Buy glasses online at low prices (4 products)
enabled to view it. - ticket booking [from the date of publishing the repertoire at myhyundai.info] Please note that eating or drinking during the spectacle can disturb actors and other spectators. When purchasing tickets on-line we need your full details [full name, phone no., e-mail address] . TEATR POLSKI. Similar to most things in life, the internet is the solution to that problem. Check out our list of the seven go-to dating sites for Polish singles. Online dating service for Polish Girlfriend, Dating Online, Meet Polish Women. Register for Free!.
Characteristic performative strategies were supposed to undermine one another: Actors were allowed to say things they didn't agree with in order to trigger a problem or subject which, according to them, was important. In this context, comments by actors describing what such assumptions underlying working in the theatre meant for them and how they changed their way of functioning within the performance are interesting. Actors pointed to the fact that this experience was new for them, difficult and in some sense revolutionary.
Szymon Czacki and Krzysztof Zarzecki suggested that such a model of work undermines the position of the director-master legitimising the content of the production, and that it forces actors to take an autonomous position. To explain why some actors expect taking a role from the director and not from their subjectivity described above by Krakowska: The method of working with actors which assumes that they are not representatives of the characters from a play but rather become a political entity, is not easy for them.
Oliver introduced certain issues during rehearsals and expected us to take a stand in a given matter. Often these were very difficult questions which I, for instance, have never previously asked myself. I realised that it was easier for me to assume the attitude of a character I played on stage, stand behind it and provide arguments for it, than to defend my own private opinion from the stage.
It is much more difficult to utter on stage words which are my own and take responsibility for them, because it becomes completely different. It carries more weight. Their opinions, mentioned above, come from the meeting Nie-Boska.
Afterimage], held on 15 January at the the Zbigniew Raszewski Theatre Institute in Warsaw, over a month after the premiere had been cancelled. These are unique, especially in light of the fact that no cast member who worked on the production until the end commented on it in public before or after that discussion. The official reason for suspending rehearsals was the witch-hunt campaign by the right-wing media against the Stary Theatre, motivated by 'leaked' information about the production originating from the theatre, a series of anonymous threats addressed directly to actors, and attacks from the right-wing press on the Klata's directorship of the Stary Theatre.
However, later statements by Klata suggest that he used those circumstances as a pretext to cancel the production.
Remains 'enabled a rare insight into the functioning of a usually invisible mechanism, revealing the image of a theatre as a particular manorial institution'. The rhetorical strategy Klata employed by after cancelling the premiere aimed at rebuilding his position of power and re-establishing a typical hierarchy within a repertory theatre: That is exactly the kind of harmony, as Leder emphasises, that is typical in relations built on a folwark model.
Consensus was manifested through the fact that the statement related to suspension of rehearsals was signed by the entire team. The content of the statement was motivated to a large extent by willingness to consolidate the ensemble.
In this situation, the motives behind the decision to suspend the production become even more questionable. The difference between speaking and being silent is one of the principal indicators in folwark relations. Klata not only prohibited the actors from speaking. He wanted to make them pawns in his own game, but he was playing for himself. In the most primitive way possible, causing conflict.
As if piling on things which could insult the greatest number of people, from actress Anna Polony to philosopher Professor Hartman. By inscribing Frljic into this traditional framework, he strengthened his function as director in order to rebuild the institutional hierarchy and judge the actors' position from this perspective. It's worth noting that not all actors who participated in the project to its end chose to come to the meeting, which may indicate that participation in the debate did require a certain amount of courage and was a kind of statement.
Actors who participated in the meeting with me and the playwrights at the Theatre Institute came of their own will. I had not been in touch with them since the suspension of rehearsals. They were subjected to various kinds of pressure and aware of potential consequences following their participation in the meeting at the institute. Klata, the theatre's director who was so willing to position all his subordinates, especially actors, in the press releases, remained an untouchable figure in this discussion.
Actors' statements were marked by strong fear of crossing that line, evident in Krzysztof Zarzecki's remark: I'd like to remind you that we're here to talk about the methodology of work, about the point of this work and its meaning to us, and not about the director of the theatre and his decision, especially as he's not present. As an employee of this theatre, I don't want to engage in the discussion concerning the reasons for suspending rehearsals. The actors' participation in the Theatre Institute debate, though potentially an act of independence, symbolically reinstated them to their function as performers with limited competence.
They talked about the process of work, about their opinions about it, but not about the media and institutional violence they were clearly subjected to. Krzysztof Zarzecki, acknowledging his dilemmas and conformism, stated: I know that the theatre will not function according to all my desires, but at the same time I have a strong feeling that the Stary Theatre is the best place for me to make theatre. And, after all, we represent a united front with the directors, stage managers and technicians.
We believe that beautiful and valuable things can happen here.
The question is whether this is not an easier solution'. What would they say if Sebastian Majewski was not seated in the audience? Later, however, Injac spoke in public of intimidationand pressure Klata subjected him to, both before and after cancelling the production.
One day the director called me in and said: He showed me my contract. This would be a dissolution of the contract by mutual consent. He started to scream at me — it was his typical behaviour — saying I'm worthless, I have no talent, I can't do anything, he wanted me to give him a list of things I did for the theatre, that everything I did was wrong, I'm not worthy of working in a national institution, etc.
Then I raised my voice and said: He stood up, opened the door and said: I'll chuck you out in a week! Even if he humiliates someone, it's 'for their own good'. And those humiliated accept the 'lessons' gratefully, demonstrating that they know their place. And The Undivine Comedy: The POP-UP project was intended as an alternative formula of public theatre — impermanent, perishable.
Its alternative character was meant to translate into a multifaceted broadening of the field of artistic freedom, which is why the curators declared a lack of control over the production created within the project, on one hand, while expressing on the other hand their hope that such ephemeral circulation of performances would broaden the potential risk undertaken by the artists.
We hope that the temporary nature and provisionality of these actions will release other creative impulses and will provide the artists with an opportunity to create sometimes very personal statements, in which they will not have to take into account the possibility of conflict.
The point was not to negate them but rather to postulate the development of many different alternative forms of theatre production and activity distinct from repertory theatre.
It turned out, however, that even within that framework, the folwark system of relations present in repertory theatre companies influences content and form as well as the hierarchy within productions created, and decisions by producers and curators are to at least some extent conditioned by theatre institutions.
Confession, this sphere of influence included mostly actors. As has been mentioned, the production under consideration here was a commentary on events surrounding the premiere cancelled two years earlier at the Stary Theatre. Three actors were invited, none of whom had been engaged in the cancelled production: The performance can divide into three sections this division is conventional and subjective.
Then the actors, with 'Jew' and 'Jewess' cards around their necks, talked about family members who were the Holocaust victims, while declaring that their heritages were the main reason they were cast. In the final section, the actors announced that they were given a task consisting of 'practising democracy in theatre' then posed a series of questions to the audience.
The performance ended with a phone call from Jan Sobolewski to Jan Klata. The open performance structure enabled the posing of several important questions. The production was presented three times, but the most serious intervention took part during the premiere, when Krzysztof Zarzecki was in the audience and spoke up during the table scene, asking why he'd not been invited into the project despite having declared his willingness to participate.
Zarzecki also said he was the only actor from the original cast of The Un-Divine Comedy: Remains who came to the new performance and that he wouldn't have been afraid of consequences for taking part in this project. During his intervention, all on stage participants were looking at their plates, waiting for Zarzecki to finish his statement.
Only Dominika Biernat invited him to the table, but he refused. Nobody answered the question The curator Agata Siwiak said that choices in casting were motivated by concerns for physical safety and job security of the Stary Theatre actors. Goran Injac confirmed this version, and recalled his above-mentioned description of intimidationviolence he'd experienced from Klata.
The organisers were also afraid, however, that if they engaged Stary Theatre actors, whose primary responsibility was to fulfil their obligations as full-time employees, they'd be open to the risk of performances being blocked due to 'urgent substitutions' at the theatre on days when POP-UP performances were scheduled.
Stary Theatre actors were in fact denied the right to make their own autonomous personal decisions, therefore, and to take a stand in this situation. Such a defensive gesture seems not only quite patronizing, but is also dangerously associated with the Stary Theatre statement concerning the 'suspension' of rehearsals 'for the safety of actors and the entire theatre'. Though in this I have no reason to disbelieve the sincerity of intention on the part of the POP-UP decision-makers their arguments haven't changed, as was the case with Klata, while in Injac's case, his change was motivated by subsequent experiencesthe fact remains that institutional hierarchy was sustained and strengthened in this way.
Actors were positioned as individuals entirely subordinated to the director, both in his eyes and in the eyes of people outside who declare a willingness to create an alternative model for public institutions.
In the same way, the hierarchy within the new production was legitimised, as its authorship and the right to speak was associated with the director and playwrights despite the fact that the previous project had attempted to undermine such dependences.
Confession — were treated as mere performers, interchangeable and meant to fulfil certain acting tasks. That second dependence, what's more, is visible in the newer performance, when the distinction between professional and non-professional actors is marked at several points. In the table scene, the role of actors is reduced to asking the playwrights questions.
The issue of financial dependence and performing acting tasks has been raised many times, as has the situation of casting that preceded rehearsals here fictional. On the other hand, Biernat stated from the stage that she participated in the project because she was able to separate her private life from professional life. Such emphasis on the external perspective of actors and their professional approach to the project was intentional.
However, it seems to me that in some perverse way it actually defines their role in this production. I also think their job was different from the one in the Stary Theatre production. Sobolewski said, for example: It was just a simple, normal job — from idea to idea Other actors' attitudes may have been different, with Biernat declaring her much stronger engagement and sense of responsibility The fact remains that the producers employed actor-performers and denied Zarzecki participation, who'd been as engaged in the previous production as its director and playwrights.
It seems a punch line to the situation can be found in Zarzecki's second statement: His statement was a commentary on the situation of actors in the project as hired performers Biernat and Sobolewski wittily said they participated because of low pay from their own theatre companies and referred to the position of audience members in that third section as unpaid actors, by which he indicated the alternative model's economic framework.
Zarzecki's statement may also be treated as an allusion to the fact that actors involved in rehearsals for The Un-Divine Comedy: Remains weren't paid beyond their base salary as no performances were held.
To further complicate the situation while not reducing the position of Stary Theatre actors to 'victims', it should be noted that this particular casting decision may also have been influenced by the fact that all actors from the Stary Theatre ensemble signed the decision suspending rehearsals, then refused to comment on that issue during the Theatre Institute discussion, while defending the Stary Theatre as an institution and confirming that they would remain full-time employees, which they did.
In any case, Zarzecki's declaration that he was the only Stary Theatre actor who came to the POP-UP performance is meaningful and testifies to the dominant frame of mind at the institution. One may say that most actors favoured the theatre model proposed by Klata.
Only Zarzecki attempted to break with this pattern. Perhaps the POP-UP producers and curators were concerned that in a conflict between their project and the Stary Theatre, he'd eventually support the institution's interests again.
Audience members at the premiere emphasised that listening to the production team's voices, as alternatives to Klata's omnipresent version, was important to them. Perhaps Zarzecki's declaration was a sign of readiness to assume yet another perspective, blocked two years earlier by the theatre's director. From that perspective, it's a pity that his 'confession' was then blocked two years later by the producers and curators.
Again, in that way, it was actors playing the muted roles in narratives created around them. Such a situation refers again to the folwark system and its power, pervading and influencing power relations even in projects declared as alternative to repertory theatre and its hierarchy. What seems most valuable here is the public voice of objection against such relations presented by Zarzecki, exposing and undermining the institutional and performative frameworks he spoke before the section where audience interaction was to take place.
It was also important that the actor appealed to friendship connecting him and the creators of the production. In doing so, he also pointed out that patterns of thinking and hierarchies are stronger than human relationships and any so-called community solidarity. These assertions are further confirmed by the fact that actors participating in the POP-UP project hadn't been invited to participate in the concluding round-table discussion an exception was actor and designer Piotr Skiba, whose function in director Krystian Lupa's theatre is based on particular principles and who didn't perform in the POP-UP project.
Some focus more on relationships, while others seem geared toward flings and dating around.
Dos and don'ts for online dating
Bennett added, "Your own experience of these apps may defy the typical experience. Try a variety of apps for a few months and then go from there. You'll save a lot of time you would have spent going out with the wrong people. You are representing yourself in your profile, and that's the first impression potential matches are going to see.
Bennett told me in our interview, "Don't use a boring or standard opening message. Online dating is very competitive, and some people have anywhere from hundreds to even thousands of likes, matches, and messages to sort through.
A hey or WYD isn't going to cause you to stand out. But in most cases, it's not worth it to take rejection personally. Kulaga told me, "If someone doesn't respond to a request you sent them or someone doesn't follow up after a first date, move on. Kulaga continued, "If you sulk, ruminate and dwell on the fact that someone didn't come through on a follow up, this will hold you back from meeting the real Mr. Celebrate your mismatches instead of getting upset about them.
Kulaga's words, "Be happy the person didn't come through and you didn't waste any more of your precious time. Krimer told me, "Going into the dating world knowing that you have a lot to offer can really buffer some of the potential effects of dates not working out and can help you not to personalize dating experiences that may be perceived as rejection.
Kulaga told me it's better to move on when that happens.
She said, "If you are emailing someone back and forth and recognize this person is not a good fit for you, or you go on a date that just wasn't your cup of tea, let the person know. Be upfront and don't lead people on. Not only does this waste their time, it is wasting yours. Krimer told me, "Be upfront about what you're looking for when meeting people. In this day and age, the word clingy gets thrown around a lot — someone who is secure and emotionally mature will be open to hearing about your readiness for a relationship, and you should feel safe in expressing at least a general sense of what you want from a dating experience.
7 things you should do when online dating and 7 things you shouldn't
Don't jump to the finish line Shutterstock While you want to be honest about what you're looking for in a partner, don't let your desire to get married and have kids get in the way when you first start dating someone. Kulaga told me, "If your ultimate goal is to get married and you go on a first and second date with someone dreamy, don't blurt out the marriage countdown! You will scare this perfect match away! You might be dying to show off an engagement ring on social media, or you might feel like you are last on your list of friends to marry, but don't jump to that finish line just yet.
Enjoy the process, get to know the person and create memories before you drag them into your pre-written agenda. Krimer told me, "If you went on a date and had a terrific time, don't buy into the game-playing and rules. Let that person know soon after your first date that you really enjoyed your time! Krimer continued, "They'll either reciprocate if they felt the same way, or you will know by their response or behaviour if they aren't interested in pursuing anything further.
There's no need to wait days before you text or call — if you like someone, let them know it! It seems like poor communication has become standard in online dating. But it doesn't have to be. If they want to communicate with you, they will.
And if they don't, cut them loose. Krimer told me, "Don't buy the I'm really busy with work excuse to justify lack of communication — I've had patients who are in relationships with doctors who work 17 hour days and still manage to text their partners in breaks between OR time. We're all busy people — but we know that we make time when we want to make time.
But don't just brush it off. Even if texting isn't someone's main mode of communicating, if they are ready and interested in pursuing a relationship, it will be reflected in their behaviour.
They will absolutely find a way to check in, keep you in the loop, and make themselves available to talk. Even getting on that first date can feel difficult. Bennett told me, "Don't expect to get a date right away. Statistics show that around one third of online dating users never go on a date. The number was as high as seventy percent without a date in one study focused on Tinder. These apps aren't magic, and going from matching and messaging to an actual date is pretty much just as hard online as it is in the offline world.