2 posts tagged “art”
Last night's P. Ramlee the Musical was a blast. Tickets sold out, and a lot of celebrities were cramming behind the double doors. I even saw one the popular Melodi reporter chit chatting with the people around there. People were still queueing up to buy tickets, though they were sold out. I felt cocky yet nervous standing and waiting for the show to start. Maybe because this would be my first time watching a theatrical presentation in Istana Budaya, or maybe because this was the premiere, and the feeling were supposed to be tha
t way.
So what's up with the musical? Is it something like the highly appraised TV show High School Musical? Well, it's something like that, but with a bit of Malaysian touch. It tells a story about the history of P. Ramlee from the day he dreamed of becoming an artist to his last remaining days contributing to the Malaysian art scene. Along the way he meets his love life and faces grief and sorrow before becoming a renowned artist througout Asia. And it doesn't need a complex plot to tell such story. Let the song and the rhytms explain it all. And of course with dances too. The story spans up to 3 hours starting from 9.p.m with a 30 minute intermission.
And now comes the review. Since this was my first time watching a Malaysian musical theatre I couldn't comment much about how it was presented (did watch different kind of theatres performed by my collagues, and even acted in one during the KL festival, but those were totally different than what I was watching ). But overall it was good, with the beautiful voices from the cast, synchronized dancing and eye-popping props and backdrops. However I did find a little bit funny (but not obvious) on the voice projection by one of the actors (well, maybe they did that on purpose). And some of the songs did not really fit the moods of the story, especially when it came to the sad part. They also put some modern twist in the rhythm. And the absence of P.Ramlee's collection of original songs were felt (maybe they wanted to avoid copyright infringement). And the plot did really have a climax that drived my emotion to the top. Something that would make a person who had never known P. Ramlee to cry and say "I should've known
him earlier!" Maybe this only came from my own judgement, but I believe that every part of P.Ramlee's life was explicitly told in the story. And with my dad to elaborate on what was happening in every scene, I found out that his life was not just about being a 'seniman' or an artist, but more about being a man. And seriously, Sean Ghazi managed to 'become' him that night. I enjoyed watching every scene and wouldn't want to miss a second of it. The production team really did their best.
All in all it is a theatre worth watching. If you want to know everything about P. Ramlee, start booking your tickets now!
Art is very much related to individual's awareness of the environment and how they express it in an abstract manner,which can only be understood by themselves. We can say that art is everything around us -and we work our daily life with the essence of life. It is very much related to the spatial intelligence suggested by Gardner.
So the question is: are the so-called visual artists gain their ability through natural talent or from acquisition? Are those who acquire the talent better than those who already have the talent but do not wish to enhance their skills through further studies of art? Are those who has a keen interest in art better than those who are forced to learn? What are the criteria to become a good artist?
I remember myself trying to learn guitar a few years back but just can't the tunes right even though I like it. Thus, in my opinion you can't just have an interest to acquire art skills. You need natural talent. Furthermore, I believe that we cannot force ourselves to learn the skills. It requires time and patience. I realized that the "Learn to Play Guitar in 30 Days" guidebook is just not enough for me.
However, when you a have a bit of a talent on something such as playing the piano, you might as well have the ability to experiment any songs in just a short period of time. I recalled the day when I introduced my friend to a song and as soon as she heard the tunes she played the violin and had the melody was almost coherent with the original song.
But there would be another question that needs to be answered: What about if you in a totally different situation but requires almost the same ability that you already have? A friend of mine who liked to draw manga characters were forced to become an architect. But would he really be able to become one without having at least a little knowledge on architecture? That's when we need to learn the skill. We have the talent but sometimes we just can't just do a new stuff without digging informations about what should you do and what you shouldn't first. An illustrator cannot become a comic artist without learning the rules about illustrating comics. An illustrator may not know about "colums" or "captions", while a comic artist may not understand about "super-imposed" and "decisive moments", even though such terms are available in some of the art-related careers.
So, I believe that talent and experience must work hand-in-hand to produce a fine and coherent piece of art. That is why a natural-born singers are not as good as an experienced art critics when it comes to commenting during competitions like American Idol and such. Meanwhile, a person who only learns about music may not be able to sing better than a natural-born singer. Thus balance is needed between talent and experience.
However, I do believe that you can get the talent if you learn the skills during early childhood. Thus, we can say that talent is not just about nature, but also about nurture. Good upbringing can produce good artists.
