The Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014 (previously called the "Kill the Gays bill" in the western mainstream media due to the originally proposed death penalty clauses)was passed by the Parliament of Uganda on 20 December 2013 with the death penalty proposal dropped in favour of life in prison. The bill was signed into law by the President of Uganda on 24 February 2014.
The legislative proposal would broaden the criminalisation of same-sex relations in Uganda domestically, and further includes provisions for Ugandans who engage in same-sex relations outside of Uganda, asserting that they may be extradited for punishment back to Uganda, and includes penalties for individuals, companies, media organisations, or non-governmental organisations that know of gay people or support LGBT rights.
The private member's bill was submitted by Member of Parliament David Bahati on 14 October 2009. Same-sex relationships are currently illegal in Uganda—as they are in many sub-Saharan African countries—punishable by incarceration in prison for up to 14 years. A special motion to introduce the legislation was passed a month after a two-day conference was held in which three American Christians asserted that homosexuality is a direct threat to the cohesion of African families. Several sources have noted endemic homophobia in Uganda has been exacerbated by the bill and the associated discussions about it.
On 1 August 2014, the Constitutional Court of Uganda ruled the law invalid.
I think that this is disqusting, love is not a crime.
Monday, 15 December 2014
The most horrific
I found the most horrific a really hard peice as i always focus on character, and in this paticular peice, as we were all named either A, B , C or D, we didnt really have much identity, which i found hard. I am a very political person in genreal and always keep up with current news stories and articles, so i was familiar with most that were mentioned in the peice. I liked the clear seperation between the A and B's and the C and D's. We had to use our phyicallty most of the time and were told to be at a 7 the majority of the time. I liked how much we portrayed the steryotype of the 'Media Wannabes', i also enjoyed the use of newspapers and coffe cups as props. Throughout the rehersals i think that there was a lack of energy because of the subject that it was about. It was really hard to have to be so jokey and calm about such distressing subjects. I also found it really hard to be at a 7 physically whilst sitting down. I think that one of the stronger aspects of the peice was that i used my voice effectivley and i think that both 'teams' worked well together to create the peice in the best way that we could. the space was also a really cool space to work in, as we wanted that office like, simple space. I think one of the weaker aspects was that sometimes the C's and D's spoke on top of us, so sometimes it was hard to know who to watch, and who was talking at one time.
I really enjoyed watching the other peices as well as it was interesting seeing the same peice but done in 3 completley different ways. I loved Wills class as i think they really captured the point of veiw of the public and how disinterested they were in such sensitive subjects and how interested they were in things such as the x factor and celebritys. I think that this really did the peice justice and how serious the C's and D's were and how jokey the A's and B's were. I also really enjoyed Sarah's group and liked their incorperation of music and the 'audition space', it was completely different to the others, which was quite refreshing.
I think that our final peice went really well and we had the perfect balance of energy and seriousness for the performance. At the beginnning of the show, we all had to perform individual group protests, this was also really good as it showed contrast to the laughter of the performance to the serious of those situations (attached). We performed a protest about homophobia in Uganda, i already knew about this story and knew how serious it was. we used the use of silence, we didnt talk throughout until we all individually told our stories. i think it was effective as we were all really aggressive with one another. I liked the promenade aspect of it aswell, as they went around the space and witnessed all of the protests/peices and then went into the space and were able to see a more relaxed peice.
By using Brecht’s different techniques over the term, they helped me develop a deeper understanding of what it really means to present a piece of political theatre to an audience. Brecht believed a piece of political theatre should leave the audience asking questions about themselves, what they just saw and society itself – I feel we definitely managed to achieve this successfully and effectively and that we not only left an impact on those viewing the performance, but on us, the actors, as well. I have thoroughly enjoyed this political term and studying both “The Most Horrific” and Brecht’s techniques. I have learnt many different skills over this term which I have never had the chance to develop before and I have gained new knowledge and experience that I will definitely use in further pieces and their development.
I really enjoyed watching the other peices as well as it was interesting seeing the same peice but done in 3 completley different ways. I loved Wills class as i think they really captured the point of veiw of the public and how disinterested they were in such sensitive subjects and how interested they were in things such as the x factor and celebritys. I think that this really did the peice justice and how serious the C's and D's were and how jokey the A's and B's were. I also really enjoyed Sarah's group and liked their incorperation of music and the 'audition space', it was completely different to the others, which was quite refreshing.
I think that our final peice went really well and we had the perfect balance of energy and seriousness for the performance. At the beginnning of the show, we all had to perform individual group protests, this was also really good as it showed contrast to the laughter of the performance to the serious of those situations (attached). We performed a protest about homophobia in Uganda, i already knew about this story and knew how serious it was. we used the use of silence, we didnt talk throughout until we all individually told our stories. i think it was effective as we were all really aggressive with one another. I liked the promenade aspect of it aswell, as they went around the space and witnessed all of the protests/peices and then went into the space and were able to see a more relaxed peice.
By using Brecht’s different techniques over the term, they helped me develop a deeper understanding of what it really means to present a piece of political theatre to an audience. Brecht believed a piece of political theatre should leave the audience asking questions about themselves, what they just saw and society itself – I feel we definitely managed to achieve this successfully and effectively and that we not only left an impact on those viewing the performance, but on us, the actors, as well. I have thoroughly enjoyed this political term and studying both “The Most Horrific” and Brecht’s techniques. I have learnt many different skills over this term which I have never had the chance to develop before and I have gained new knowledge and experience that I will definitely use in further pieces and their development.
Gestus
Throughout this term, we having been focusing very much on Gestus, which is a brecht technique in which, people use 'gestures' to show the action in a stronger light. Brecht felt that traditional theatre focused too much on facial expression and so gestures dried up. He wanted people to investigate their body own body language as well as the body language of a social class, their mannerisms and customs included. As Brecht was uninterested in traditional, psychological drama that presents the mental attitudes and actors of its protagonists as God-given or unknown forces, he wanted to display a character’s actions as choices a person makes because of the social factors affecting them. For example, a ‘peasant’ would lick their plate not because they were a peasant but because that is how they had been brought up to behave in a less wealthy climate.
This is Brecht's term for that which expresses basic human attitudes - not merely “gesture” but all signs of social relations: department, intonation, facial expression. The Stanislavskian actor is to work at identifying with the character he or she portrays. The Brechtian actor is to work at expressing social attitudes in clear and stylized ways. So, when Shen-Te becomes Shui-Ta, she moves in a different manner. Brecht wished to embody the “Gestus” in the dialogue - as if to compel the right stance, movement and intonation. By subtle use of rhythm pause, parallelism and counterpointing, Brecht creates a “gestic” language.
The songs are yet more clearly “gestic”. As street singers make clear their attitudes with overt, grand but simple gestures, so, in delivering songs, the Brechtian actor aims to produce clarity in expressing a basic attitude, such as despair, defiance or submission.
Instead of the seamless continuity of the naturalistic theatre, the illusion of natural disorder, Brecht wishes to break up the story into distinct episodes, each of which presents, in a clear and ordered manner, a central basic action. All that appears in the scene is designed to show the significance of the basic “Gestus”. We see how this works in Mother Courage. Each scene is prefaced by a caption telling the audience what is to be the important event, in such a way as to suggest the proper attitude for the audience to adopt to it - for instance (Scene 3): “She manages to save her daughter, likewise her covered cart, but her honest son is killed.”
When we performed this scene from Mother Courage, we used many Brecht techniques, such as holding up a sign at the beggining, stating where we were and when it was. We also used things such as using one actor to play multiple characters. We really enjoyed performing this scene as we had been taken out of the natrulistic acting world, and we could be as over the top as we wanted (obvioulsy with boundaries).
This is Brecht's term for that which expresses basic human attitudes - not merely “gesture” but all signs of social relations: department, intonation, facial expression. The Stanislavskian actor is to work at identifying with the character he or she portrays. The Brechtian actor is to work at expressing social attitudes in clear and stylized ways. So, when Shen-Te becomes Shui-Ta, she moves in a different manner. Brecht wished to embody the “Gestus” in the dialogue - as if to compel the right stance, movement and intonation. By subtle use of rhythm pause, parallelism and counterpointing, Brecht creates a “gestic” language.
The songs are yet more clearly “gestic”. As street singers make clear their attitudes with overt, grand but simple gestures, so, in delivering songs, the Brechtian actor aims to produce clarity in expressing a basic attitude, such as despair, defiance or submission.
Instead of the seamless continuity of the naturalistic theatre, the illusion of natural disorder, Brecht wishes to break up the story into distinct episodes, each of which presents, in a clear and ordered manner, a central basic action. All that appears in the scene is designed to show the significance of the basic “Gestus”. We see how this works in Mother Courage. Each scene is prefaced by a caption telling the audience what is to be the important event, in such a way as to suggest the proper attitude for the audience to adopt to it - for instance (Scene 3): “She manages to save her daughter, likewise her covered cart, but her honest son is killed.”
When we performed this scene from Mother Courage, we used many Brecht techniques, such as holding up a sign at the beggining, stating where we were and when it was. We also used things such as using one actor to play multiple characters. We really enjoyed performing this scene as we had been taken out of the natrulistic acting world, and we could be as over the top as we wanted (obvioulsy with boundaries).
Tuesday, 2 December 2014
Protest evaluation
In our political protest we protested about domestic violence and how more should be done legally about this subject. We wanted to cause a debate, we wanted to know other peoples opinions and how and why we must change this behaviour. Me and Ursula used many different effects to impact people who saw us. We didn't want to just chant our views and beliefs about domestic violence, we wanted people to stop and talk to us. In order to do this we used make up to bruise ourselves and make it look like we had been beaten. We also used another person to fight for domestic violence to cause some sort of debate. As me and Ursula were walking around, Claudia would say things such as 'she deserved it', 'what else do you expect if she doesn't listen to her man' etc. We also used pictures of women who had suffered domestic abuse to bring the reality back to people. I really enjoyed the political protest and think that it taught me a lot about how to get through to people about such sensitive subjects. I also found it really hard as we wanted our protest to be as raw as possible and not have to use many props and costume to make it a Piece. This happens every day and the one thing I wouldn't of wanted was to make it feel like we were mocking anyone. We aren't and hopefully never will be in that situation but just to put myself in those shoes for 30 minutes did scare me, and really made me walk away with a different view on domestic abuse. Just in the sense that I felt so connected to the character, and because it is political, we understand how real it must be. As there were many protests happening at one time, I think it had a big impact on people, seeing such raw, horrific things in what they see as such a safe place. I think you need to do this for protest, as you want people to feel emotional. I think the weaker aspects of the protest was that we didn't have one place that we stayed, unlike the other groups. We walked around the foyer, reception and the courtyard to attract as much attention to the situation as possible. I think that this May have affected us in some ways as what we were doing became quite repetitive. We also didn't plan our piece as well as we could have, purely based on the fact that both me and Ursula have some very strong political views and couldn't choose just one idea. We were over complicating it by trying to later the protest with subliminal messages etc. I think some of the stronger aspects were that we did grasp the attention of many people, due to such a graphic appearance. We were also comfortable in going up to people and talking to them, not just putting on a 'show'. Overall I think that the protest went really well and more than anything, which was most important to me, I got to hear what people thought of what I was fighting for. Hearing everyone's thoughts and opinions on the piece really made it worthwhile for me.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)

