Thoughts on "Resabios de Amargura"

Since no one that I know of in our class was in this performance or saw it, I'm going to summarize it a little before discussing it.

"Cabaret" is about a Puerto Rican woman who moves from Puerto Rico to a town near the Canadian border to Los Angeles to New York and finds herself missing her original home.

It is a solo piece, and the actress behind the production took stories from her various friends' experiences with moving to the US. She said in the post-show discussion that she had friends who never wanted to go back to Puerto Rico once they moved away, friends who longed for the island, friends who moved back, and friends who did not want to move back, but felt guilty for feeling that way. Her story is about several different kinds of love: love for one's old country, new country, and romantic love.

The performance was partly in English, partly in Spanish, and partly in Spanish with English subtitles, which she said she did to privelege the Spanish speakers. I don't speak Spanish, but I didn't feel like I missed a beat. Her facial expressions and body language said it all.

I've never seen a monologue quite this long or elaborate.

And I loved how she would announce things like, "Okay, in a moment I'm going to change into a red shawl, and I will be playing the other character for awhile. Okay? Okay." This clarified things for me, and it was also just cute. Makes me wish this kind of thing was common on stage, sometimes I get confused.

And she talked to the audience like we were her best friend or her diary; we got to see her little quirks and flaws, and I thought she was really charming.

I didn't know much about Puerto Rico before seeing this, and I still don't know much, but I feel like I have a better idea of what it's like to be a transplant in a new place. She goes through a lot of trials, but she keeps smiling and singing through it all.

Thoughts on "So/La Spaces"

Much like "On these four matters matters we cannot agree..." this piece had the great concept of juxtaposing two different performance styles. The piece was divided into two sections, "Sky" and "Water." I want to focus on the dance piece, "Sky."

"Sky" featured M.F.A. candidate in Performance as Public Practice, Meg Brooker. I loved her costume. It was a flowy, peach dress. And I don't know if it was the costuming or the dancing or just the way she looks, but I felt like I had been transported to a different time. A time when Florence Fleming Noyes WAS alive and developing Noyes Rhythm, the early twentieth century movement practice which inspired "Sky."

The piece was performed on the B. Iden Payne stage, but that included the seating area. This made this performance extremely intimate. Because we were enclosed in close quarters, Brooker's use of breath in her dance was evident. She later said it was a conscious choice to implement her breath the way she did. It emphasized on the use of the solar plexus. According to the "So/La Spaces" program, the solar plexus, or the "spot" as it is referred to in Noyes terminology, is the body's coordinating center. I could relate to this concept because the solar plexus is one component of the chakras. I took a movement improvisation class with Yacov Sharir last semester and he implements the awareness of the body's chakras in performance.

"Sky" also featured watercolor images by artist Linda DeHart. The images were projected during Brooker's dance. Her movement, coupled with the images, created a sense of exploration and adventure. A celebration of human beings and earth, the relationship created between the two through movement.

Thoughts on "On these four matters we cannot agree..."

I was attracted to this piece because of its concept: The juxtaposition of a dancer (Matthew Bunker) and an upright bassist (Jessica Valls). But I was completely captivated by the bass player and didn't pay much attention to the dancer. Honestly, he did a lot of standing around and that bass player was really GETTING' DOWN! It was hard not to pay attention to her. More info on her here.

I had no idea how versatile the upright bass is. It can be jazzy, funky, classical, everything all in one. At one point she was plucking and slapping it a la "August Rush." I loved it!

The only thing I would have liked to see was more confrontation between the dancer and the bassist. There was some at the beginning, but then it sort of tapered off and Valls was doing her thing, while Bunker was doing his. I think it would have made it a more cohesive piece and I probably would have been forced to pay attention to the dancing as well as the music.

Also, I wasn't thinking at all about physicality or gender associations during the performance. Progressive? Maybe. But honestly, I think it was just some badass bass-playing.

Thoughts on "Footprints"

First of all, I have to say that I LOVE LOVE LOVE Marlane Barnes. She was fabulous in "An Ideal Husband." And she was great in "Footprints" and "The Edge of Peace" during the New Works Festival. She is a powerhouse actress, which you wouldn't think at first because of her size. But she really is this little bundle of energy on stage.

I loved the little things that made "Footprints" different, especially when it came to the set. The piece really stuck to its subject matter and concept of eco-theatre and sustainable theatre by not printing programs. Instead, the program was projected onto the wall above the stairs outside of the Payne lobby. The set design was also unique, eco-friendly and a collaborative effort. With the help of the Austin EcoSchool, the set designers transformed the Payne lobby using plastic bags, newspapers and Styrofoam peanuts to portray trees in a forest.

I liked the actors' costumes as well. If I remember correctly, everyone was wearing black and most of the costuming was seen in the headpieces/headdress of each actor. I think this choice was made simply because this was a staged reading of "Footprints," but I liked having something that visually separated the elements from Sophie. I also enjoyed the positioning of the actors in chairs. I think the team really used the space to their advantage. The performance was in a lobby after all.

Even though this "musical eco-tale" is geared toward children, I think the authors/writers did a fantastic job of not dumbing it down. Even the topics discussed during song were presented in factual manner, and were meant to be taken seriously.

Also, I have to mention that the live music was fabulous! But it was also a little distracting. I wanted to see who was playing and what they were playing. I experienced something similar during "On these four matters we cannot agree..." I dunno, maybe there's something about live performance and instrumentation that fascinates me.

I loved the "Footprints" reprise that appeared several times during the show. ("Please leave only footprints/Nature will take care of the rest.") I have to admit that I was a little teary eyed toward the end. And the play really made me think. Honestly, I walked out of there feeling like a horrible human being. It made me think of every cigarette butt I've thrown on the ground, my long showers, and the fact that I don't recycle on a regular basis. I came straight home after the performance and pulled all the [clean] paper I could find out of the trash. Yes, I'm a little silly. Let me.

Last, but not least I want to commend Bryan and Julia on their performances. I really enjoyed that moment when Julia "broke it down" and let it all out. Yes, I heard that. GREAT JOB!

"Just as you may have suspected, Hell is a shopping mall." :)

I went to Psyche Project because I knew people in our class were in it, but I was a little wary because I never studied mythology in much detail during school. So if you're thinking about seeing it but do not want to because you know little about mythology, just see it anyway, it's hilarious and you will understand the language.

I liked how Psyche's counting the grain, retrieving the golden wool and going to hell represented the everyday maintenance that people do to retain their relationships. I didn't realize until the post-play discussion that this was the idea behind those actions, but it makes sense now, this is all about love and making it work.

I never understood why it was such an awful thing for Psyche to know that Eros was a God, but upon Wikipedia-ing the story, it looks like there's no reason, and it doesn't matter much why--Eros makes her promise not to see his face, and she betrays him.

And when she counts the popcorn (separates the grain,) who helps her? I understand in the original story it was ants, but I can't recall who helped her in the play. I thought it was the voice of eros, who gave her larger popcorn bowls. I'm confused.

Were we supposed to eat that? :)

The image of Anxiety and Doubt (and maybe Fear and another?) hovering around Psyche stuck with me. To see these feelings personified and doing what they do best--taunting--reminded me of people's bodily insecurities but also of the inner editor writers have. Those things were scary! Just like in real life.

And it didn't occur to me until now, but the Gods bargaining with Zeus was an interesting scene, because I think of the Gods as working together, but if I knew much about mythology, I'm guessing I would know that Zeus rules over them all?

And the actress who played the Oracle was a riot! I loved the whole "this is 200 proof beauty" bit, it really caught me off guard.

*Spoilers here*

And lastly, I wonder how it must have felt to play Eros at the very end and to have the whole audience angry at you. Seems very daunting. I was disappointed by the ending, but when it was explained after the play, it made sense to me. I know I would have walked away contented and not thinking about the message had Psyche and Eros been reunited.

And like someone in the audience said, I do think it was more Eros' fault than Psyche's for her demise. He just sat there and pined and "bled" for her while his mother put her through ridiculous paces. And the only reason in my mind that she opened the box was to ensure that when she saw Eros next, he would still love her. She was accustomed to being loved for her beauty, she felt it was her only "trick."

Also--I see why the box of beauty and golden wool would directly benefit Venus, because both make her more beautiful, but why did Venus ask Psyche to separate the grain? Was it just a first effort to get her to go away, because she couldn't think of any beauty-related task to give her?