we tend to get excited when we were being invited to either watch or act for a performance, while seldom, should i say, oftentimes, we were required.. (hehe!!) whether or not it’s woprth the rime spared.
literally, according to Mr. Webster, in his best-selling book, the dictionary, performance is the ability to act or present in front of the spectators.
on one hand, it was discussed in two different views, which were said to be developed by the performance artist themelves in Noel Carroll’s article, the “Performance Art”. if i’m not mistaken, here goes my interpretation; performance is like a magic mirror that shows the real reflection of yourself, someone that is free, genuine, and unrestricted, or it may be the other way around, a others would refer to be a concrete, first stepping stone that provide a houe for discipline wherein everything i organized and almost ideal.
you may agree or oppose to any of what i mentioned, perhaps to both of it. our beliefs do vary, as we all know. simply because, we have different point of views, which were greatly influenced by the culture we grew up in.
it is an understatement to define performance based only on the contradictions stated above. basically, unlike any other forms of art, performance is not entirely an account for music and language alone. nevertheless, it can be a combination of all medium. it neither requires the presence of performer barely, for any movement at the tage that comprises action and oberve blocking, is considered as an art.
every now and then, we were able to witness how performance evolved. Carroll preented the contemporaary pieces, to be particular, a an emergence from two sources. the firt labeled as the “art performance”, which is grounded for viual arts, and the other aa “performance arts”, which revolve only in theater arts.
briefly examining the latter, it is then defined as the revolt against the prevailing form of theater (serious production), specifically during the late fifties, and early sixties, in which “well-written plays” by the text or script were given more value, overlooking the significance of the spectacle, or the overall stage appearance of the production.
moreover, the “art performance”, was roughly initiated by the anti-essentialists, created a a reaction to the fundamental and theoretical principles governing the field performance of the same period, which were dominated by formalism.
during these years, each artform were approched with a particular ttribute, no more, no less and were firmly believed to be delimited and restricted by nature, set through its medium. aesthetic issue and problems were also critically allotted with attention, prohibiting performance that for them are morbid and immoral, otherwise, known as those that were not generally accepted by the “formalist” society and the church.
Evaluation A.
- As “S/he” Unaccessorized It -
without any doubt, i was amazingly struck with the performance Mr. Kiamco did on friday afternoon last week. without knowing about how the act had gone, having all those high regard awards, take note. i’m talking about international ones, for an introduction is way too overwhelming and flattering on his part. not to mention that it was a solo performnce that i bet you’ll also wish to have the gut like his.
enough for that “liver swelling” appreciation. jut as what we saw, primrily, it was about that talented Filipino boy who grew up in the somehow rural community of Illinois, and undergone identity crisis for quite sometime, and later on found out that he’s a gay at the early age of 14. he then broke away from his family’s expectations of medical school, and decided to pursue his career to the busy streets of the Big Apple as a fahion designer.
obviously, it is under the dimension of “performance arts”. but, on the other hand, the principles governing the two concept can be applied for further evaluation of the performance.
as i have said, it wa a comic monologue that wa lively preented in plainly, bluntly, to be more appropriate, set stage appearance, that after all. precisely justified its title.
applying the concepts on my preceeding part of this entry, Mr. Kiamco’s act is both a disposition and agreement to the two.
why? first, as a reaction to the beliefs of formalism. queer theory, especially those concerning what we call, the 3rd sex, were nowadays, although openly discussed, even labeled and studied, however, accepted by the society, is generally, and is still refered a something that is morally questionable. for formalists, the mere fact that we were molded in a community that is supposed to be prim and proper, community of only males and female, and that the concept of being “gay” or “lesbian” should be definitely diregarded, and if possible erradicated.
nonetheless, he succefully imparted that performing is indeed a great medium wherein you can be whoever you want to, the real you.
- to be continued -
