not said.

When do I know if my characterisation is "good enough" to start working on the next one? (in this case, from the wife to the priest)
Is there a better way to approach characterisation (for example, through animals, or cartoons), or does it depend on the case?

Which method works better for our characterisation -> developing our characters from the inside to the outside, or from the outside to the inside?

Quotes from:
1 "Method Acting: How to Become a Character" - by Andy Herrick
2 "Stanislavski's system" - from Wikipedia

Creating a play- Limits and changes

Description

It has been more than a month since I wrote my last entry, but very important things have happened.

1. We worked on the play's concept, 'textures' and colour scheme in class
2. I wasn't able to be present on the first One act play rehearsal, but on the second one (Thursday 9th), we started to see something was wrong.... The game we had imagined had an "extreme makeover".
   I think we are finally learning the difficulties of creating a play...

Analysis and Connections

We've always been told that a play cannot be created by "sitting down", but by standing up, improvizing and trying.

It was very hard to find an interesting game for our One Act Play, and when the idea of the "halves" or "two-face" appeared it sounded like a brilliant one!
However, when we started to rehearse for the first time... something was going wrong from the beginning.
I remember I told one of my partners that maybe we were always taught to act in "3/4" because acting side face doesn't really work in theatre.
Does it? maybe for another play or acting space, but it was impossible for us to perform different actions, and the play was becoming static and borring. Characters could not move from one place to another, and couldn't really interact between them.

Imagine any play (Más pequeños que el Guggengeim, La Cocina, Interruptor) but with characters who have those "limits". I tried, but I can´t. In all the plays we've watched characters CONNECT with each other, and their faces can face any direction.

The idea of the "magic door" seems like a good one for me, as it gives us much more possibilities, and is very interesting in terms of characterization. Not only the costume creates the character, but mainly the voice, the body expression, personality, mannerisms, etc.
This extreme sudden change will create the "rechicken effect" in the audience, as hopefully, thanks to the change in characterizations, they will feel amused and very surprised. 

Reflection/ Final Questions

A play's game can be a very "high obstacle", and practice + trying is essential in theatre. We need to see if things work, and if they don't, they need to be changed then.
Other very important aspect is that interaction and connection between the characters in a play is extremely important. Otherwise, the audience will not connect with them, and it may become uninteresting.

Finally, a play needs to be full of ACTIONS (things that happen) and not unuseful text [that's why creating a script was also extremely hard for me].
 If your game doesn't let you perform different actions and movements, then consider changing or improving it.

In what kind of play or acting space would the "two-face" game work?

Is the game of a play ALWAYS a limit?

"A matter of dissection" - THE ORIGINS

dissect·
1. To cut apart or separate. -> GAME
2. to cut open and examine the structure of a dead animal ->PLOT
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description

Paucartambo and One-Act play.
This week (on Tuesday and Thursday) we started staying after school to plan our one act play.

Although Roberto said that the first day wasn't successful, I think it was, as the stimuli (of a morgue) appeared, and we read two different plays ('Over the wall' and 'Us and them').

On Thursday, (although it wasn't easy) an idea for a possible game appeared, inspired by the concept of "gender bender" and "Two face".
We started exploring the possibilities and limits that the game can give us, and the possible characters for our story. 

In class, we've been studying how the four conditions for Theatre are applied in Paucartambo.


Analysis and Connections

So...What did I learn on Tuesday + Thursday?
As we already know, the creation of a play is a long process, and not at all an easy process, it takes a LOT of creativity, time, knowledge about theatre and different plays.
(From the two plays we read) I learnt that short sentences and dialogues work perfectly if you want to create an entertaining and dynamic scene. (I hope I can apply the technique of short dialogues and counter point when creating my scene for the One-act play).

*When creating a play, you need to create characters who "lack something", or are 'looking' for something.
*A game will always give you a lot of possibilities, but also a lot of limits (like the communication between different characters in our play).


As I mentioned in one of my past entries, the Activation Theory is a great contributor in the creation of a play, and we need to make sure that our One-act play has variation (dynamic scenes and varied characters), uncertainty (what happened to mr. Robertson/McRobbie? and what do they want from him?), novelty and complexity (innovative and complex GAME).


We need to create 'elaborated jokes' such as some in "Más Pequeños que el Guggengeim", and focus on characterization, as it will be the most important aspect in our One-Act play.

*In the play "Yerma- mujer que no se habita"- there were two male characters, represented by only one actor who changed (vaguely) parts of the costume and hairstyle. The characterization of both characters was so different, that you could easily and clearly differentiate them.
This is what we need to achieve. A clear and easy differentiation of the two characters that each actor is going to represent.





Now that we have a game and a plot, what 'steps' should we take to create a successful and comic play?

What exercises can we find to reach great characterization?

Are the steps for creating a play, script, or character always the same?


How is the varied characterization reached in Paucartambo? and which could be a good research topic about this tradition?

Conditions for Theatre + A new experience

 A question that has appeared in my mind several times is… what can be considered Theatre?  Or, How do I know that a presentation is a “theatrical play/piece”? (obra de teatro)

On Tuesday I learnt the four “CONDITIONS FOR THEATRE”, which are:

1.   Involvement of the body to represent another person in a certain time and place trough performance.

2. Order, composition and game.

3.  A content, something to say 

4. A social and ritual function

And on Thursday we had the opportunity to watch “La consagración de la primavera”, presented by the “Ballet de Londrina” from Brasil.

There, I had the opportunity to think about the four conditions for theatre and comparing the dancing spectacle with what would be a theatrical play.

Should this presentation be considered a play?

There was an involvement of the dancers’ bodies to represent other characters, a content or something to say about a virgin’s sacrifice, and maybe the social function of showing this idea and the concept of its unfairness.

However, there was not an exact or clear composition of the story/plot and characterization, as it was not focused in telling a story, but in delighting the audience with the dancers’ abilities and skills.

This idea can be connected to Opera, as the Opera spectators do not assist to see the plot, but to hear the music. For a very similar reason (as we were discussing in class), ballet performances usually represent “the same” or traditional stories (such as the Swan lake or The Nutcracker), as the stories entertain the audience and make the presentations more ‘dynamic’, but are not the “focus point”.

So… This was a DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE to the experiences that all the plays have given us. We were expected and able to appreciate the dance moves and tremendous bodywork.

*In Western Theatre, we usually go to concentrate on a plot or story, which should entertain us.

For example, in plays such as "Más pequeños que el Guggenheim", "Los músicos ambulantes", and even "Shadow Queendom", the audience is interested in the STORY that is being told, and wants to know how it will develop and end.

However, comparing this new experience to the Kabuki tradition, the audience goes to appreciate the ACTOR (in this case the dancer's skills), and not the plot.

In just 13 days we will be travelling to Paucartambo, and I ask myself.. how are the 4 conditions of Theatre applied there?

Should the audience be more concentrated in the dancing, music and atmosphere created rather than in a specific story or plot?

What is the most important aspect in the celebration of "Mamacha Carmen"? The acting? the irony in the masks, costumes and representations about past characters and events? the 'story' of Qollarri's daughter being captured by Inkarri??

What kind of experience do the "Paucartambinos" want to give to their audience?

In musicals (such as Hairspray), should the audience be concentrated mainly in the story or in the singing? 


Are the performers in Paucartambo actors or dancers? and if they are dancers, why should it be considered theatre?