1) The play Progress effectively conveyed its message about pushing through bureaucracy without being pushy. It portrayed the determination of the main character Marina despite facing obstacles from an inefficient system.
2) While the story was not new, focusing on it highlighted issues still relevant today like dealing with poor government service. The play aimed to inspire diligence when facing challenges rather than condemn past regimes.
3) The actors conveyed emotions and interactions skillfully through precise movements, expressions, and delivery of lines in a humorous yet genuine manner. Marina also broke the fourth wall by interacting with audience, enhancing engagement.
16 Mar 2015Reading Response The Vagina MonologuesThe Vagina M.docxhyacinthshackley2629
16 Mar 2015
Reading Response: The Vagina Monologues
The Vagina Monologues is a play comprising episodes written by Eve Ensler. This play is mainly based on the monologues made by a large number of women about their genital organ named “Vagina.” The author herself is a woman, so she has a good knowledge of the main theme of the play. The monologues made by several women about their experience of sexual relationship and their perceptions about vagina (Ensler, 2007). Different women have different thinking about their vagina. Some have quoted, “My Angry Vagina”, “Because he liked to look at it”, My Vagina was my Village” and many more. The content of the play is quite realistic as it is based on the monologues made from the personal experiences of the women. From the reading, it has been inferred that women of different age and background have different feelings about their vagina. Young women, married women, lesbians, sex workers, all have their own views about their vagina. The work is formed in a structured and interesting ways to keep the interests of readers to a greater extent. At some places, the play gives a negative portrayal of the sexual relationship of males and females. In all it has been inferred from the reading that though vagina is the supreme embodiment of all the females, yet they take it in different ways.
ALENEZI 1
Mar 25, 2015
Corpus Christie
Terrence Mc Nally’s Corpus Christi forays a multitude of onlookers as it deals with a very delicate and peculiar issue. The play projects the outrageous question of portraying Jesus Christ as gay. Depicting Christ as gay brings no difference to his fate which means he is deceived by Judas and is crucified for all to observe. The play, despite the rising controversies, passes the message of parity. But the spectators view the surface aspects of the play that creates the hullabaloo. The predestined minds of the viewers can never accept Christ as a homosexual and definitely consider the play as blasphemous. I personally oppose many factors in the play. The strong religious background never allows people like us to take a positive stance with the play. Christ is a popular and revered figure and to accept him as a human with all follies is something that requires a special and peculiar sense of spirit which is difficult to achieve. Jesus is born of immaculate conception and it is predestined that his life should be and certainly be immaculate. The mind set can never be altered with such ease and there is always a tendency to categorize the play as sacrilegious. There are still double sided opinions regarding homosexuality and yet there are debates as to whether it be regarded as natural or not. In any case, it is not fair to disturb the feelings of a sect of people. In my personal opinion, the play is disgraceful. The play’s apparent objective of upholding lenience by misportraying a venerated personality that Christians all around the globe reflect to be celestial needs to.
16 Mar 2015Reading Response The Vagina MonologuesThe Vagina M.docxhyacinthshackley2629
16 Mar 2015
Reading Response: The Vagina Monologues
The Vagina Monologues is a play comprising episodes written by Eve Ensler. This play is mainly based on the monologues made by a large number of women about their genital organ named “Vagina.” The author herself is a woman, so she has a good knowledge of the main theme of the play. The monologues made by several women about their experience of sexual relationship and their perceptions about vagina (Ensler, 2007). Different women have different thinking about their vagina. Some have quoted, “My Angry Vagina”, “Because he liked to look at it”, My Vagina was my Village” and many more. The content of the play is quite realistic as it is based on the monologues made from the personal experiences of the women. From the reading, it has been inferred that women of different age and background have different feelings about their vagina. Young women, married women, lesbians, sex workers, all have their own views about their vagina. The work is formed in a structured and interesting ways to keep the interests of readers to a greater extent. At some places, the play gives a negative portrayal of the sexual relationship of males and females. In all it has been inferred from the reading that though vagina is the supreme embodiment of all the females, yet they take it in different ways.
ALENEZI 1
Mar 25, 2015
Corpus Christie
Terrence Mc Nally’s Corpus Christi forays a multitude of onlookers as it deals with a very delicate and peculiar issue. The play projects the outrageous question of portraying Jesus Christ as gay. Depicting Christ as gay brings no difference to his fate which means he is deceived by Judas and is crucified for all to observe. The play, despite the rising controversies, passes the message of parity. But the spectators view the surface aspects of the play that creates the hullabaloo. The predestined minds of the viewers can never accept Christ as a homosexual and definitely consider the play as blasphemous. I personally oppose many factors in the play. The strong religious background never allows people like us to take a positive stance with the play. Christ is a popular and revered figure and to accept him as a human with all follies is something that requires a special and peculiar sense of spirit which is difficult to achieve. Jesus is born of immaculate conception and it is predestined that his life should be and certainly be immaculate. The mind set can never be altered with such ease and there is always a tendency to categorize the play as sacrilegious. There are still double sided opinions regarding homosexuality and yet there are debates as to whether it be regarded as natural or not. In any case, it is not fair to disturb the feelings of a sect of people. In my personal opinion, the play is disgraceful. The play’s apparent objective of upholding lenience by misportraying a venerated personality that Christians all around the globe reflect to be celestial needs to.
DescribingLast semester on October 9th, my boyfriend and I att.docxsimonithomas47935
/Describing/
Last semester on October 9th, my boyfriend and I attended the production of "Stupid F---ing Bird by Aaron Posner" performed at Studio 88 by the Miami Department of Theatre. We just went for fun, not knowing anything about the actual play. I once practiced lines of this piece with my friend, and came away from that thinking it was a comedy. This was NOT a comedy. Before the show started, all actors were passing out playbills, and responded to people coming into the studio as their characters, not themselves. They took on the attitude of the people in the play. The playbill gave us the insight on things that may have been slightly adapted from the original production, and the show included original music composed by the actors as well as different interpretations of a few scenes from the original show. It also included various interaction with the audience where there would be long pauses of silence with the on stage actors waiting for the audience's response (they didn't move on with the show until someone responded. Some of that took a while.) The description of the performance provided by the Department of Theatre is as follows:
"Love, death, beauty, despair and one unfortunate seagull collide in this unabashedly provocative riff on Chekhov’s classic. Con is a burgeoning playwright in love with his ingénue; his mother, an aging actress, is involved with a famous novelist; the novelist, in turn, is increasingly enchanted with Con’s girlfriend; and everyone else suffers on the sidelines. Chekhov’s characters still ruminate on love, revolution and the pursuit of happiness, but this time convention is severely compromised."
(I wish I had known this information before, because honestly it would have better prepared me for what I was about to deal with emotionally.)
/Interpreting/
Having the characters passing out playbills rather than just someone not in the show giving them out was an interesting way to meet the characters before we saw them perform on stage. Even when we greeted someone who we knew, he acted as though he never met us before and didn't know why we called him by a different name. All of them took it very seriously and played it out well. It added an extra layer of depth to each character. While I often feel like added original songs are unnecessary and tend to take away from the show rather than add to it, I will admit that the lyrics of each song they performed set the mood for the scene that would directly follow. There were also many times where actors would go off-stage and perform dialogue in different places in the audience, or sound effects would be heard to inform us that something happened. This added to the overall effect of having the audience be included in what was transpiring on stage/off-stage. Many times when the characters would speak, it would be as though they were speaking directly to us rather than to another character on stage. At the end of the show especially, this played a large role in havin.
Mosab AlsubhiRCC Theater-3 Reaction Paper for Duality (A Per.docxgilpinleeanna
Mosab Alsubhi
RCC Theater-3
Reaction Paper for Duality (A Perspective on Truth)
The theater presentation that was held in Singletary Hall in Riverside Community College on November16th, 2016 at 7pm was amazing and I had a lot of fun and real theater and as I said again that I would prefer going in place of a cinema and watching movies.
The play was funny and has a lot of meaning of perspective on truth that how you explain or telling the truth. The director did a really good job by affectively locating and presenting the storyline onto one stage. The dialogues used and the story was meaningful, while the lighting used was gentle and exposing what needed to be lit at exact moments. I like what they did in back stage that was normal view and reality.
The acting of characters were talented, motivated, and reality. They voice were really clear and sensible. Most of characters have double character in acting and they act as a professional actor. The characters send a message or the point of the play with sample way.
The dialogues used and the story was meaningful, while the lighting used was gentle and exposing what needed to be lit at exact moments.
The scenes were reality and from our story life and the best part that I like show and act in play as in house, bar or in street. The scenes were wisdom and have a lot of a emotional that some scenes makes you laughing and other makes your teardrop and everyone did a great job on their timing, since I feel that is one of the most crucial and important part of a play as it can make a play or break a play. Background play was normal and relax that show you in real life like some scenes you feel in house or in bar.
The equalized seating arrangement that you could see through and hear pitch perfect along with the differences you can only judge through the primary and the secondary characters. Time flew very fast especially when you are enjoying what you are doing. Technical instruments and equipment used was advanced and really helped with the lighting and shadow effects over the stage. Everything seemed really organized and perfected over and over again to integrate into one single play. They were definitely successful since they did not slip in any dialogue and seem to be very fluent and confident with every move they were making on the stage.
The best part for me on the play was “sleep with me” that I like it because was explain the truth by funny part that makes me laugh each time I remember.
I appreciate everyone on the stage even they are in same my age approximately they act as expert because they let the audience respond in each scene. When I was watching the actors I felt like I would act with them. It seems like something really hard to achieve and once completed should give a sense of a accomplishment and pride in them self. The ending props were also very well put together for an impeccable ending which was very touchy and reactive. I did not feel like boring or exhaus ...
International Strategy: Creating Value in Global Markets
Evaluation of the play, progress
1. Louie Patrick Rosales February 14, 2013
Effective Communication TTh 1:00 - 2:30 pm
An Evaluation of the Play, “PROGRESS”
Before I dig in to the requirement of this evaluation paper, I would like to vent my
short insights about the message of the play. (Apologies! I can’t help myself). So, let me
start this with how the play drives me to never quit making a stand to every single right,
this nation has bestowed upon me, as a citizen, and as a person. I believe the core
message of the play was the line stated by the Minister of Good Governance, “The
bureaucracy is thick, very thick. So you have to push, push, and push, without being
pushy.” It was paradoxically portrayed by the character of Marina Salcedo, who was
submissive yet determined. A typical character of Filipinos and I think the audience has
come in to a realization about her journey (I hope so!). The play has urged the viewers
to be affirmative especially when confronted with circumstances where the people who
are supposed to give service are succumbed by a sick system.
Second, I would like to give reaction why the Little Boy production chose the
short story written by F. Sionil when the concept is no longer timely, and a lot of plays,
films or, oral discussions had already portrayed the same story line. Young people are
already aware how many Filipinos were aggravated during Marcos regime. They could
have chosen issues that would perfectly strike the anomalies of today. However, I have
convinced myself that the play did not intend to re-condemn the Marcoses or its
governance but they wanted the audience to respond diligently in the event when they
are like toss in the air especially getting service from the government. I am definitely
sure, a silly bureaucracy still exists today and the people looped in the sick system.
Alright, I have to say that the play was effectively communicated. It was effective
that the metamorphosis from a short story to a play was as lovely as a caterpillar
breaking off from her cocoon to spread her wings and fly as a butterfly. Let me start this
with the non verbal cues showed by the actors of the play. Visually, the actors had
precise movement of their eyes. I can see that their postures were well projected and
acted depending on the mood of the scene. Facial expressions were splendid.
Expressions from their faces drew natural sound. The whole body reacted the same
way as their lines. What I like about the execution of characters is: it appears as if they
were naturally moved by the progress of every scene especially the flower-characters
(as I call them). There were seven of them who acted as the pushers of Marina’s
determination to follow-up her promotion which never had progress for five years. This
style of play has truly captivated my interest. It was really creative. The lines they throw
were exactly persuading to make Marina pursue her nitwitted dream. Those lines were
well-delivered that every word could really drive Marina to never let go of what she had
been waiting. Another thing, the play was really worth paying for because of its humor.
Not only by the lines but primarily by how the actors executed the scenes. What made
the humor were the faces drawn from the actors’ faces. Hand and body movements
were just secondary but still, those helped so that the audience would laugh in their
chair. Lastly, what I appreciated about the play is Marina’s (main character) interaction
with the audience. There are some parts of the scene where she had to get near with
2. the audience and asked for a response. I think it was way awkward for a play but it
caught the attention of the rest of the audience especially those who were sitting in front
(because Marina went in the middle part of the audience, and they all turned their heads
to witness how Marina would act). The play was non-verbally creative and the acting
showed by the characters was not forceful but appeared to be gelling to their real
personalities.
The play Progress was naturally convincing. I have to believe it was, because of
the words and language they use. It used the three languages that Cebuanos know and
the accent was very Filipino when speaking the English language. Using such accent
has even made the play humorous yet genuine portrayal. I like how the words or lines
delivered by the flower-characters because it was played in a funny way. I also like the
way the words were pronounced because it reflects how Filipinos before are not so
keen about correct pronunciation such as the word journey, pronounced as jArnee.
Next, the voice used by the characters was well managed. The volume of their voices
was practically softened and amplified to give emphasis on the lines and words they
deliver. To cite one, when one of the flower-characters said, “This is long (low in
volume), very long (loud up)! Furthermore, the songs sung by the flower-characters are
accessory to the play which made the audience to stare on the scene when Marina had
to face the adversities of achieving her dream. However, the emotional content of the
tone of the characters were a bit raw (though I should believe it may be intended that
way) because there were critical scenes when there has to be an outpour of sad and
down feelings. Anyway, like what I appreciated about the play is its humorous content
and it has driven the audience to learn instead of react only. Pausing, phrasing, and
emphasis were just simply eaten by the actors especially by the main character and the
actor who portrayed the Minister of Good Governance.
Ultimately, the play Progress has collaboratively executed its performance in a
manner where audience can understand and respond about it. Both in verbal and non-
verbal language the actors have showed how a worth-watching play should be.