After several years of reflection on our practices, productions and activities as an independent company, we found ourselves questioning the way we name what we do. This led us to embark on the risky adventure of asking if the genre we call contemporary circus represents us completely.

From our experience and concerns, we have observed that, since its inception, circus has evolved and adapted to historical changes.
Some practices maintain their traditions, while others evolve by merging with other disciplines and undergoing various research processes. We believe that terms such as ‘traditional circus’, ‘new circus’, ‘contemporary circus’, ‘acrobatic theatre’ and ‘acrobatic dance’ arise from this constant modification, which we believe has nurtured scenic, aesthetic and artistic languages.

However, we would like to point out a problem that we have identified, which we believe is exacerbated when we enter the labour market as independent companies. This has a direct impact on our creations and the growth of our labour market.
How do we introduce ourselves in the labour market here in Argentina? How should we describe our work when introducing ourselves to the labour market in Argentina?

In our opinion, this mixture of languages, the need for economic recognition, and the limited professional network for circus practices has led us to search for strategies to insert ourselves into other markets. Consequently, we have started using names such as: ‘Acrobatic theatre’, ‘physical theatre and circus’, ‘acrobatic dance’, and so on. This, in our opinion, causes a loss of identity, which is reflected in the scarcity of places where we can perform.
This has led us to ask ourselves how we create from the circus and whether these denominations cause us to lose sovereignty over our practices.

From there, we began to realise that we often create shows based on theatre, dance and performance, rather than the circus itself.

We understand circus as a dynamic art that emerges from the heart of culture and transforms according to its context.
Initially, we positioned ourselves as heirs of the contemporary circus. However, after exploring other forms of circus performance, such as street and traditional circus, we realised that these differ from contemporary circus in purely aesthetic terms. While we acknowledge that some productions delve into other aspects of construction, we believe it is necessary to rethink the ways and concepts we use to create circus performances.

By observing our creative process, our approach to circus and our production and sales methods, we have concluded that the contemporary circus genre is too narrow for us, or at least our scenic proposal does not fit into it. That is why, from now on, we will refer to our genre as ‘Political Circus‘.