Demons and reality

Daimon is the Greek derivative for the term demon. In this sense the term "demon" means "replete with knowledge."
the definition comes from http://www.pantheon.org/articles/d/daimon.html

"it wasn’t until the Roman period that the term came to be used exclusively for evil spirits."

"If there are evil spirits capable of inflicting physical and mental ailments on human beings, there arises a theological problem of how to explain them. If their actions occur with the permission or support of God, then it becomes difficult to square this with the idea of God as perfectly loving. If the actions of demons occur without the permission or support of God, this becomes difficult to reconcile with the idea that God is all-powerful."

Religion doesn't like the idea of demons from the greeks, they say, since around the XIII - XV centuries that demons are evil creatures, with the excuse that knowledge can only come from God, and therefore, demons' knowledge is not pure/good/right or whatever they said.

The idea of this blog is not to talk about demons, religion, god, or anything related to that, it is just a mere example of how the definition of something can change according to the people it is told to, and i wondered if this happened in theatre,

As roberto said, the human brain interprets signs and understands texts, where a text is a group of signs put together in what may be a sentence. So, this means that the word demon will be interpreted different by a religious person and by someone that knows it's real meaning, and therefore, understand something different. But that is how the human brain works, it does 5 main things, as carl sagan said:
1) recollect
2) inter-compare
3)synthesizes
4)analyzes
5)generates abstraction
And thus, each person will construct his own reality, by his perceptions and brain. Reality is nothing, and we make our own, as we give sense to the words as we interpret them.

In theatre, we interpret breathing much differently as we do in science, which makes it difficult to understand as well as i should... maybe if i weren't so addicted to physics and biased on how to breath it would be simpler, as it is said "Where ignorance is a bliss 'tis folly to be wise". But who to blame who is wise and who is not? Who dares to say that his reality is the truth? Wise, for me, is to build a reality in which you can understand many different realities, and therefore have a wider knowledge. But that is my reality, what is yours? why is mine right and not yours?

Same in theatre, you cannot say what kind of theatre is correct and which is the best. that is why we study different traditions, to have a wider knowledge of theatre (amirite?) and be able to build a more complex reality and meaning for plays. no tradition is right, no tradition is wrong. they just interpret differently. that is something i will have to keep in mind for paucartambo.


On stage, a director can construct his own reality, and share it with the audience, that is what i think, the most interesting part of theatre, the fact that you can give any opinion and idea of the reality you have built in your brain and make a play from it, there is no society that won't think as you, and won't let you enjoy of a world in which your reality is the one true reality, and it doesn't have to be face the fact there other people will see everything different. In your stage, everyone is living the same reality you built.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TERMINE EL BLOG Y ESTABA INCREIBLEEEE Y SE BORRO SDIJFLKDSF MALDITO INTERNET.. AHORA ESPERO RECORDAR, PORQUE TENIA IDEAS INCREIBLES AFLKS;FMDJKLFDSNKGBFHJKSDFLKHADSMF DHJKSGFLK;

resumire lo que habia puesto..


The people who go to see the play are living a different reality that what is on stage, and therefore they can interpret things different, and it is amazing when the barrier between stage and audience is broken, because for the moment in which the play is happening, the audience is living the same reality as the stage, the directors reality, but connected to their reality, and causes their brains, the factory of their reality to make changed and fix some things, making people think, and interpret, and try to understand, because this reality is different from their own. But this is why theatre gives knowledge, because as i said before, knowledge for me how wide you can differentiate different realities, and have a better view of your own.

But when making the play, is the director's reality the same as the actor's? they will both see the play different, but therefore everyone has a lot of general knowledge in common, so people won't be so disorganized.

As demons are something to greeks and something different to religion, the same works for theatre, what is something in everyday life, is not the same in theatre. Not even the reality, but how do people connect their reality to the play? neither reality is better, right, wrong, or bigger, there are just different, many people think that what is not their reality is not right. and that is the awsomeness in theatre, there is no right reality, just different perspectives, and i wide range of opinions of reality. Theatre is closely connected to knowledge, and i had a lot more cool stuff to say but it got deleted :(...

That is something i have to keep in mind when i go to see a play from now on: How did this play affected my reality? what was different from the stage reality and mine? how did it make me reflect about things?

"Where ignorance is bliss 'tis folly to be wise"
When i started writing this blog, i liked a lot this quote, but now i am in disagreement, because as i said before, the more you know, the better the reality you make, the better the connections, the better your understanding, the wider your knowledge. anyways reality is nothing more that what you perceive in your brain. How does it work? theatre seems to a good gateway for this understanding. Although i like a million times more the theory than the practice :)

Our realities can only get as closely as possible, and by understanding a wider range of them we can become more accurate on our perspective of reality, but never precise, because reality doesn't actually exists, it is created. How can reality be analyzes through a play? Is reality on stage supposed to be separated from every day life or to be connected? what is reality on stage apart from just a attempt to construct a reality within the reality of someone? How does the reality on theatre works?

I have a quote of myself, which goes like this: "There is 2 kinds of people in this world, the ones who make the lies, and the ones who live them". I personally like a lot my quote cause i know what it means, but it is not as clear as it could be, because the real meaning likes in this concept of reality. The ones who lie are the ones who make the reality for others, they tell them how reality should work, and make them think reality is 1, and the ones who live the lie are those who are living the built reality of this powerful men (governments, religions, social groups, etc... from here comes my hate to these, because i hate when people make the reality for others). But theatre, in the contrary, does not lie, but presents a reality to think about, to realise about these lies, to see that reality is different to what people think. At least this is how i think about it. This is my reality. What's yours? Do you make your own reality or do you live someone else's? Reality is nothing, we make it. How accurate and closely are connected different realities in different people's heads? How much can a play stretch or synthesize reality?