Newtontambo

After studying the traditional Andean festivity of the Virgen del Carmen, we discovered that it explained the origin of the Inca Empire. We decided that we will use Andean theatre conventions in our performance to explain one aspect of our lives as Newton students: the origin of detentions. The characters in our performance were the Qollas (representing the students) and the Saqras, (representing the teachers). ‘Newtontambo’ was performed during 3 days, a performance of more or less 10 minutes per day.

DAY 1
The first day was about the Saqras. The main purpose of this day was to show how the Saqras hide the IB answers so no one could steal them. We finished this day with a dance. Our main error this day was that we didn’t dance the dance. There was no energy. We were all lost and often had to look around to see what everyone else was doing. The space was not well used. We had an enormous ‘stage’ which we wasted. What we need to do next time is to rehearse in a big open space like the one we are going to perform at. We should have done our rehearsals in a small classroom, this limited our space and made it difficult to adapt when performing in the patio. We also need to rehearse better with the costumes we are going to use. We should have worn our mask and wigs on every rehearsal so that way shouldn’t have to stop acting to fix them.

DAY 2
Day 2 was about the Qollas. This was my favorite performance day. It was full of energy and we could notice that the audience was having a lot of fun. This is when the Qollas steal the IB answers and then start running around the patio, interacting with the audience. Unfortunately, we failed in the singing part. I think
that the Qolla’s song was one of the most important elements of the day because this is when they sing to the Mamacha, the most important figure in the Paucartambo celebration. At this moment of the play we were too exhausted to have the energy to sing loudly so that the audience could hear us.

Day 3
The last day concerned the participation of the Qollas and the Saqras, 4 actors per character. In this day the Saqras discovered that the Qollas stole the IB answers and they give them detentions. One positive aspect about this day was that it had lots of actions. The audience was entertained. Negative aspect: lack of energy. The actors that performed as Qollas were supposed to be running around, all the time screaming in ‘falcete’. This rarely happened. Additionally, we didn’t use the wheelbarrow that represented the ‘ninacarro’, an essential prop in the guerilla.

Performing a play using Andean theatre conventions was a completely new experience to me as an actress. I found many differences. For instance, in ‘Newtontambo’ there were no lines I had to memorize; instead I focused more on learning the actions and being aware of the audience. The position of the audience was also different as in this performance they were located everywhere, surrounding us; sometimes we were at the same level as the audience. In constrast, in other plays like ‘La Vida es Sueño’ or ‘It’s all Business’, I was used to have the audience below the stage, so it was clear to me in which direction was I supposed to perform. Also, the use of mask was a significant difference. As an actress, I love to work on face expressions but this was taken away from me in this play because of the use of mask. It was difficult for me to express without using my face. Next time I should work more on my body movements. I need to learn how to use my body to tell the story.

I wonder if the audience understood our play. Do Newtonians prefer plays in theatres or in open spaces? Did they criticize our presentation in the same way they criticized our previous productions? Were the Andean theatre conventions clear for the audience?

La Opera de Tres Centavos

After participating in last year’s ‘The good woman of Setzuan’, I wondered how professional actors presented a play by Brecht. ‘La opera de Tres Centavos’ was my chance to understand fully how to act using Brecht’s techniques.

Friday’s play was entertaining but I didn’t like several aspects about it. First of all, it was too long. The play could have easily been perfect with duration of one hour and a half. Each act lasted close to 1 hour and 15 minutes, so by the second act I couldn’t take more of it.

There were too many songs. Each scene ended with a song sung by the characters present in that scene, where they expressed their feelings about the situation. By the 3rd song, the structure of the play was predictable: scene-song-scene-song-scene-song… and on and on and on. This basically made the rhythm of the play be the same all the time. Thus, by the second act I was tired of watching the same thing. I couldn’t concentrate.

I didn’t like the images portrayed in the background. These black and white pictures were confusing because they were very contrasting to the actions that were going on. The play looked like colorful like a fairytale, and the dull colors of the images changes the mood of the audience. I didn’t understand the purpose of those pictures.

Positive things about the play: many.
The costumes were impressive. They were very well done and represented perfectly the personality of the characters. There were changes in costume when the actors changed characters. Make-up added to the costumes.

Scenery was great. It was very interesting to see how they used the same structure to represent different things. For example, at the beginning the structure were one character sell tickets for what it seemed to be a circus, was turned backwards and used as the place where Poli’s mother hung the clothes to dry. The desk used by Jonathan was gigantic. This definitely added importance to Jonathan’s characters, but also was great for the use of levels in the scene.

Acting was exceptional. The actors played the Brecht technique almost perfectly. Their positions and face expressions excellent. The most memorable character, I believe was Poli. She had great use of column (which she forced backwards and sideways) and she reacted to everything that happened in the scene. Her use of voice was also very good and funny.

I can’t tell that this play was excellent, but I admit that it was nicely done and the groups of actors were very good. I didn’t like the fact that there were too many songs. Singers are performers like actors. What distinguishes the performance done by an actor than the one done by a signer? Can singers be actors? Can actors be singers? Are musicals better than plays without songs?

Miss Sunshine

My character in ‘It’s all business’ was a hippie woman called Miss Sunshine who invaded 2 of the stands, Mr. Totsy’s and Mrs. Middleton. She truly believed in the spirits and she always followed her destiny. When I first imagined my character I thought it wouldn’t be difficult to build it up, but that was the hardest part.

To help me build my character I investigated how hippies were like because what I already knew about them was not much. After reading some information on the internet I realized that Miss Sunshine was not only a hippie, but kind of a witch too, because she performs rituals and changes personality (like being possessed). Thus, one of my big influences for this character was Professor Trelawney from Harry Potter, because she was the character I could relate Miss Sunshine the most.

In terms of body language Professor Trelawney thought me to focus on the movements of my hands and arms. Miss Sunshine had to have very big, but soft movements. This was difficult for me to portray because I am used to rapid and short actions.

Face expressions are my favourite thing to do when building a character; and I think it’s kind of easy for me to try different face expressions. The problem is that once I find a face expression that I like, it is very difficult for me to try other ones. I played Miss Sunshine with my eyes wide open. I was trying to show that she truly believed in everything she was talking about (spirts, destiny, etc).

Voice has always been my weakest point at character building. I have always worked with a high pitch voice in all my previous characters, so for this one, Roberto and I wanted to do the opposite. It was impossible for me to maintain the low pitch voice in the rehearsals, so we decided to try the high pitch again but with the ‘ñe’ (voz nasal). In some of the rehearsals I managed to go through the whole play without forgetting the ‘ñe’ sound; but in most of them, Sandra’s voice took over Miss Sunshine’s. Unfortunately, this is what happened in the final performance. Voice is one aspect of acting I really need to work on.

As in for props, Miss Sunshine carried a guitar bag where she kept the scarves she sold, a carpet, a perfume, leaves and a dead rat. I should have planned step-by-step the actions with my props because in some scenes I took too much time to take out the carpet from the bad, and that affected the whole timing of the scene. Additionally, I didn’t have the dead rat until the final rehearsal, so in the final performance I basically had to improvise how to carry and use the rat. As an actor, I should also be responsible for the props I need, so if the Prop-responsible people have not given me the prop I need, I should find a way to get something that is similar to the prop I need so I can practice.

At first, my character was very superficial. But after lots of rehearsals, and the help of the costume and the wig I wore, I managed to believe in what I was doing and that I was Miss Sunshine. In the final performance I didn’t show my best Miss Sunshine. I know that Sandra often showed instead of my character, mostly in the aspect of the voice.

How much research do you need to do to build a character? Did I ignore many possibilities of voices, body movements and face expressions when building Miss Sunshine? Who is the judge of my performance... the audience? The director? Myself?

It's all business

Every play has a process of creation. In my opinion, I didn't contribute much in this process. We arranched several meetings to write the play, but I was not fully concentrated. As we had little time to work on this, we decided to do what we are good at: comedy. We had to focus in the type of audience we were going to have: students of our age and parents (which most of them do not speak English), therefore the play had to be very visual and the story easy to understand.

What I believe that worked in this play was that all the characters had contrasting personalities: the little tomboy girl, the hippie, the bipolar flower-seller, the pervy japanese, the videogame addict, the pervyvideo addict, and the british shoe-seller lady. This contrasts keep the audience entertained and makes them have a good time watching a play that does not try to deliver a complicated message. The play was not telling a story, it was just a set un fun situations in 4 scenes.

Another thing that worked was the structure of the play. While one scene was being acted, the other 2 were done in mime. Only in the last scene the characters used all the space in the stage. I don't think that any other school used this technique before because the whole audience was impressed by the way we managed to coordinate the 3 scenes. (Of course, there were lots of mistakes done like, people doing their scenes faster in mime and very slow while we talking, but the audience did not noticed. Only us, the actors, Roberto and Melissa).

While discussing about our performance in class, we were remembered by Roberto that this was the first time we ever had a dressed rehearsal without anyone watching. This affected significantly our performance on Thursday because we were never given advice or comments from espectators. The day of the final performance was the first time we faced an audience with our play. The adrenaline and the nervousness, in my opinion, did not let us really feel our characters. Honestly, we performed our play better during previous rehearsals.This reminded me of the difference between presenting a play 3 nights on a row, like 'La Vida es Sueño', and only presenting it one night. When you do several presentations, you get better everynight. On the other hand, the One-Act Play Festival only gives you one chance to prove the audience your talent and habilities.

In 'It's all bussiness', we represented people who form part of our world and our society. We represented ourselfs by showing others, because they form part of our culture. We were not trying to change the world, we were just showing our point of view. Some theatre traditions, on the other hand, have the purpose of changing our way of thinking and living (our culture). Last Tuesday in class we got the conclusion that, if threatre in Lima had that purpose, nothing would change because people in Lima are not used to go to theatre. In this case we would have to use mass media methods like T.V., cinema, etc. The role of theatre (role of representing ourselfs) is an import role in society beacause in theatre is where you see yourself. The play belongs to the audience. Theatre is an immediate art, that is why we focus on getting to the people.

Does every play have the same process of creation? Do we really need a process to write a play? Or can it come our of nowhere? Is the process the same for comedy and dramatic plays?

Danza Abierta de la Universidad de Costa Rica

On Thursday 25th July, we went to watch a different kind of performance to the ones that we are used to, a dance performance. It was absolutely a different, unique experience because dancers, in comparison to actors, only focus on movements. Actors, on the other hand, have to divide all their energy into actions, face expression, voice, etc.

Nevertheless, I found some similarities between actors and dancers. For example, breathing. After watching this performance I understood the importance of breathing, something Roberto taught us long time ago. It was impressive to actually hear the performers breathe before making a new movement. Breathing was their source of energy.

The performance, directed by Rogelio López, was divided into 3 dances: Prohibido adentrarse en el bosque, Pulsión, Érase una vez un Árbol. They were all aggressive. To me, the most impressive dance, and my favorite one was Pulsión, because all dancers were onstage at the same time during all the performance. This proved that they had to work a lot on their energy to present this almost-10 minutes long performance. The choreography was very interesting, but they needed some more practice. The mistakes they made could have been because of the nervousness (this was their first show in Lima), but they still were very coordinated.

Érase una vez un Árbol, presented the themes of death, the lost of someone you really appreciate and admire. This was influenced by the death of María Cristina Gigirey, maestra de danza. Thus, the dance was aggressive and full of fast, strong movements. In this part of the presentation I realized that sometimes dancers, as actors, also used face expression to accompany their movements.

Some of the movements involved more than one performer. We could see how, for example, the couple of dancers placed in the right part of the stage did one movement, and then, after a couple of minutes, we could see the same choreography repeated by the other two couples. The amount of team work portrayed in the dance was remarkable.

Apart from the movements and the energy of the dancers, what I found interesting were the costumes. In the first presentation they appeared with black robes, which could be used in different ways. When they were representing trees, they used some clothes made of latex which made it more elastic.

In conclusion, I loved watching dances for a change and I couldn’t help myself for comparing actors and dancers. I wonder, if we add words to a dance, would it make it a theatrical representation? How different are actors from dancers? Do dancers need more energy than actors? Are the 3 principles for rehearsal the same for actors and dancers?

Respira

Last week we went to watch Respira at Teatro Britanico. It was a play written by Eduardo Adrianzén and directed by Roberto Ángeles. I was expecting it to be an incredible play, because I heard wonderful comments about it, but I got a little disappointed.

On the one hand, there were good things about Respira. The script was very well written. The story was narrated by a boy called Mario, in the present 40 years old. He talked about his family and their life in Lima on the 70s. His mother was religious and his father was a socialist atheist. ‘El conflicto de la obra es la dificultad de creer’ – Eduardo Adrianzén. This was exposed by, for example, the different ideas Mario's parents poured into his mind. He didn't know who to believe because the things his mother told him about religion was the oppposite of what his father told him.

These contradictions makes Mario create a different type of Jesus in his mind. Cristo, played by Renzo Shuller, was my favorite character and a total plus to the play. He was not the Jesus that we all know, but his a rebel, he likes fighting and talks about revenge. Roberto told me that he thought that Jesus was a little bit fat, but I thought that was the way he had to be, to add to the idea of contradiction. We all have the image of Jesus being a tall, skinny man, so watching a short fat guy playing a rebelious Jesus, to me it maked sense.

Oher thing that maked the play interesting, was the comedy. We are presented these too kids, Mario and Walter, in their first look to sexuality. The character of the priest was full of greed which adds to the contradiction of what people normaly expects, and what Mario experiences and imagines. Additionally, taking into account the scenery, I liked the idea of the rolling thingy on one corner of the stage and the images projected in the background wall, which changed the place the actions were happening.

On the other hand, there were things that, in my opinion, didn't work in this play. First of all, Mario was supposed to be the youngest child in his family. He had an older brother, Renato, yet Leonardo Torres Vilar (the actor playing Mario) had beard which made it imposible for audience, at least me, to believe that he was younger thatn his brother. Furthermore, I really did not understand the purposes of both Mario’s parents giving a speech of more than 5 minutes each, explaining their lives’ frustrations. I didn’t care about that. In my opinion it only made the play go slower. Overall, I didn’t love the play. It was not for a specific reason, I just didn’t enjoy it.

Roberto told me that he loved the script but the direction, thus the performance, was not as good. So I wonder, do we sometimes waste good scripts by giving not so good performances? What does it take to give a performance that is at the same level as the script? Can we give an excellent preformance with a bad text? How much of the quality of the performance rely on the script?

BREATHING, CENTRE OF ENERGY & COLUMN

'Training is knowledge, knowledge is power.'
On the last weeks of March, we worked on the three principles of a rehearsal: breathing, centre of energy and column. We started with the centre of energy. It was very difficult for me to understand what the centre of energy was, and how to use it.

In one of our first exercises we had to lie down in position A and imagine that all the energy we had, was leaving our bodies. Then, with every breath we took, energy entered our body but stayed on our centre of energy (near the bellybutton). Roberto told us to imagine that our energy was like a sphere that spins through our bodies. After that, we stood up, focusing our energy all the time in the centre and we had to imagine that we were like Spiderman going down a building, but the building was upside down.

I HATED THIS EXERCISE. It was impossible for me to imagine a sphere, my centre of energy was a purple box... and boxes don’t spin. My energy couldn’t reach every part of my body. I fell asleep in the middle of the exercise. I couldn’t concentrate on the Spiderman-exercise. Every time I felt I was concentrated enough to take one step down, I lost my focus. It was frustrating.

To train with the column we did various exercises, and of course, I hated them all. One of them was about ‘waking our column’. We had to try different movements and positions to create our own routine. I focused more on the upper part of the column, so I need to work on my lower-column more. After that, Roberto put us in couples, so each couple would create 4 movements involving the column and then we would create the whole-class routine. At first, it was very difficult to concentrate because of the heat of the room (we were all sweating like pigs) and the laziness I had those days... but after a while I started enjoying the exercises.

One of the best things about working with breathing, centre of energy and column is mixing them all. On the last day of ‘training’, Roberto made us work with all the principles. We started by waking up our bodies and then we had to imagine a situation and walk around the room being always aware of the 3 principles of training. I imagined I was a human being raised as an animal. I walked through the room using my hands and back. I watched everything closely because I was in a new environment and I was scared. I really enjoyed that exercise and I discovered how difficult it is to walk with the hands and to be aware all the time of the three principles while acting.

I wonder, in what ways I'll put in practice breathing, centre of energy and column when building my character for the play?