Sunday, February 12, 2006

2/12/06 Theatre thought

Theatre thought: two ways of un-linking theatre from representation:

1) avant-garde: creating images which resonate with the observer but don't represent specific signifiers or aren't so constrained by their context that the observer can't freely associate; immediate impact of sensory stimulation which may be (loosely) tied to a fictional framework.

2) eliminating the virtual in favor of the actual: the "style" of what happens may be that of natural behavior and recognizable, the event may (must?) be transparent and coherent, but all indications of fiction are avoided: what takes place is what is really taking place. Breakdown of performer/observer distinction (always?).

How are these two categories different?

At what point does an obvious representation (image, music, word or words, allusion) distance the observer to the point of passivity and "deaden" the event? Is it a question of structure? Structuring the event to allow for periods of unpredictability in which the observers determine what will happen? (sounds like "Sally's Rape")

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home