After the Colloqium.

Hello everyone. I've survived.

Yes, with merely three hours of sleep, a very upset tummy, buckets of sweat, nearly sleepwalking from the MRT Ortigas Terminal to Robiinson's Galleria, nearly getting run over by buses, nearly running into pedicabs and Ford Expeditions, I survived.

Oh, and I survived tripping on our front door.

But accident-proneness aside, the Colloqium went rather well, if I may say so. I had invited over two good friends from Grail as audience, Ruzella and Zenna. Speaking of audience, it was actually less intimidating than what I had first imagined. I was shivering at the very idea of around 30 people gathering to scrutinize our studies; the total head count n the room amounted to twelve, including reactors and presenters.

Joseph Cabrera was to go first, I second, and Raquel Regalado third, as she had to hurry from class. When my turn came, I tried to keep calm, speak clearly, and tried to keep things light and conversational yet professional. I'm glad it paid off.

I was surprised our reactors recieved my thesis rather well. It was very uplifting to hear what Sir Apoloniio Chua had to say, kung baga, nakakataba ng puso. He said he was very excited to see a study such as this happening, and he said I was confident, or at least I looked confident venturing into such a topic. Ma'am Ami Bonifacio-Ramolete said likewise; the problems very interesting as it was challenging, and it was courageous of me to take that direction. Dr. Belen Calingacion, the head of our Department, said it was high time someone did a scholarly study on our DUP directors, and she was glad I was going there, or at least I was starting this kinf of possibility. In a way, as I see it, it would also be like opening up a new avenue for academic papers on Dulaang UP directors and their aesthetics.

True enough, no study will be without its weaknesses, and so our reactors helped me by pointing out the parts where I could improve on, which ones ought to go where and which ones were not that necessary.

Now, I must decide where I want my thesis to go: either I choose to talk about the man himslef, or I choose to talk about his aesthetics. If I do choose to talk about his art(as Sir Apolonio has keenly observed my study was primarily heading into), I must have seen most of Sir Tony's productions as the plays, not just as recorded videos; if I were to rely solely on recorede material, it would not suffice to serve as material strong enough to support my paper. After all, videos are just secondary resources. On the other hand, should I choose to study the man himself, it might prove to be strong enough, as I can interview Sir Tony himself, as well as the people he has worked with in previous recent productions.

I find myself as thus: I wish I could say watching the videos may be enough for me, but the only plays I've really seen of Sir Tony's were Othello in 1992 and a portion of The Iceman Cometh last year. Not a good way to go. But Ma'am Ami and Sir Apo have suggested me two other options. I could either do a study on Sir Ton'y relationship with the palywrights of his plays (like Sir Floy Quintos with ... And St. Louis Loves Dem Filipinos), or his relationiship with his favorite actors(like my grandmother, Mrs. Sonia Valenciano.).

Hmm. Decisions, decisions.