From watching the other groups present on our day, I liked the group about Russian theater because of the way there presentation took shape based off of frustrations in the research. I thought that even though they couldn't very much information on their specific topic, they found a way to make a presentation on why that might be. Also, I liked how they dug deep into the history of Russia during that time. I felt that all group members were really knowledgeable and drew specific conclusions from the project. The other group that really stood out to me what the presentation on Mexican Theater. What I remember about this presentation was its tie to the present day. This story was about the Clinton's coming to Mexico and how the dance was used to insult them without them knowing it. I thought this group did a great job of narrowing their scope and catching interest with this story, because then after that they went on to explain more specifics about the theater and dance. The other group of Elizabethan Theater that focused on Marlowe and his play Faustus was a great example of how to narrow the scope. I did feel that this was a kind of bland presentation with just a powerpoint. Maybe the group could have acted out something from Faustus or tied it in with a present day example?
I feel that our presentation was one of the more engaging and interesting presentations just because it was one of the only ones that was interactive. I think a lot in our presentation went well, specifically people in the audience were responsive and I felt like our point that ancient Roman Spectacle was spectacle and not theater was clear. Looking back, I feel that maybe we still could have narrowed our focus a little bit. We could have focused on just Chariot racing and gone further in depth about its significance and how it relates to theater, instead of focusing on all different kinds of spectacles. If we had done that I also think our closing argument would have been tighter and less broad.