Pedro Casablanc pays tribute to Valle-Inclán and Gómez de la Serna in a musical cabaret of reflections
Filmed in a tone that blends memory and music, the performance honors Valle-Inclán as seen through the eyes of Ramón Gómez de la Serna and features a collaboration with pianist Mario Molina. The work, shaped and directed by Xavier Alberti, centers on a character whose presence accompanies the music, turning the stage into a space where literary life and personal artistry converse.
How would one describe this show to fans of Valle-Inclán, the master who inspires it?
The piece is a musical homage from Gómez de la Serna to his mentor and idol, Valle-Inclán. It veers away from a conventional play and takes the form of a conversational cabaret or literary evening, depending on how one chooses to slate it. Gómez de la Serna offers vivid portraits of Valle-Inclán, weaving anecdotes about his life and his approach to literature. He presents a figure both controversial and entertaining, a revolutionary who spoke his mind. The narrative even touches on the idea that a lively literary salon once ended in an extraordinary altercation, costing a participant an arm in a spirited clash of words.
What do these characters yield to one another, and what do they receive in return from this collaboration?
The answer lies in mutual admiration. A sense of kinship exists among Serna, Valle-Inclán, and the present performer. There is a perceived third strand, a link that binds them: Serna admired Valle-Inclán, and the performer admires them both. The show draws on the performer’s experience on the theater stage accumulated over many years, while also exploring a fresh capability as a musical performer. It becomes a space to reveal a facet of acting that leans toward musical storytelling, an evolution that enriches the actor’s craft.
How does the show distinguish Valle-Inclán, Gómez de la Serna, and the performer itself?
The differences arise from the eras they inhabit. The performer is a child of the early twenty-first century, carrying the values and sensibilities of the present, while Valle-Inclán and Gómez de la Serna lived in a much more volatile prewar Spain. Gómez de la Serna was younger and could find exile if needed; Valle-Inclán passed away before the war broke out in 1936, unable to witness the dramatic events Gómez de la Serna described as a dance of the esperpento. The work thus reflects on a literature that once faced sharp risks, and on an art form that navigates a landscape where life and literature intertwine more visibly than ever.
Is this piece also a meditation on the lasting validity of literature and on a moment when art and life begin to share the same space? Does the evolution of public perception toward writers and performers mirror a broader shift?
Performance work today earns broader recognition, aided by access to streaming platforms that amplify visibility. Yet, a portion of society will always resist this path. Still, the arts contribute meaningfully to society by enriching leisure and learning. Watching cinema or going to the theater opens doors to new ideas and deepens the soul, offering experiences that endure in memory. The show considers these contributions, presenting art as a catalyst for personal growth and reflection.
How resilient is theater in modern times? What sustains its vitality amid rapid change?
In this era, audiences enjoy direct access to social networks and an array of recordings, which paradoxically can strengthen live performance. Theater remains fundamentally live and, in this view, resistant to certain technological trends. It is not something that can be replicated by artificial intelligence. The immediacy of a live show—the shared breath, the responsive mood of the audience—defines the form in a way no machine can mimic.
Yet the performer never imagined a career solely in front of the camera; cinema was always a dream before the stage called louder.
Cinema has long attracted this artist, and the path chosen keeps room for both film and theater. Which medium fills more depends on the work itself. Some theater pieces resonate intensely on stage, while certain films echo deeper in different ways. Today, the touring production is a source of happiness, but it also comes with ongoing work in front of the camera. The duality enriches the performer, offering complete professional fulfillment.
Does the theater audience prove more discerning than moviegoers? The artist believes so. Theater demands a more immediate, spiritual connection with the audience; if the performance fails to engage, it fails entirely. A film permits viewers to disengage by watching visuals or listening to music, but live theater is spoken word in the most intimate sense. If the connection falters, there is little that can salvage the moment on stage.
And do theatrical works have a fixed life span, or can they be revisited later?
Live theater carries a singular, unrepeatable experience. Recordings may exist but rarely capture the same electricity. A strong production such as Valle-Inclán through Gómez de la Serna remains a memory that travels with each viewer. The current performance invites audiences to share in a moment that defines the arc of a life in the performing arts, and it continues to illuminate the cultural journey for everyone who witnesses it, now and in the future.