"they looked at me with that what-do-you-think-you're-doing-bitch attitude"

Yesterday, we didnt go to "yuyachkani" [i know..:(], we went to diego's house and then went to Universidad San Marcos to watch one of the plays in the "4to Festival UCSUR de Teatro Internacional". We waited around an hour and killed the timeplaying charadaa and playing tiny scenes of "Nelly's guest house" [I found out that one of sandra's characters was a french maid and one of rodrigo's was a cowboy]. the ants invaded us and i discovered thta roberto is a cheater! [OMG!, the girls won anyway]. Then we entered and i wondered if the school theatre could ever be that cool.

The play was called"Dominicanish" by Ayombe from Dominican REpublic. I'n not sure if i liked it or not but i do have both comments about what i think was wrong and very very very very very very...good. First of all, I want to state what i supposed was the theme of the play. The actress, who represented more than one character and sometimes societies, expressed the struggle of countries towards foreigners. in this case, the 'need' to learn english where the native language is spanish. I compare it to the spanish colonization of america. although in dominicanish the language isn't impossed as hardly.

Likes:

• I looooved the actress' performance, she used a combination of oppositions, that as the others said, made look rolly and his moco like nothing [of course, if he is nothing we are..less than nothing], and indu dance. Her voice was strong and her steps were well syncronized. She thought every step she took. she was also, aware of the audience [disappearence of the 4th wall] and made the audience participate.
• The use of light was amazing. the actress could hide in it and it created a sort of mistery. it also focused little parts so we could direct our attention to it.

I'll add a little video of the light and her movements:

Dislikes:

• The video that they put, was unnecesary, it might have had a purpose or relation to the play but it divided the attention of the audience, and i peronally didn't know where to look.
• The lack of other actors made the play uninteresting and without the right amount of action, monotoned and very boring
• I had problems trying to follow the play, and i didnt get some words
• the use of space was unbalanced, there was like 5 square meters left alone.
• the play seem more like a monologe than a play. it didn't really have an end.

In conclusion, what really made me applaud, was the actress' performance, it was visible that she had a good control of her body, strenght and charisma when acting.

The same question revolves and revolves in my mind, is the comedy enough to entretain the audience in 'Las aceitunas'? If they cannot understand the text and just the actions..could they get bored? Itsn't it more interesting to have a combination of both context and comedy?

'Stressed Randomism' could be my new culture

Oh god! this week has been... stressfull, yeah that's the word. We've been studying the spanish golden age for class and each one of us was suppposed to investigate about a subject and explain it to the rest so each one of us had a pretty good idea of what was coming for the school play. My PPP about the antecedents of the golden age were visibly unprepared and so I got the lowest grade I've ever had (well-deserved of course). Soon, the other bad and good presentations passed as well and I could see all we had to do. It is a lot to do and not much time, so we have to hurry up!



Tuesday came and so CAS and rehearsal day. We stayed for CAS first, listening to Katty complaining about drama rehearsals in front of us and assuming that we weren't there. Then we went to the good stuff! Luis Diego didn't come that day so we couldn't rehearse as well as before. I also found out that I sometimes have an explosive behaviour when things don't go well. The problem was that the actors were easily distracted and when it came time to act they didnt get what to do and they wanted us to do all the work for them, i had to tell them several times that they had to think for themselves as well, we weren't suppossed to do our jobs plus theirs. We would help, of course, but as roberto said, we can't teach them how to act. And we definetely shouldn't tell them EVERY SINGLE action they must make. I know I might not be a great actress but I know when something isn't prepared, and we have to work really hard with them. the problem is, how is it the best way to get to them, maybe make them see more movies and plays so they can see how many actions and feelings a person can perform in scene; or maybe we should just leave them by themselves one day and see how they can manage to make a scene without external help? I know I'm not the director but I feel the urge to make this play perfect, maybe it is because now i'm part of it and if something goes wrong i'll feel guilty as i usually do, even when it isnt up to me to feel that way. Anyway.. we're a team and we must stand together and the ib's will try to pull the other up so the play is end up as a magnificent piece of art. But we're still in the first weeks so should except these kind of things, we'll get better as time passes.

Changing the subject, today i was watching Titanic and while Rose and Jack were running away from her fiance, it occured to me a great idea (consider it, it you like it let me know). The idea of the superheroes for the next year play looks great, but wouldnt it be cooler if we made 'the making' of a superheroe movie? imagine a director, kinky actors that change personality - from movie to real set-, a gay modist, camera men, EVERYTHING (it will be a comedy so it will suit perfectly)... we'd need a lot of people and that's what we have a lot of. Just think about it guys and we'll see about it later. Now we have to focus on this year play.

I just think of a problem, how can we make the audience to not fall sleep during the play? talking seriously, the kind of language used there isn't the easiest one, I myself wouldn't get if i didn't read it first. How can we translate the play in a way that doesn't alter itself but that is understandable at the same time? should we realy more on the actions? should we concentrate more on 'scpecial effects'? or maybe both? a balance or more of one and less of the other?