VIRAY.anthro 292.Final Draft

8/3/2019 VIRAY.anthro 292.Final Draft

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/virayanthro-292final-draft 1/13

Anthropology of Performance: palabas; danas; kawangis; direktor; dating

Bryan L. Viray 2005-70636

1

Anthropology of Performance: ‘ palabas,’ ‘ danas,’ ‘ kawangis,’ ‘direk tor,’ ‘ dating’

If I would be commissioned to contribute entries for compilation of Encyclopedia of

Anthropology, I would choose theories that are more associated in studying cultural

performances, theatre, and popular entertainments. (1) Victor Turner’s communitas and

liminality is the best way to explain the processes involved in acting for the stage, especially

when one is studying the complexities of performing. What happens when actor enters into the

stage, performs on stage, and exits from the stage? In the Philippines, is liminality related to the

palabas – a common notion of performance in layman’s terminology? (2) Clifford Geertz’s

culture as text is a very functional foundation in studying dramaturgy or the management of a

text and/or literature/s for the stage and/or performance. In here, Geertz argues that

ethnography is a closed reading of human and cultural behavior, thus, a very important aspect

in the creation/invention/formation of a performance concept or germ. How does the writer, a

deviser, or a creator of a concept or script can utilize danas – his/her own experience in the

process of dramaturgy. (3) Another basis that is central to ethnography of experience is James

Fernandez’s play of tropes. As described in the book by Moore (2009), “the trope is a bridge

between metaphor and act, and this creates the opening for anthropological insight.” What is

important for Fernandez is the playing or asking what tropes can do rather than questioning

what these tropes are. These “performative metaphors” by Fernandez I think could open a lot

of creative inputs as far as the staging or directing for theatre is concerned. How can stage

director transcends or plays the tropes in the text/script? This notion is linked to Filipino words

like parang, mistula, katulad ng, kawangis. (4) In the realm of theatrical productions, how can

we consider a director who is supposedly directing as also performing? Perhaps, Michel





2

Foucault’s micro politics can explicate the notion that a stage director performs power as well

in the process of rehearsal, and directing itself. (5) The notion of dating was raised in identifying

Philippine Theatre Aesthetics in the recent conference held last September at the CCP Silangan

Hall sponsored by the National Commission for Culture and the Arts. Last part of this essay

would be a reflection of this conference using Antonio Gramsci’s hegemony. I am convinced

that there is still a subtle hegemonic discourse despite of this attempt to form a Filipino sense

of aesthetics.

Hence, employing anthropological theories in studying concepts of palabas, danas,

kawangis, direktor, and dating are attempts of theorizing Philippine theatre and performances.

This would be significant in the development of discourse/s in Anthropology of Performance.

Palabas, Acting, Communitas and Liminality

Richard Schechner (2006) in his book of Performance Studies: An Introduction, offers five

kinds of acting according to congruence of daily life, the kind of actions presented, the state of

mind of the performer, and the importance of performing objects. These are (1) realistic (2)

Brechtian (3) codified (4) trance and (5) performing objects – masks and puppets. Let me focus

my discussion in realistic and trance for us to identify palabas as acting for the stage through

communitas and liminality.

In realistic acting, there is an assumption that the actors portraying the characters are

like of those real people – from the physical, mental, emotional aspect - in other words, the

whole behavior is patterned after the everyday life. Likewise, in trance performance, the

shamans – the babaylan or katalonan in Filipino play role/s that can be spirits. This portraying





3

or playing of roles involves several stages and preparation for them to attain certain

transformation. How one can perform for example the role of Hamlet truthfully and

realistically? How can a babaylan transform him self/her self before, during, and after the

possession (of the spirits)?

In analyzing the process/es involved in the transformation of the actor (and the

babaylan), we have to consider that pre-performance, during-, and the post-performance using

Turner’s concept of liminality. I shall contend that actors acting on stage and the babaylans are

liminal entities that experience periods of transition – the rite of passage; therefore, they are

“…neither here nor there; they are betwixt and between the positions assigned

and arrayed by law, custom, convention, and ceremonial. As such, their

ambiguous and indeterminate attributes are expressed by a rich variety of

symbols in the many societies that ritualize social and cultural transitions.”

(Turner 1969:95)

If you were to portray Hamlet, you shall attend series of rehearsals with the director and

co-actors to flesh out ideas and meanings of the lines assigned to you. A lot of uncovering and

explorations happen during this pre-phase of performance with the help of creative designers,

production staff, the co-performers, and director. You can also attend workshop on

Shakespeare’s life and Elizabethan theatre conventions for you to identify resources, dig up

inspirations, and break down your self through the help of a resource person or the workshop

facilitator. Rehearsals and workshops are very tedious process because of constant repetition

and revision.

After a month of rehearsals, you as Hamlet should be ready to perform before an

audience and let them see and feel that you are not longer “you” but you are already

transformed as Hamlet. The stage is ready. Costumes are dressed in your body. Make-up is put





4

on your face. The lines are fully memorized. And the lighting is waiting for you to step into the

stage. The moment you enter on stage, you have to leave the “you,” let Hamlet enters your

body and act. This is where I think the moment of liminality comes in.

Through the help of rituals of rehearsals, workshops, costuming and make-up, the

memorization of lines with the communitas around you as the actor – the director, the staff,

the workshop facilitator, the creative designers, the liminal point is achieved. You would be no

longer “you” nor Hamlet, but you are in between being Hamlet and “you.” Your essence or

personality is neither Hamlet nor “you.” This liminal point is also contributed by the

communitas who helped you achieved this moment of uncertainty. The directors, co-actors,

production staff, facilitators somehow share this anti-structure status since they themselves are

transported to that different realm.

In the case of the babaylans, the so called sacrifices are prepared. This can be food,

wine, pigs, or any thing that can be offered to the spirit or the anitos. Teodoro Agoncillo (1990)

in his book, History of the Filipino People, describes the sacrificial ceremony as this,

The priestesses [katalonan, babaylan] dressed very gaily with garlands on their

heads, and are resplendent with gold. They bring to the place of the sacrifice

some pitarrilas (a kind of earthen jars) full of rice wine, besides a live hog and a

quantity of prepared food. Then the priestess chants her song and invokes the

demon [spirit], who appears to her all glistening in gold. Then he enters her body

and hurls her to the ground, foaming at the mouth as one possessed . In this

state she declares whether a sick person is to recover or not. All this takes place

to the sound of bells and kettledrums. Then she rises and, taking a spear, she

pierces the heart of the hog. They (the people) dress it and prepare a dish forthe demons. Upon an altar erected there, they place the dressed hog, rice,

bananas, wine, and all other articles of food that they brought. All this is done in

behalf of sick persons, or to redeem those who are confined in the infernal

regions. (Tolentino 1990:45-46) (Emphasis is mine)





5

Perhaps, the same way as the actor experiences the fear or uncertainty of “becoming”

Hamlet, the babaylan also feels that ambiguity. Before the transformation happened, several

ritualistic preparations are performed – from the garland, gold, jars, the sacrifice, chanting.

Before the ritual, the babaylan is just an ordinary individual but becomes a babaylan because of

the communitas or the people around her. “Communitas offers those in liminality recognition,

support, and the skills necessary to transition into their new roles.” (Turner in Cote-Arsenault

2009:74).

How can we relate the concept of palabas in the discussion of acting in relation to

communitas and liminality? If we observe some of the performances in the Philippines

(especially in the provinces) like those of fiestas, concerts, singing contests, videoke concerts,

high school dance and choir performances – or all of these “clichés” performances, we can

come up with an idea that the palabas is similar to what the actors are doing. In terms of the

process/es - before the palabas, performers usually practice or rehearse their piece of song,

their dance routine, prepare costumes, and all the necessary things important bago

magpalabas, or bago lumabas. Furthermore, the palabas can be seen as part of liminal point.

When one is in the moment of paglabas o palabas, one experiences also the moment of

uncertainty. The role of the person while in the palabas is somehow transported in different

realm with the individuals surrounding him/her. In amateur singing contest in the provinces,

the contestant is not anymore the friend that you know, but, when he/she steps into the stage

to sing “Isang Linggong Pag-ibig” of Imelda Papin, he/she perhaps transcends into an Imelda

Papin-like realm. Within the palabas or that moment of liminality, various feelings are brought,

heightened, and purged; as a result, the “not-yet-there,” an ambiguous emotion is felt. Then,





6

after the singing – palabas or the anti-structure realm, the communitas (or the audience, the

judges, the operators, the emcees) is moved. All claps. All are amazed. All are transported.

She/He is brought back to typical friend but now with different sense of person. That palabas

perhaps boosts his/her pride and confidence after singing Imelda Papin’s Isang Linggong Pag-

ibig.

Danas, Dramaturgy, Culture as Text

Dramaturgy, a word that comes from the Greek dramaturgia means a composition of a

play, and according to Eric Bentley (1991), it was G.E. Lessing who first established the modern

understanding of ‘dramatury’ as a theatrical concept and practice. (Bentley 1991:19) In

addition, Norman Frisch articulates that dramaturgy is the process of finding ‘appropriate

presentational format for the subject under investigation,’ He added that is about ‘joining form

and content in a work. (In Bently 1991:25) In other words, dramaturgy does not only concerns

with the conceptualization and/or construction of the text (for the stage), but also, the manner

how this idea would be presented.

Interestingly, Eugenio Barba has this description of dramaturgy as “a synthesizing

process, a ‘weave’ or ‘weaving together’ of elements (In Bently 1999:31) As Bently explicates

Barba’s dramaturgy, he consider this as ‘a complex network of signifiers.” (Bently 1999:31)

Given this idea, we can now relate this to what Clifford Geertz is saying in his Thick Description:

Toward an Interpretive Theory of culture. Culture for Geertz is “…web, and the analysis of it

therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search on

meaning.” It is clear that for us to understand culture, one must pay attention to interpretation





7

or in his term “explication… *or+ construing social expressions on their surface enigmatical.”

This is very true with the symbolic perception of culture wherein, culture itself is important for

the observers understanding and creation of meanings. How one can interpret culture? Geertz

argues that semiotics would be achieved through interaction or “phenomenalistic observation.”

Consequently, Barba’s notion of “weaved signifiers” correlates with Geertz’s culture as text.

How does the concept of danas would be implicated here? We translate the word experience –

a concept that is essential in the discourse of phenomenology and/or ethnography, – as

karanasan which comes from the root word ranas or danas. So, if we talk about culture as text

read and interpreted through ethnography, we could adopt danas as a way of constructing

signs and symbols. Now, I assert that in the process of dramaturgy in the Philippines, danas or

culture as text should be considered.

621, 987 Taon ng Paglimot, a devise-play written and directed by Arlo de Guzman last

September 2007, is one of the examples I could relate to this assertion. De Guzman’s

dramaturgy is a product of various experiences: first, his vacation in Ryoanji Temple wherein he

experienced nothingness through merely looking at the Zen Rock Garden; second, his

encounter with monks in India. Somehow, this experience is similar to Buddha leaving his

temple to take his enlightenment with his belief that liberating one self is to be free from selfish

desires (De Guzman 2007). Then, these inspirations gave birth to this dramaturgy:

“Three women with a broken umbrella brave a sandstorm on their way torealizing that it is us who give meaning to our lives. It is us who will put a rock on

our lives to have weight; still, grounded against the current of water that pulls us

into the all embracing ocean that we may find the end to be just in a vast

nothingness; full of emptiness.” (De Guzman 2007)

His dramaturgy is grounded on existential concept and staged in a very absurd manner.





8

The interpretation by De Guzman’s dramaturgy of this infinitesimal culture in Ryoanji and India

was very experiential, therefore, his own danas is explicated.

Kawangis, Playing of Tropes, Staging/Directing

Edgardo De La Cruz (2004) defines directing as, “a process in which a director’s creative

intelligence engages and meshes with other creative intelligences at a variety of levels and

intensities of commitment…collaborators help achieve the director’s goal and purpose.” (De La

Cruz 2004:5) He adds that attaining the goal or purpose is not merely an interpretation and the

creation of meaning of the script to be staged but rather a “…transformational act, very similar

to the way in which a seed becomes a tree that is admired and experienced.” (De La Cruz

2004:5, emphasis is mine). This notion is very true to James Fernandez’s playing of tropes since

he emphasized the significance of the trope being the bridge between the metaphor and the

act which directing is very involved into. That bridge is the transformation act that constructs

the mis-en-scene of the production – the one that provides the audience the multi-sensory

experience when they watch theatrical productions. To attain such transcendental experience

and for the audience to feel the cathartic feeling, kawangis or words like parang, mistulang,

katulad ng, should be played along with the process of gestation.

One example that I think made used of the playing of the tropes or kawangis is Dulaang

UP’s “Asintadong Tinarantado,” an adaptation of William Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus. I will

not focus on the process of Layeta Bucoy’s adaptation per se, but, on the how of the staging

and interpreting of the director Tuqx Rutaquio. With play’s milieu on Philippine election, the

adaptation clearly captures the dirt of politics, selfish undertakings, and brutal and spiteful





9

incidents happening during election (e.g. murder, vote buying, etc.). What is fascinating I think

is on how the director plays with the metaphors of pig (baboy) killed usually in slaughter house

and cooked as dinuguan. Here are the members of the audience thinking about election as

moments of katayan/patayan, lutuan/dayaan, swapang and even tagging politicians as baboy.

Politicians are pig. Ang mga politiko ay kawangis ng baboy. Philippine election is like slaughter

house. Ang botohan sa Filipinas ay parang katayan. Voters are also pig. Ang mga botante ay

mistulang baboy. Voters are cooked to become dinuguan. Ang mga botante ay nilulutong

katulad ng dinuguan.

Through this “performative metaphor,” or kawangis, the message and that

transformational act of staging Shakespeare’s text in Philippine setting is a significant tool for

directors in theatre and performances.

Director, Micro politics

In theatre, events, and cultural performances, the director assumes as the head of the creative

production. As a matter of fact De La Cruz describes the director as, “organizer, labor leader,

facilitator, and an orchestrator of the theatrical score.” (De La Cruz 2004:7) In other words, the

director is on top of everybody as far as the creative input for the production is concerned.

I adopted De La Cruz detailed job description of a director in theatre production:

(1) mediates with producers; (2) chooses a script; (3) absorbing the script; (4)conducts dramaturgical research; (5) performs structural analysis; (6) holds

auditions and selects cast; (7) plans rehearsal schedule; (8) prepares and attends

design meetings; (9) meets with other designers; (10) rehearses the actors; (11)

participates in the paper tech; (12) attends technical and dress rehearsals; and

(13) fine-tunes the performances. (De La Cruz 2004:6)





10

Let me concentrate my discussion on the director-actor relationship during

rehearsals and performances. Rehearsal time is usually determined by the director,

depending on his/her availability; thus; to call actors for the rehearsal is also determined

by the director. Certain spaces are assigned for actors and directors. However, the

director’s space is usually at the center of the rehearsal venue considering that he/she

could see the entire stage where actors are moving. He/she calls when to start the

moment of rehearsal, or when to stop or to have a break. There are some directors who

are very strict in their blocking (the movement of the actors on stage) and actors must

follow every detail of his/her instructions regarding the execution of the line and the

timing of emotions. Nevertheless, other director encourages free blocking and

experimentation on the part of actor’s acting.

Actors should have a very harmonious relationship with their directors. Some

unspoken rules of conduct are followed in dealing with the directors. Director assigns

characters or roles for the actors. Actors may audition or be pre-cast through invitation.

Director decides who performs for certain dates of performances. Director gives notes

or comments to actors; questions and suggestions are encouraged but arguments

should not be practiced.

Through these descriptions on how director’s work in a theatre space, we can

say that he/she exercises power – or we can call it as “power-knowledge” mentioned by

Foucault (1975) in his Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (In Counsel and Wolf

2001: 127). In the dynamics of rehearsal-performance between the director and actor,

power relations is established in a sense that this “power is performed as





11

strategy…dispositions, manoeuvres, tactics, techniques, functionings.” The director does

not acquire that power and not even given a “privilege” to become dominant in that set-

up. However, nuances, gestures, and behavioral conducts plus this strategic position as

a director entail to regard him/her as power-producing agency.

‘Dating,’ Philippine Theatre Aesthetics, Hegemony

This last part of my paper will present my reflection regarding the recent

National Theatre Conference held last September 2011 at the CCP Silangan Hall

sponsored by the National Commission for Culture and the Arts. This conference aims to

identify the Philippine Theatre Aesthetics. The conference’s structure was categorized in

four domains: The Luzon contingent, the Visayas Contingent, the Mindanao contingent,

and the National Capital Region (NCR) contingent. Dr. Bienvenido Lumbera, the first

resource speaker presented the concept of ‘dating’ as the foundation of the conference

theme. From there, NCCA commissioned theatre scholars and practitioners who come

from each of the regions presented their papers about their experiences on concept-

making, directing, designing, working with the community, and other related theatrical

production matters which are relevant in the creation and identification of Filipino

theatre aesthetics. All of the paper presenters really offered detailed descriptions of the

kind of theatre they have in the regions. For example, Armand Sta. Ana shared through

his paper the very basis of theatrical production that the Barasoain Kalinangan

Foundation is mounting. Wherein he mentioned that their productions should reflect

the cultural-social values of Bulakenyos in Barasoain. The National Capital Region, even,





12

utilizes the term kabisera to situate the writers and kind of theatre they have. The

presentation was focused on the theatre companies under academic institutions that

have been helping in promulgating the sense of theatre aesthetics each of the schools

or universities have. And the question now is, is there really a Philippine Theatre

Aesthetics? Is there a need to indentify Philippine Theatre aesthetics? Who dictates

which theatre production has dating or aesthetics?

The structure of the conference is a very clear manifestation that there is still

hegemony is identifying this “Philippine theatre aesthetics.” What were the reasons

behind categorizations like Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, and NCR? This categorization

somehow suggests that someone or any form of dominance and control still exists. Will

the Visayan theatre individuals be convinced that Mindanao or Luzon for example is the

best representative of performance/s that has dating? And what is a Visayan sense of

aesthetics anyway? Is dating related to beauty? Where is the concept of beauty come

from? Is this Western beauty or aesthetics? Moreover, even Philippine Theatre alone is

struggling now in terms of its identity and situated-ness. These are some of the

considerations that I thought during the two-day conference.

I have this impression that this attempt of identifying aesthetics through

Filipino’s idea of dating might resulted to misleading assumptions and generalizations.

The very geographical location of the Cultural Center of the Philippines in the Metro

somehow gives us the sense that the NCR or the kabisera region has the hegemony.

Much might not in position to question artists and creative individuals who are already

linked here, trained here, and now are established in this undertaking. As Dr. Priscelina





13

Patajo-Legasto mentions, regions need not to fight; we have to end the notion of

regionalization; and go beyond the construction and identification of canons.

As a final point, palabas, danas, kawangis, direktor, and dating are some of the

fundamental concepts in understanding Anthropological theories that concerns theatre

and performances.

References:

Agoncillo, Teodoro A. 1990.

“History of the Filipino People, 8th

Edition.

Quezon City: Garotech Publishing.

Counsell, Colin and Laurie Wolf, Editors. 2001.

“Performance Anaysis: An Introductory Coursebook.”

London and New York: Routledge.

De Guzman, Arlo. 2007.

“621, 987 Taon ng Paglimot Programme.”

UP Diliman, Quezon City: UP Dulaang Laboratoryo.

De La Cruz, Bengson. 2004.“Directing for Theater: A Personal Approach.”

Diliman, Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.

Moore, Jerry D. 2009.

“Visions of Culture: An Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists.”

United Kingdom: AltaMira Press.

Schechner, Richard. 2006.

“Performance Studies: An Introduction, Second Edition.”

USA and Canada: Routledge.

VIRAY.anthro 292.Final Draft

Documents

Transcript of VIRAY.anthro 292.Final Draft