(I wrote this in my imperfect Spanish, probably because I couldn't simultaneously listen to the play in Spanish, then translate and also write in English, so this is a loose translation from my poor comprehension of the language. And since I'm transcribing these journal notes in 2017. I remember I fully entered into the drama, as it unfolded, and was transfixed. There were ghost characters interacting with the main characters. The playwright used personal experience to characterize the larger social issues Oaxaca is facing on the eve of revolution.)Living theater event, in the courtyard of an old hacienda, Oaxaca.
The maestro de teatre introduced himself and gave a discourse on the premise of living theater. He said the function of theater is very important and the form is the total sum of the differences between the reality of life, and the grand passion of the Catholic Church. (Church and state vs. the real drama of life.)
The premise is of a mother and child from the campo, surviving in the city. It brings up the past, spliced with familial memories, and juxtaposes them with the present day reality. There is a proposition and the possibility that takes the powerful moments of life and juxtaposes them with the ideal situation where everyman too is represented. It's a very powerful message, defined by a life of possessions. And there is possession of the spirit too.
The sentiment of the other function, the other arts, we communicate with this process. The function of class signifies everything, it is the reason for the arts, for music. And we quickly go with the rational process. It is not solely national, it is not solely based upon positive emotions. And I think it makes us want a more relevant God.
The maestro continues: I think it's very interesting, at 2 AM, the terror in the night comes. Yeah it is bad, it gets ugly for about 30 minutes. The emasculation of the cast. I very much would like the participants (you) to think of the motive, it's very facil, and it's revealed, little by little. The theatrical piece is ambiguous, with many profound ideas. (He breaks the fourth wall.)
He said: I look at the miracle of Brecht and think on the social structure, in the practicality of life. The plays of Brecht, I understand, but I don't do sentiment, exactly. The work is hard, and is socially profound. It is meant to be difficult. It's the theater of change, the theater of life. It is authentic theater.
(OK that premise was blowing my mind as I am a Brecht fan, and I have been involved with the living theater of Julian Beck, and have seen productions of The Committee, so, in a sense, it was old home week. Something I certainly didn't expect to see in Oaxaca, which I had labeled a provincial town.)
He continued: There are many controversies within the strength of living theater. For example the inspiration, in some cases, it's 70 years too late for change. The social context of the lands of the country has changed, for example Columbia, the tribulations of the country is interesting. Meanwhile there is much violence.
The Latino theater of the United States, the people get it, it's very clear and very explicit, it's curious, and relevant. It's all about the individual. The change is active and it brings out the commentary and the neuroses, it's also a very necessary social function. It preserves the political, and honors the land. It takes the cojones of imperialism of the United States, and adds the customs and the values of the people, this is the theater of Latin America—very curious.
The international theater focuses more on imported classicalism. And caught in the middle are the artists. We have to go back and look at the Mexican theater, it's very satisfying, and 80% of the people believe that it is a mirror of society. Focusing on the little houses, the microcosm, then it's just there. We have to look at the theater from the outside to understand the values or the strengths. It's a pertinent art form.
Yes, there are anti-Latin Americans in the United States but the process of art is also the process of life. It is the public personae. Though it is one language and it's ceremonial, but it's also factual. It includes contradictions, and it is very smooth. I don't know about the causes, all I know is the country. The situation of the campesinos is horrific, and you have to capture it and then process it....
(.....I'm bailing on the rest this piece because it's too hard to translate from my mangled Spanish.) He talks about the social context in various countries, Columbia.... Not sure if he's referring to the Zapatistas. But he mentions the violence. Which was palpable in Oaxaca. This theater movement seems important, the theater of change.... It was a memorable theatrical experience.)