graceycute

the beauty in me

Gracey’s 4: Antigong Agong

Isa ako sa mga Usherettes sa play na ito. At pagkatapos mapanood ang kabuuan ng play, wala akong pagsisisi na nag-volunteer ako. It’s simply just amazing!

Minsan kapag tayo ay nanonood ng mga dula, sa eskwelahan man o sa mga cultural centers at iba pa, malimit natin inuunang itanong kung ano ang istorya ng play na ating panonoorin. Minsan naman, sa tiket palang na ating binibili, makakakita na tayo ng isang maikling background kung tungkol sa ano ang dulang panonoorin. Pero sa karanasan kong manood ng Antigong Agong, hindi lamang istorya ang naghikayat sa akin na manood, kundi ang katotohanan na ito ay istorya ng Mindanao, Dulang MIndanao, at likhang Mindanao. Ito ay bagama’t repleksyon din ng aking pagkatao, at pagka Pilipino.

Masayang mapanood ang isang “authentic” Mindanao creation na nagsasalamin sa maraming paghihirap at pagsusumikap ng aking mga kababayan.

agong_alejandro78.jpg

Advertisements

January 11, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Gracey’s 3: Konting tanong para sa Sining..

Ang pelikulang “tuhog” ay nagbigay sa akin ng isang magandang halimbawa kung paano nagagawa ng tao na “gahasain” at “abusohin” ang mga natural na bagay para sa ngalan daw ng “sining”. Isang tanong tuloy ay pumasok sa aking isipan, “Ano nga ba ang basehan, para ang isang bagay ay masabing likhang sining” at paano ito masasabing “distortion”?

pilipino_video_-_tuhog_small.jpg

Isang mahalagang kaalaman ay naibahagi sa akin ni Aristotle sa kanyang obra na “On Poetics”. Ayon sa kanya, ” the difference in the imitation of these arts come under three heads, their means, their objects, and their manner..” Sa bawat pagsusuri ko tuloy sa mga bagay na ginagawa ng mga tao sa aking paligid, hinahanap ko ang tatlong aspetong ito. Sa ngayon, mas pinapalawak ko muna ang aking kaalaman upang maberipika ko ang aking pagkakaintindi sa mga konseptong ito. Balik sa pelikulang “tuhog”, nakakalungkot na hindi ata naging patas, at maktotohanan ang mga konseptong ginamit, dahil ito’y naging pawang likha ng sobrang paglalagay ng “arte” sa kung nao ang nangyari sa totoong buhay. Sa huling bahagi pa ng paelikula, nabatid naming mga manonood kung gaano ka grabe ang epekto ng maling pagpapahayag-biswal sa pag-iisip ng mga taong tumatanggap ng mga impormasyon. MAs lalong nagiging kapanipaniwala ang isang kasinungaling maganda lamang ang pagkakapresenta.

PArang komedya, ayon kay Aristotle. ” It has been observed, as for Comedy, that an imitation of men is worse than the average; worse, however not as regars any and every sort of fault, but only as regards one particular kind- the RIdiculous which is a specie of the Ugly”. NAbatid naman namin, bilang mga third degree na tagapagtanggap ng mensahe, ang kapangitan ng kopya ng kopya ng kopyang nanggaling pa sa malayong “main source” ng isang istorya. NApakahalaga na dapat ko pang mas lalaong intindihin ang mga bagay na ito upang mas lalo akong makapagpaliwanag ng mabuti tungkol sa mga bagay na maituturing kong pangit dahil sa mga aspetong nabanggit ko sa blog na ito.

January 11, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Gracey’s 2: Art as Imitation

We learned in class that we are to study art and beauty. We then started ourselves on the question, “what is a good theater?”. Plato said that “art”is three times removed from the truth since art is an “imitation” of something, and because of the meaning of the word, art losses its truth value as it is not absolutely the same as where it is originally taken from. Theater, is but an art, and how we judge theater, whether it is good or bad, is guided by the understanding that theather, is an imitation of life and experiences, of nature and environment, and of everything.

mask4.gif

What is then a good theater? Maybe because theater is a process of imitation, the more nicer and better you copy from something and put it on stage, the more beautiful the theater becomes. Or maybe, the more convincing you get, and the more realistic your art becomes, the more it should be appreciated. Theater has been famous in almost all parts of the world, and every one has his or her way to create a good one. Everything we place on stage should be good and beautiful.

bsa.jpg

BUt as I observe it today, I realize that “imitation” as a fundamental aspect in theater, changes and upgrades through time. From the yesteryears where the nobles are the basis for imitation (that was the time theater was a bit serious), to the years where there was political struggle (satiric plays and spoofs were staged), and up to these days, where even the things we consider “taboo” and “morbid” are made into theater (classic examples:sex, heinous crimes, etc.), theater changes up to now, as it chooses a lot more to imitate.

In this case, I’m a little bit confused, is there any universal rule on what is a good theater, and where should we base it? Since art imitates, and the subject of imitation changes, I guess the judgement on this matter change also through time. The manner, the object, the medium changes also through time. What more can we get also? Of course, an art, an imitaion, and a theater that changes through time, that can be appreciated and condemned at the same time.

January 11, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment