toptermpaper.com

Explore the ways in which The Beggar’s Opera influenced the development of musical theatre in the eighteenth and twentieth centuries. What were the reasons for its continued popularity?Intro

The Beggar’s opera’ is an outstanding piece of writing, which has for centuries been an inspiration of talent to musical theatre everywhere. John gay’s piece has led to the creation of many different production’s, that shall be talked about in more depth throughout the essay. The 18th Century is the obvious place to start, with the first production being staged in 1728 on 28 January . This is also where John Gay’s marked his place in History as a great Ballad Opera writer. Ballad Opera was a new Style of musical theatre made huge by it’s humorous satire, which could be related to by all types and classes of people, because of it’s satire on Italian Opera’s and British prime minister Walpole at the time. The play in it’s new and unique group managed to relate to a mass amount of people who found the humorous play to be so true in it’s own exaggerated wayWhen given the question (Explore the ways in which ‘The Beggar’s opera’ influenced the development of musical theatre in the eighteen and twentieth centuries. What were the reasons for it’s continued popularity?) there were certain aspects of the ballad opera which I needed to understand before answering the question. The Production, adaptation’s of the play, the stylistic aspects, the construction, and it’s popularity within the two Centuries are some of the key aspects needed to answer the question.

‘The beggar’s opera’ and Its low-life settings were Taken and used in pieces like The Cobbler’s Opera, which is set in Billingsgate. Charles Johnson’s The Village Opera ( 1729 ) started a trend for more emotional and more rural subject, which contained little satire or wit. None of these two opera’s came close to the success of The Beggar’s Opera. This waspartly to do with the fact Gay had used most of the best songs in the public domain.(footnote)
The popularity of The ballad opera caused a lot of serious difficulties for The composers and Italian opera houses at the time including composers such as Handel. When the obsession had died, there were still shorter pieces of the same style which came onto the scene and became popular afterpieces of the Big shows.(footnote) These pieces were written In the early 1760s, they were unoriginal pieces of ballad opera. One called Thomas and sally(1760) by Arne, and one called Love in a village(1772) also by Arne. These were considered unoriginal because only 5 new songs were written for the opera and some were taken from his previous works. (footnote)

Bibliography and More Information about ballad opera

R. Fiske , English Theatre Music in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1973, 2/1986)

Y. Noble (ed.), Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Beggar’s Opera (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1975)

Percy Scholes / Nicholas Temperley

Only The Beggars opera’ is the only one out of the pieces that kept it’s popularity. It was a huge milestone of the 20th century for musical theatre, was an adaptation (probably the most well known of all that have been done) of the ‘The beggar’s opera’, The Threepenny Opera. The piece was inspired by ‘The beggar’s Opera in its social message, using some of the same characters and even one of the songs. Composer Kurt Weill and playwright Bertolt Brecht changed old-fashioned opera and operetta forms, an incorporateda political view and the sound of 1920s Berlin dance bands and cabaret into the play. Weill’s harmonies and Brecht’s writing created a completely new musical theatre that inspired some of the most well known hits such as Chicago and cabaret. “Mack the Knife,” is one of the most well know tunes of the century, this is the opening song to the play.(footnote)

The first night of ‘Three penny opera’ was August 31, 1928. No one knew what to expect from the night, but not long in and everyone began to shout and cheer. The show turned out to be a brilliant success and the popularity spread throughout Europe. This started something huge. After the Berlin premiere, 46 stage productions of the work was generated because of the popularity from audiences. 1931 brought a film version to it’s audience, the film was called Die 3-Groschenoper. This made a an international star out of weill’s wife, Lotte Lenya. The opera, by 1933 had already been produced 130 times all over the world.

The play really took off after the war when there was a New York production at Theatre de lys, this production was off Broadway. It ran from 1954 to 1961 and the show did a total of 2707 performance and was the longest running play in history a the time. The Threepenny Opera is still entertaining audiences all over the world. There are three cinematic versions of the work, made in 1931, 1963, and 1988. the music and story of The Threepenny Opera as stayed irresistible to audiences everywhere as they were in 1928.

This adaptation of ‘the beggar’s opera’ as you can see has had significant inspiration on musical theatre, and had a lot on early popular music of the 20th century.

In America, ballad opera began with the importation of an English work, Flora, or Hob in the Well, which was given at Charleston, South Carolina, in 1735. The first American performance of The Beggar’s Opera itself took place in New York in 1750.

Thereafter all the most popular English comic operas were quickly imported, and, indeed, for long they formed the sole operatic entertainment in the English colonies and successor states, since Italian and French opera did not reach that part of America until the 1790s, and no serious attempt to promote Italian opera was made until 1825 .

Many writer’s of the time were sticking to Italian Opera, which were very serious
1953 brought forward a new light on the ballad opera turning it into a film. The film priemered in London on the 5th of June 1953,
film1985,

Musical theatre before ‘The beggar’s opera’ was very different. During the 17th Century there was a period called interregnum, unfortunately this had an effect on musical theatre and During this time theatrical performances were forbidden under the Puritan government. After this period and when the restoration was finally over, there was a lot of changes to society. There was a lot of positive effects on the country’s performing arts, and because of the financial developments the balance of social classes came together. Londoners started to appreciate newer forms of artistic expression. They welcomed teachers of Italian and French to the city, as well as the many Continental musicians who arrived and settled there. An era began where Italian style was put above all other types of entertainment. The Italian castrato was a male singer who was trained to sing with soprano or alto voice. The Italian Castrato became very popular(footnote)

John gay took a lot of his inspiration for the ‘The beggar’s opera’
Production’s an adaptations of The beggar’s opera since 1728 have been everywhere. I have taken a look at some of these since it’s first performance to show how much of a success it was even 250 years on, the influence on musical theatre has shown in many different types of opera.

When John Gay took his new ballad opera to the manager of the famous Drury lane theatre, Colley Cibber, gay was unfortunately turned away. The main reason for Colley Cibber’s choice was not ignorance, it was a perception of it’s political satire that made him refuse. If maybe ‘The beggar’s opera’ was a bit more obtuse there would have been a bigger chance of Cibber accepting. The fact that Cibber had a Personal friendship with British Prime minister Walpole would probably have also played a big part in Cibber’s decision, as he could not of found Gay’s Humour remotely comical.[i]Not long after Gay’s disappointment with Colley Cibber’s Decision, Gay approached John Rich, the manager of another successful theatre called Lincoln’s Inn Fields. John Rich decided to take a chance on Gay’s work, However John Rich had his doubts and probably would have dropped it after it’s rehearsal’s if it wasn’t for Gay’s friends who pressured him into continuing with the balled opera.[ii] John rich was so right in taking on the piece and the widespread popularity of Gay’s Ballad opera led Rich to build Covent Garden, which today is the most famous Opera house in London.[iii]

Gay’s main source of inspiration for the 69 Songs (in the original score there were 68 songs, one was added later by third edition) in his ballad opera were taken from a collection of songs and ballads written by Thomas D’Urfey. The verses he wrote were mostly written to folksongs and favourite melodies. The book was published in 1700 in a songbook entitled, ‘Wit and Mirth or pills to purge melancholy.’ John Gay selected many songs from this collection of popular music and wrote his own lyrics, so that the lyrics fitted in with his opera. Gay also had other sources which he borrowed from such as his contemporary composers Eccles, Barrett, Purcell, Clarke, and Handel, as well as using tunes from English, Scotch, and Irish folksongs. The music in the ballad was collected and the arranged to fit. The chosen songs included a range of popular styles at the time, from jigs to hymn-like tunes. German composer and music Director of Lincoln’s Inn Fields Theatre Dr. Pepusch

Also participated in the creation of the score, providing the overture and assisting in the orchestration of the opera.[iv]

The first Performance of John Gay’s Ballet Opera The Beggar’s Opera was on stage in 1728, This performance attracted the acclaim and attention of the Popular audience in England. The first season of performances lasted for a total of 62 nights. The play received just as much applause in the next season of performances. It soon spread into a lot of the main towns in England, and also made it’s way to Wales Scotland and Ireland where it was made more popular. The woman who played Polly( Lavinia Fenton) became a favourite of many different people. The ballad opera became that successful it drove Italian opera out of England for the whole season. Italian opera had carried Musical theatre for 10 year prior to this completely new style, I see as Experimenting at the time, as it was completely out of the norm. The 62 consecutive nights seems like a huge amount to be doing nowadays, but back in the 18th Century however this was quite normal for the actor’s to be doing. Years later the Opera was performed internationally in Dublin, Jamaica, Glasgow, New York. In America The beggar’s Opera was one of the earliest musical comedies Produced.[v]

The Opera popularised this new form of stage entertainment which was known as balled opera. Balled opera changed Operas standard Upper-class audience and had attracted and combined the likes of lower-class, middleclass and Upper-class followings. Londoners really loved the realism and satire in the ballet opera, I think it was something that everyone at the time could relate to, which maybe why it attracted such a wide range of different minded and different classed people. Audiences would leave the theatre talking about the opera and singing the familiar tunes. There is a lot of evidence to show it’s popularity in the 18th Century, one being the book trade. This was highly increased because of It’s controversial subject matter and satire. Other evidence showing it’s popularity was that every year after 1728 The beggar’s opera was performed every single year of the 18th Century.[vi]

The Beggar’s Opera was premiered on January 29, 1728 at John Rich’s theatre at Lincoln-Inn-Fields and had an overwhelming amount of success. A newspaper at the time, The Craftsman(London weekly) ran this short piece:

February 3, 1728

“This Week a Dramatick Entertainment has been exhibited at the Theatre in Lincoln’s-Inn-Fields, entitled The Beggar’s Opera, which has met with a general Applause, insomuch that the Waggs say it has made Rich very Gay, and probably will make Gay very Rich.”

The reference to Rich above refers to John Rich, the manager of the Lincoln’s Inn Fields theatre.

February 17, 1728

“We hear that the British Opera, commonly called The Beggar’s Opera, continues to be acted, at the Theatre in Lincoln’s-Inn Fields with general Applause, to the great Mortification of the Performers and Admirers of the Outlandish Opera in the Haymarket.”[vii]

The piece written shows how the play was a hit, and happened in such a small amount of time. People from everywhere wanted to see the play because It was the talk of the town.

The huge success of ‘The Beggar’s Opera’ has retained its popularity for over 200 hundred years, which forms a record in dramatic productions. Every generation brings new applause and the causes for it’s popularity change each generation, John gay probably didn’t expect such a major interest in his work and maybe didn’t think it would become as popular as it has. I’m sure it would have shocked him that the piece was performed 62 nights in a row at one of the most well known theatres at the time. Gay at the time most definitely would have been expecting some abuse over the satire contained in the opera but he would not of been expecting the creation of the characters Macheath, his gang, and women followers would be criticized, and made into something more serious.[viii]

The ballad opera has become so influential that critics by now tend to assume that complicated irony is “Pervasive” and “thoroughgoing” in the language of the play. Ironic double-meaning is understood to provide a key to correct reading of Gay’s satire, which in it’s ambiguity and uncertainty is modernistic.[ix]

The first imitation of ‘The beggar’s opera’ was by Tomas Cooke and johnJohn Mottley’s ballad opera ‘Penelope-the odyssey story set in England, this was also in 1728. The opera only ran for 3 night which had nothing on Gay’s piece.[x]

Another production of the beggar’s opera was the 1985 Performances at

1985 brought forward lots of production of the ballad opera, and it marked Johngay’s

In 1985 this Catchy News paper article, shows how popular ‘The beggar’s opera’ was and how popular is was still in 1985.

Beggars’ Banquet

“…Dramatic and musical flexibility and vitality make John Gay’s 1728 ‘Musical comedy’ an indestructible theatrical creation…”

During the 18th Century Musical theatre

‘Except in Air 34, where Pepusch used P.G. Sandoni’s original bass for the latter’s setting of Gay’s own song-text ‘Sweet William’s Farewell to Black-ey’d Susan’. Also, in Air 20 (Handel’s march from Rinaldo) and Air 41 (Purcell’s song ‘If love’s a sweet passion’), Pepusch’s bass line is similar to the composer’s own. For further details, see my edition, p.108. )

Arrangements’ of the

The rearranging of the songs in ‘The beggar’s be traced back to the first performance in 1728. The existing tunes John gay had chosen for his play, were taken by arranger John Christopher Pepusch and instead of him taking earlier harmonized version of the songs, he added his own basses.(footnote) In 1729 the basses were published, this was the third edition of the work. The first two edition only include the tunes.( The songs were unlike John Pepusch’sfully-scored overture written for two oboes and string, and there printed on two staves. The staves lack any instrumental introductions or codas.(footnote)
Other sources show evidence that there was a standard method for arranging the songs. Scoring was for unison violins and continuo, and instrumental introduction and codas copied the opening and closing bars of the song itself.(footnote)
When the third edition was introduced it was used as a basis for arrangements until late into the 19th century. However, in the second half of the 18th century, many London revivals began to try out new arrangements for the musical, the most significant version is Thomas Linley’s of 1776. All of the arrangements have not been published. In 1769 there was an edition of the ballad opera published with a misleading title page:
‘THE BEGGARS OPERA…with the Additional Alterations byDr Arne…The Basses entirely New.(footnote) The publisher hoped the audience would think that the ‘basses entirely new’ were part Dr Arne’s ‘additional alterations’, The truth is the pieces were far to poor to be his work, as it contained too much harmonic for the speed of the tunes. This gave a different spin on the musical but didn’t contain the right ingredients, that made gay’s version what it is. Compared to Pepusch’s simple but very effective bass the ‘Arne’ version omitted some of the songs from the piece, some were transposed and part of the writing is introduced into ensemble numbers. (footnote)
Arrangements of ballad operas

Antonin Artaud and Jerzy Grotowski are two famous artists who presented two different views of humanity within theater. Even though they conceived productions that were religious experiences for the audience and the actors, the nature of the experiences for each artist was different (Albert 73). This is because one of the artists sees man as moral while the other sees man as immoral. Artaud saw performance in theater to be surrounded by cruelty, the meaning of cruelty to him was that; there was evil; the act of will was goodness, an effort; to live a good life one was required an act of will, with great effort to offset the inherent evil in the world; hence, it is cruel to live without evil (Bermel 40).

Their performances therefore, ended up being similar in several aspects, such as style, artistic goals, and religious experience of theater. In their theatrical style, their performances frequently had the aspect of violence as a major theme. They thought that the performer should not be separate from their audience during the performance. In the end, both artists had their audiences around and in the action (Chambers 4). Such was seen where they staged their plays in factories, hospitals, schools, airplanes and any real environment. Looking at the aesthetic concept, Artaud and Grotowski both agree that what makes theater to be theater is the relationship between audience and performer (Croyden 20). They also believe that theater performance involves the performer presenting the full psychological and emotional essence.

According to (Brockett 20) their artistic goals were directed towards the creation of theatrical work that would benefit the whole society. We find that Grotowski theatrical performances were surrounded by the themes of martyrdom, persecution, and suffering of individuals who had debatable worth like that of Christianity. Such themes required and made the audience to think more deeply about their purpose, life and meaning. Conversely, Artaud’s theatrical performance was based on the function of civilian outlet for the performer and the audience of the destructive and negative impulses that are found in every individual (Hayman 13).

Jerzy Grotowski is from Poland and was an internationally acclaimed director whose work is mostly found from the Laboratory Theater from1959-1976, which revolutionalised modern theater (Hodge 13). On the other hand, Antonin Artaud was from France, and experimented with various theories within the theater scene in the 30s. His work did influence contemporary artists. This paper shall discuss the theater performance theory as it was influenced by Antonin Artaud and Jerzy Grotowski, who were the chief influencers of theater since World War II.

Artaud experience in theater saw him go through his profession as an actor, director, avant-gardists, and playwright. He was able to exert posthumous influence on contemporary theater trough his work which was mostly in writing (Oscar & Robert 748). We find that he proclaimed theater to be the ‘theater of cruelty’ that is based on the development of sensory and gesture actor’s responses on an extreme level. He required the actors to present an aggressive nature during the development of each stage performance. The purpose of this aggressive development in the actor was to produce the desired audience, through communication on a psychological level through the selected words. This therefore means that Grotowski made use the psychological effect that selected words have in order to realize the desired audience for each playwright he staged (Theodore 81). Therefore his performance theory for theater is based on the use of gesture to produce a psychological effect in the audience. His work and ideals only achieved international recognition in the 60s when the production of Royal Shakespeare and Peter Brook Company show cased. These were mostly seen in productions like ‘The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat’ which was performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton (Auslander 3). This was under the Direction of the Marquis de Sade. The reason why this piece of art was considered the thwarter of cruelty was the emotional hysteria that was in the performance.

Artaud influenced theater performance through his opinion that it was not more of psychological domain but rather it was more of a physical, plastic domain (Kegley & Robert 125). Within such a domain the actor was an athlete of the heart where feelings, actions, emotion was appropriate to the theme. Artaud simply was telling directors and actors that in as much as there was truth in the inner message; this truth to the audience was what they could see from feelings and believing. The desired effect in his performance theory was realized through the use of psychological effects of gestures, words and feelings on the audience. Therefore, this presents the biggest similarity between Artaud and Grotowski in performance theory of theater.

Within this context we find that Jerzy proposed the ‘poor theater’ (Hodge 23). He was seen to have rejected the notion that theater could attempt in matching the effects and spectacle of film and television. He declared that the basic element in theater is the relationship between the spectator and the actor. In his view, theater could exist without the make ups, lighting, separate stage, sound effects, however without the actor-spectator relationship it cannot exist. To this theater theorist, the issue was that the actor had the duty of working using his body to communicate. The main instruments then to this actor are then the plastic, physical and vocal training that gives him skills and training (Grotowski 24). Within the theoretical grounds, the actor looks for the signs that can express movement and sound.

To Artaud, the body is the third referent that in mimetic, dialogue, psychological theater, it is a dramatic situation that is able to convey. As compared to Grotowski, Artaud sees the body as the secondary sign for oral logos (Ronald 24). Therefore for the performer who is acting for any given vocal or psychological behavior, is beyond all instruments in the world of actions that are concretized without making mention to a body in any manners. Artaud requires that there is an interact approach to performance in order for the bodies of the character and the actor to act. This interaction is expected to be very different from any semiotics signs fashioned by the words and gestures of the performer on the stage and tat are immediately interpreted by the audience (Ronald 40). The reference to the body as a complex referent to Artaud is referring to what can be called as epiphanic function of bodies based on the understanding of the character. Such a character within the performance theory is expected to act according to a specific scene and dialogue as depicted by the playwright.

This epiphanic function is also seen in Grotowski’s work, which also shows the epiphanic function of the character as communicative (Temkine 31). This is manifested in terms of somatic and material corporality in performance. Therefore, within the performance theory of Grotowski and Artaud, the body in this theater calls for semiotic manifestations unlike the semiotic communication. In the semiotic manifestations there is no regard for autonomous theatrical as the rejection of the psychological theater (Esslin 25). This autonomous theatrical is considered by many as the evolution in psychological theater. This evolution is seen to take the form of body: the third referent-material support of the action and verbal logos; epiphanic action of the body: complex referent-psychosomatic charge; theaterlized body: prime referent-autonomous theatricality. Therefore we find that both Grotowski and Artaud made good use of the body in order to revolutionize modern theater performance (David 13).

There were able to do this through the incursion of the body within the textual modern theater by splitting the signs of logos and soma. This means they reorganized the theater to narrate the body as an instinctual structure. The signs of logos make use of ambiguity through dialogue that has structure were the body is a subject. For this reason we find that Artaud’s performance was based on the use of words that were reduced by incantations, shouts, gestures, groans (Croyden 34).

One of the single major aspects of man within the field of theater is that man is a performing animal. This is because within the performance of theater, man becomes a self performing animal, reflexive performance, and reveals himself only to himself (Brockett & Findlay 32). Self performance means that the theater performer is expected to get rid of meditation and use impulses in order to produce effective performance. This is the basic requirement of the performance theory form every performer. By performers making use of impulse in their performance they end up performing to themselves and in the end effectively communicating to the audience (Brockett & Findlay 33). The beginning of modern performance was marked during the era of Grotowski and Artaud, where actors were seen more than mere interpreters of the text as they began being riposted as the center of the performance.

The development of the modern performance theorists and practitioners was seen by Grotowski and Artaud who are some of the major contributors. According to (Brockett & Findlay 35) he idea behind modern performance is the capture of deep psychological and emotional layering and authenticity. Therefore, in order to understand the performances of Artaud and Grotowski, we must analyse their stage plays on a psychological level. This will require the revealing of any psychological effects their plays have on both the performance, audience and the actors. In (Auslander 3), without a doubt where psychology is used, the human emotions are evoked, for this reason a good performance within this theory must evoke strong emotions in the audience and actors.

Artaud’s gain in this psychological and emotional performance was realized when he encountered the Balinese theater in the Colonial Exposition back in 1931 (Hodge 6). This encounter deeply influenced him to develop ideas that allowed him to create performances that were deeply physical and sensual. Artaud gave important reference to context were performance commemorated non-verbal constituents of consciousness that were able to arouse therapeutic emotions in the audience (Chambers 4). He however did not give modern performance concrete technique that performers would use, but made the contribution that the performer had potential physically (Chambers 4). This was could the effective athleticism where the performer could make use of their emotions. It was this perspective that influenced the physical theater in the late 20th century of Grotowski. For this reason, we find that it is believed that Artaud did in fact influence the theory of Grotowski.

The idea through out the development of theater, since World War II by the two theorists was that traditions played a central role in the development of the performers training and performance aesthetics. For example, we find that Grotowski to create this deep emotional connection through performance drew from martial arts, holistic practices like yoga as he prepared the body and mind of the performer (Hodge 6). Grotowski on the other hand, was interested in the physical actions of Stanislavsky (Hodge 4). In the process he developed psychophysical techniques that were concerned with the development of the performer’s expression and imagination through physical structure discipline. It was very vital to Grotowski that the performer justified, by means of real and imaginary methods, specific details of the training. We can therefore, draw from this experience that the two stage directors were trying to make the performer to live truthfully on the stage. This truthfulness was in fact depicted through various aesthetic frameworks (Hodge 5).

Of the many proponents of this performance theory is the improvisation technique that has been characterized in theater and frequently practiced in rehearsal processes. These have been an important aspect for all performance practitioners on the stage. To (Albert 74) within this context, we find the modern performer making use of extemporaneous exercise to explore and express the authentic emotions that according to Jerzy and Artaud are necessarily to assist the performer to understand the thoughts of the parts they are playing (Albert 74). The two theorists and practitioners made use of these improvisational exercises as a means to represent the character the actor has taken up. To the two, the actor’s body is known to know feelings and thoughts learn to better express these aspects on a deeper level in order to influence the performance of the theater (Albert 74). It is through this serious exercise that the performer was required to acquire the skills of body impulses that would assist them to enter the body of the character while communicating to the audience.

Such concepts on performance were proposed by the two theorists in tier writings and journals that detailed their thoughts and ideas on performance ( David 5). For example to Artaud, performance in theater was achieved trough the use of gestures that to him were ‘spontaneous conflagration’ that was able to touch everything. Therefore, to Artaud, the gestures in the theoretical scene were to go to the extremes in order to have an understanding. Like we find, he was able to make constant use of improvisation through the use of aggressive pushing of the expressions to take them to the highest levels. To (David 5) Artaud’s performance stage was characterized by language that was highly ‘concrete’, which was ideally of the physical sense. In the end, he expected any good theoretical performance to have concrete language that made use of everything on that performance stage. We find that his ability to improvise was due to the fact that he proposed and made use experimentation with gestures ( David 5).

Moreover, it is within Artaud’s ‘theater of cruelty’ where the actor finds it difficult as they risk their bodies in order to learn (Esslin 43). This is because the performance set requires the performers to make use of extreme action to get the meaning of the play. According to (Esslin 43) Such an approach according to Artaud makes it possible for the actor and audience to have a keen perception of their world. Therefore to achieve this, he made his performances and expected every theatrical performance to have continuity in creation.

Jerzy was similar too to Artaud since he viewed the theater as the space where expression could happen. For his theoretical performance he saw the theater as the best space for expression. He like Artaud also had experimentation and improvisation as the basis for his theater productions (Esslin 43). This is because we find that he continually tried to improve theater and what was theater. However, he believed tat this rested on the vested interest and the performer’s art and also on the presence of the audience. He mostly desired that the actor’s could improve their gestures and actions to be more impulsive rather than premeditated (Esslin 45). Premeditation then would mean that the actors would not have fluid movements and therefore lack effective communication to the audience. In the end through the development of skills necessary the actor or performer in theater was able to be more impulsive. Impulsive gestures and movement in theater is a product only of experimentation and improvised exercise in rehearsals that home techniques. In his concept we find that the meaning for the poor theater was one that had been stripped bare. Grotowski described this methodology of his as a training process that made use of elimination, through the performer, instead of the building of skills. The performer is taken through a process of self penetration where they act through revelation against the audience (Chambers 4).

Within this performance aspect Grotowski believed that a performer should be able to show their inner most emotions and less of the impulses. This expression of the emotions is only capable if the performer is able to peel back every layer of their self. Therefore, their theatrical performance should be characterized by meaning and emotions in the bodies and faces. In the process he showed that in order for this requirement to be achieved the performer was expected to realize this through their initiative. Such initiatives were only possible if the performer made adequate use of improvisatory aspects within the theater stage.

Grotowski was able to realize this in his work and productions through the use of exercises that gave the performer the ability to explore themselves trough bodies and gestures (Kegley and Robert 125). Often, his performances were characterized by the action and movement like that of animals, stretching, rolling, working of the voices and breathing with each performance piece. It was through such exercises that this theorist was able to feel the performers learning ability. In the end, the performances through exercise were able to give theater performances the real meaning of life and the communication of life to the audience. To (Hayman 23) Such achievement of goals was only achievable to Grotowski through improvisatory exercises and methods that gave performers advantage of the qualities of theater.

According to (Auslander 91), Wladimir Krysinski pointed that the autonomous theatricality of Artaud and Grotowski, is not the rejection of psychological theater. Their theater concept examined the evolution of psychological theater, which traced the notion that the human body is a site where autonomous expression assertion is conceived. This represents the physical nature of truth that is represented by the performer’s body on the stage. The theorists Artaud and Grotowski allied since they both wanted to de-realize the body of the performer and make it disappear. The aim of this psychological theater was to make the body of the actor disappear right into that of the character. This is the goal of the autonomous performance in theater, in the words of Grotowski, “to make the body vanish and burn in a flash of pure psychic apprehension” (1968; Auslander 91).

As Michael Foucault argued, a fraction of the object of the social discussion is the disciplining of the body in order to make additionally manageable. This is the concept behind the performance theory as the social discourse is able to manage the body by stealing materiality from it and subjecting it to text discipline. This text is either dramatic or archetypal psychic impulse.

According to (Auslander 91) the aspect of Avant-gardist within the performance theory often claims the liberation of the body and therefore, it challenges the political and social hegemony. In the end this falls short in effectively conceptualizing the liberation, by deteriorating in seeing the body as ideally produced.

The problem is that modern performance theorists like Grotowski, have refused to acknowledge that the body is coded by the social discourse. They fail to see that the body in fact has codes that originate for the social discourse. This body then is metaphysical, mystical notion, that is highly social, raceless, undifferentiated, genderless and hence it is entirely neutral. Therefore having looked at Grotowski’s avant-gardist theory of performance there is needed to see the performing body as the instrument that counters hemegemonic produces art (Theodore 25). Such a body within the performance theory is conceived by Artaud as that part that can only be understood from analyzing the history of the body. Such developments in modern performance theory of theater were simultaneous with transformations during the modern social era (Theodore 34).

Looking at the contributions Artaud and Grotowski made to this modern performance theory in theater, we find that the two theorists did in fact rely on the religious themes to describe man in their performance (Oscar and Robert 32). This presents the other similarity, where theater is a religious experience that gives spiritual adulation for the audience and the performer. Ideally we find that Artaud’s performance compares to the traditional service within the house of worship in which religious comfort reconciles the congregation. Mean while, Grotowski’s theater depicts the tribal religious set up that tries to purify religious myths, and orientations (Ronald 34). Therefore the use of religion within their performance theory means that both theorists are the same. However, we find that by critically looking at the Laboratory theater production the nature of art is different from that of Artaud. This is because each artist is functioning at different levels of awareness. Otherwise, both artists do realize that effective theater performance is religious and highly spiritual (Ronald 36). This is because though Grotowski’s theater productions show that man is moral, which of Artaud sow man to be immoral, but each show the spirituality involved. Grotowski created his theater pieces, to essentially to show that the moral man has intrinsic concern for their fellow men’s well fare. In contrast, Artaud assumed the immoral man to have innate selfish characteristics and behaviors tat harmed others while the man tried to satisfy their lust.

These two facets of the religious views of the theorist Grotowski can be found in his productions and the expectation of his audience. As an example, the production by Grotowski, Calderon’s “The Constant Prince”, and the play, “Apocalypsis cum figuris” which was adapted from the bible, contend with the painful plight of the figure of Christ and the Christian martyrs (Temkine 54). This artists needs from his audience not only to get engrossed in the play or dram, but also they make judgment for themselves on who is wrong or right within the play. In (Temkine 56) Artaud on the other hand, made the theater to be the place of ceremony, ritual, healing, by becoming church and hospital. In this pace the audience had the chance to exorcise out the demons of cruelty and they were also able to contract plagues and be healed of them (Temkine 58). In the view of this paper this is like the absinthe-ridden Aristotelian tragedy that has the combination of holy water and laudanum.

We also find that the two theorists have created their performances to surround violence. The violence is inflicted upon the characters in the plays and dramas and consequently, shows the protagonist (Kegley and Robert 125). We find that the modern performance theory heavily makes use of and advocates for the use of violence as a means of depicting the protagonist within the framework of the art work. A close look at each of the pieces of work of Artaud and Grotowski reveals that the artists make use of violence genuinely (Kegley and Robert 125). The intention of Grotowski would seem is to make the audience uncomfortable through passivity. The efficacy of this intention can be said to then be based on the priori assumption, where the audience is affected by the spectacle of the feelings and sufferings of another human being. The assumption that for this to be effective the audience must end up feeling uneasy, worry a lot and even think concerning the feelings of suffering that are projected by the performer on stage (Bermel 51). In light of this ten, we can say that Grotowski tried to effectively make use of violence as a means of realizing responsive reactions from the audience. This type of performance has become a characteristic of the modern performance theory. The requirement is that the performer will be able to communicate to the audience emotional sides of the character that show their construct of violence. Therefore to (Bermel 52) this type of performance was also similar in Grotowski’s production of the “Arkopolis”.

In this production the success of the intentions of Grotowski were dependent on the audience humane nature and their indifference to the actors’ condition. This play made use of violence were Grotowski, concerned the play with the fate of the inmates within a concentration camp (Bermel 54). The religious theme within the performance was shown by the actor’s acting a scene of the last feast, of the resurrection. The scene depicted crude violation of humans, with the sight of the gas caber, where at the end of the play, Grotowski makes the characters b led to the chamber by a headless puppet, that they believe to b the messiah. The effect on the audience was that of shock that was created by the performance of the actors, trough the use of feelings, gestures and emotions of utter desolation, sickly skin that was very pale, cheeks that were hollow, very dilute pupils, which did not make use of make up but performance (Bermel 67). Such a performance then shows Grotowski’s ability to make use of performances to depict violence and therefore extract feelings of desolation, suffering in the audience.

If the same perspective can be applied to Artaud, we find tat it does not necessarily apply. This is because Artaud believes that the feelings of people tend towards instincts of perverse and violence. As we have seen in the cases of Grotowski, the protagonist is the victim; however, in the works of Artaud, the protagonist is the victimizer. For instance, the work by Artaud, “the Cenci” from Shelley, has a protagonist who is a wealthy, cruel and greedy count, that lust after his daughter (Brockett and Findlay 32). Similar to Grotowski, Artaud, requires the performers to be very convincing, yet, the response expected from the audience is tat of sympathy for the Count and not for the daughter. Sympathy for the daughter is only required after the daughter brutally revenges. We find that these performances of Artaud are used to make the audience cleanse themselves from their own destructive thoughts and impulses by giving audiences, acts that bring them face to face with their consciousness. Nevertheless, Artaud’s unlike Grotowski’s success depends on an assumption that the human instincts are to hurt one another rather than help (Brockett and Findlay 57).

In the process of having two types of views of man within the theater performance theory, gives two separate purposes for theater. Where, Grotowski makes the assumption that his audience will have enough morals to care for the difference between wrong and right. Grotowski then fells that he is able to stimulate his audience to critically analyse the faculties through the use of dramas that depict moral conflicts. For this reason, we find that within the drama, “Arkopolis” Grotowski is trying to make the audience to make a consideration of if or not there is a dangerous illusion from the promise of salvation in Christianity.

Therefore, we are finding that Grotowski is advocating for modern performance to create theatrical dramas where they give benefits to the society, through the sharpening of the awareness of the audience on what is wrong and right. Artaud conversely, believes that the society can only benefit if the audience is made to understand that, it cares less for this distinction. Then the implication is that Artaud is effectively recognizing and confronting the dark impulses in humans and consequently make humans free and gain control of these impulses. In effect Artaud expected that his theory of performance “theater of cruelty” to have popularity, and in the process purge the world out of the evil instincts in each person in the society. This is through the letting of the instincts to have actualization under safe context in theater.

We also find that from a closer examination of the tow performance theorist’s perspectives, there is the lift by spirituality trough theater performance. However, each theorist’s spiritual lift is different. For Grotowski, the spiritual exaltation is realized through the performance depicting pan and suffering. In the drama “The Constant Prince”, the prince character submits to castration and torture, where seriously suffers physically. At the same time, the physical suffering shows that there is a higher level to the actions of the prince that show motions of ecstasy rather than agony. Grotowski depicts the prince to be at a point of grace. The expectation of the audience is that they decide for themselves, the actor’s ordeal and character are meaningful, where the audience is moved by the spectacle of a suffering noble. The expectation of the modern theory then in theater performance is that the performer will be able to physically and psychologically endure the pain to the extent that they exceed those of the audience to arouse a sense of wonder. In comparison, Artaud uses a different road towards ecstasy. The audience is expected to empathize in “the Cenci” with the Count’s incestuous lusts. The actors are expected to perform and act out all the evil in the audience to exhaustion leaving the audience and the performer very cleansed, leading to spiritual purity.

In addition, the performance of Grotowski reveals to the audience a spiritual lift that is voluntary. This is a performance that evokes free choice on all levels. For this to be achieved, Grotowski required performances to be acted out in front of a few audiences between 40 and 60. The concept was the elite audience, which was not necessarily rich or wealthy but those who hungered for spirituality and wanted to communicate through such performances. The expectation of Grotowski was that such performances drew the audience into it, rather than swept into it. While free choice has a place in Grotowski’s performance it does not have that in Artaud’s performances. To Artaud, the impulses and passions are too strong for individuals to do a thing about them. The implied attitude is that the manner in which we a free in the world, makes more sense in the theater of Artaud. The reason is because we are finding that through such uncontrolled impulses, men are making more mistakes and evil acts. For this reason the cause of the mistakes man makes are the uncontrolled free impulses as seen in the performances of Artaud’s.

In stead of making the human think like the performance of Grotowski, Artaud wants the audience to feel. It is for this reason that the performances in theater within the realm of Artaud’s work are seen to be very manipulative. Those playwrights and performers who choose to follow the example of Artaud end up with performances that are very controlling. The manipulation is being realized in the attempt of the performances trying to trigger aspects of psychic activity, by exposing the audience to certain images. Apart from the visual images created, there is also the use of the right aura. Aura was effectively used to manipulate the audience in Artaud’s “The Cenci” through the use of sound and music that was rhythmic beats that was very hypnotic.

Interestingly Artaud and Grotowski depict the differences in man trough performance in two different Christian perspectives. These two perspectives are the protestant and catholic views. This is very contradictory of the fact that Artaud and Grotowski reject traditional religion since they believe that they do not fulfill their purpose any longer, to transform the spirituality of men. The two artists in their performances will be seen insisting that despite the rejection of these dogmas man still has spiritual needs, where trough conscious or unconscious use, traditional elements are seen in their performances. Religion is a major factor to both playwrights, since we find that they make use of religion as it is familiar to them in order to communicate to their audiences. We can however; find that though playwright is an art, the idea presented to us by Grotowski and Artaud is that we cannot withdraw our religious influences on performance. Rather we can draw from experience the religious influences of both to create effective dram pieces.

We find that the two religions do depict the central elements of the performances of Artaud and Grotowski. For example, through Cath

The crowd gaped as the scarlet curtains ascended and unveiled greeting, not from the beautiful Ziegfeld girls common to the day, but from a chorus of sweating, toiling blacks chanting, “Negros all work on the Mississippi, Negros all work while the white folks play” (Kern and Hammerstein II). In the 1900s, a wave of artistic responsibility ushered in a shift of Broadway musical themes. Instead of writing lighthearted comedy, composers such as Kern, Rodgers, Gershwin and Hammerstein crafted serious pieces that reflected upon issues in society such as inequality. Musicals such as Show Boat, West Side Story, Porgy and Bess, Finian’s Rainbow and South Pacific entertained both the stereotypical images of non-Anglo-Saxons and the idea of assimilation. Although much controversy surrounded the portrayal of people of different races on Broadway, the lives of composers, the content of musicals, and opportunities for minority artists illustrate that the main goal of musicals was not to derogatorily label different races, but to express truth and encourage acceptance.

A study of the lives of composers such as George Gershwin, Richard Rodgers, Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein II demonstrates that musical pieces were written to express appreciation or approval of assimilation and of minority culture. George Gershwin, for one, was born in New York (Levert 118- 20 asdf 13) to immigrant Russian-Jewish parents, Rose and Morris Gershvin (Mitchell 9 asd 15). Rose and Morris raised their second-generation American children among Italian, Irish, Polish and Jewish neighbors (Mitchell 12 asd 15). This multi-ethnic upbringing built the foundation of George Gershwin’s acceptance of different races. Gershwin’s tolerance of different ethnicities is further highlighted through accounts of a young George enjoying ragtime, a variation of black dance music, played by Mississippi “raggers” such as black musician Jim Reese Europe (Mitchell 12 asdf 16, a).

As time went on, Gershwin created a new sound by fusing his acquired classical training with the ragtime he heard from in earlier days (Mitchell 24- 5, 37 asdf 17, 14). This was utilized in his 1922 show, Blue Monday (b). Although Blue Monday garnered few favorable reviews because it held a tragic ending and told of the black community (Vernon 13 asdf 22), George Gershwin had opened new frontiers to which other artists like Jerome Kern followed. Gershwin’s creation of American music that encouraged racial acceptance later encouraged his own family to assimilate and become more Americanized, changing their name from “Gershvin” to “Gershwin” (Mitchell 29- 30 asdf 19).

Despite Blue Monday’s lack of success, Gershwin was still open to composing Porgy and Bess, a musical centered on African-Americans. This showed his desire for people to understand those of different races. Although it took him seven years, Gershwin obtained rights to Heyward’s novel, Porgy and Bess, in 1933 (San Francisco Opera asdf 11). In order to accurately portray African-American culture to Anglo-Saxons, Gershwin traveled to Folly Island and stayed with the Geechees, whose ancestors had been slaves (Mitchell 44-6 and Swain 57 asdfr 21, 20). Gershwin absorbed Geechee music and movement through observing Island worship rituals which included chanting, shouting, clapping, tapping, swaying, praying and forming of religious circles (Mitchell 44-6 and Swain 57 asdf 21 and 20). Gershwin’s positive relationship with these blacks can be seen through his participation in their rituals. One account relates that Gershwin was so accepted by the Geechees that he joined in performing religious rituals, even managing to obtain the center spot in a religious circle, which was usually reserved for the Geechee leaders (Mitchell 44-46). Such good relations with blacks provided incentive for Gershwin to attempt to convey the need for change, acceptance of races, and unity for America in his adaptation of Porgy and Bess. American director Francesca Zambello spoke of Porgy and Bess, saying that “It’s about class, race, economic disadvantage, all these things that separate people from one another and prevent us from having a harmonious society” (San Francisco Opera).

Although many African-Americans such as Duke Ellington, Ralph Matthews, and Hall Johnson felt that Gershwin’s Porgy and Bess was highly stereotypical (Swain 57 asdf 21, 45), Gershwin denied that his aim in creating Porgy and Bess was to put down the African-American race; instead, he shared, Porgy and Bess was written to express an accurate picture of the race as he saw it (Henderson and Bowers 99). In order to maintain true to African-American culture, Gershwin incorporated spirituals and prominent African-American music forms in Porgy and Bess as Kern had in Show Boat (Bering 68-9 asdf 46). Gershwin’s brother, Ira, who collaborated with George on Porgy and Bess, also attempted to retain the black flavor through using dialect (Bering 68-9 asdf 46) and non-standard grammar. Apart from attempting to present the truth and encourage assimilation of blacks, Gershwin’s heart for the advancement of African-Americans is shown through the fact that the show had an all-black cast despite the prominence of Jim Crow laws. Gershwin insisted on having an all-black cast and even refused to collaborate with the Metropolitan Opera because he knew that to do so would mean hiring white actors in blackface (San Francisco Opera).

Following Gershwin’s lead in writing racially themed musicals, Oscar Hammerstein II decided to work with Jerome Kern in adapting Edna Ferber’s novel, Show Boat, into a musical. Although Kern was born to immigrant Jewish- German parents, Kern was not strongly encouraged to embrace his ethnicity. His parents supported Americanization and attempted to downplay their ethnic difference, so Kern’s Jewish- German side did not have a big influence on his composing (Zollo). However, Kern’s openness to assimilation is seen through his goal of preserving Edna Ferber’s original intent with Show Boat (Green 319 asdf 36) despite the fact that the message was controversial at the time. For example, Kern wrote “Ol’ Man River,” “a song of resignation with an implied protest” (Hammerstein qtd. in Zollo asdf 36) which was sung by an African-American. Like Gershwin, Kern fused African-American music with classical music to retain a black atmosphere and to communicate the message of the piece- that blacks were suffering unjustly- across to the audience. This is shown through Kern’s usage of traditional black music when composing “Can’t Help Lovin’ Dat Man” (Bering 54-5 asdf 60). Aside from his written work, Kern hired black actors for Show Boat, also demonstrating his agreement with assimilation.

Oscar Hammerstein II, who collaborated on Show Boat with Kern, was a third-generation Prussian Jew. Originally named Oscar Greeley- Clendenning Hammerstein in honor of Horace Greeley (Wickware 107), Hammerstein carried on the work of his namesake in encouraging the assimilation of blacks. Through the use of dialects in his lyrics, he preserved the black flavor and tradition so that white audiences could better understand blacks.

Apart from Gershwin, Kern and Hammerstein, second generation American Richard Rodgers also explored racial themes in his compositions (Zollo). Originally named Richard Rogazinsky, Rodger’s family strayed from their Russian-Jewish roots and became more Americanized by assimilating and changing the family name to Rodgers (Zollo). Although Rodgers, like Kern, did not observe Jewish customs, his work with Oscar Hammerstein II produced musicals such as Flower Drum Song and South Pacific, which explored assimilation and themes like love transcending racial barriers (Henderson and Bowers 148-51). Although Asians were often segregated in that era (as seen in the Chinese Exclusion Act, which was repealed later in 1943), Rodgers decided to hire a few Asian actors such as Pat Suzuki for Flower Drum Song (Gottfried 195). Furthermore, Richard Rodger’s family was the first to hear Gershwin’s Porgy and Bess, and despite the fact that the musical was highly race oriented, Rodgers expressed his appreciation by exclaiming “That was a Christmas Eve we shall never forget” (Mitchell 50). His family background, reaction to Porgy and Bess and his collaborations with Hammerstein II all support speculation that Rodgers, too, felt the need to encourage acceptance of race through his art.

Despite showing prominent discrimination, the musical content, plots and lyrics of some musicals during the time period also exhibited strong ideas reflecting integration or the need for positive treatment of non-Anglo-Saxons. In Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia, Loving, a white man, moves to Washington, D.C. with his African-American bride after threats of incarceration due to miscegenation laws. They eventually appealed to the Supreme Court, which granted them permission for their interracial marriage. However, this case did not occur until 1967 (Cruz and Berson), 40 years after Broadway’s Show Boat touched on the injustice of outlawing interracial marriage.

Show Boat, 1927, examined the injustices of the Jim Crow laws through the story of Julie, a mixed Creole performer who keeps her heritage a secret because she is married to Steve, a white man (Henderson and Bowers 240 asdf 59). Due to her mulatto heritage, Julie knew songs that “only colored folks knew” (Green 60 asdf 62 ex. Encyclopedia MT), and as a result of her singing “Can’t Help Lovin’ Dat Man,” police approached to investigate whether or not Julie had black blood (Rudinger 53-4 asdf 55) in order to decide if she was guilty of miscegenation. To protect Julie, Steve drank a drop of her blood, portraying the absurdity of the “one drop rule” (AHHHH FIND THIS). According to Booker T Washington, the “one drop rule” stated that the amount of black blood did not matter in classifying a person because even a single drop of black blood made an individual ‘black’ (Cruz and Berson asdf 37.) The fact that Julie’s black heritage was initially kept a secret allowed time for the white audience to shape a positive view of her. Her close relationship with her husband Steve and her friend Magnolia, both white, further emphasized the point that whites and blacks are not, in essence, very different. (FIND SHOW BOAT Aer) The show held a strong undertone that instead of segregating, people of different races should integrate.

Apart from mentioning miscegenation, Show Boat also cultivated compassion from whites through illustrating the hard lives that black laborers led. The opening number, “The Levee at Natchez on the Mississippi” included African-American actors singing about unending toiling for blacks. The same tune is repeated later on in “Ol’ Man River” as Joe and the chorus sings wistfully about how free the river is, saying

He don’t plant taters, he don’t plant cotton, an dem dat plants em’ is soon forgotten, but ol’ man river, he jes’ keeps rollin a long You an me, we sweat an strain, body all ach-in an racked wid pain. Tote dat barge! Lift dat bale! aˆ¦I git weary an sick of tryin, I’m tired of livin, an skeered of dyin, but ol’ man rier, he jes keeps rollin along…Don’t look up an’ don’t look down, youi don’t dast make de white boss frown; bend yo knees an bow yo head, an pull dat rope until yore dead. (Kern and Hammerstein II 47-55 asdf 61)

While Gershwin’s Blue Monday had explored racial issues and portrayed African-American tragedy, the show had not garnered much fame, so white audiences of Show Boat’s time still associated Broadway with lightheartedness and comedy. As a result, Show Boat’s use of strong words like “Niggers” (Bering 53-4) and its exploration of racial issues in society initially shocked many (Ms Farisss’s showboattt). However, Show Boat’s influential value and deep message soon captured white audiences, and it earned the title of “an American masterpiece” from the New York Times (New York Times qtd. in Zollo). The vivid images and strong lyrics in Show Boat allowed white audience members to step into the shoes of black laborers and further understand blacks through experiencing African-American woe. Other pieces such as “Queenie’s Ballyhoo” (MISS FARIS VID) stayed true to black culture (Ganzl 193) and gave the white audience a taste of black spirit. Through appealing to individual whites, Show Boat encouraged understanding and better treatment of blacks.

Show Boat provided the precedent for Burton Lane and E. Y. Harburg’s Finian’s Rainbow, a story portraying the value of trust (Green 126-7 asdf 9). Apart from expressing the importance of trust, Harburg and Lane associated evil with racism through making their villain racist. According to the plot, due to the evil senator’s racism, he tries to thwart the success of non Anglo-Saxon farmers. This angers Og, a leprechaun, who turns the senator black (Hilgart). After becoming black, the formerly racist senator becomes more open minded and even forms a quartet with three other blacks (Druxman 124). In “The Begat,” the number after the senator’s transformation, the senator sings about the origin of different races starting from Adam and Eve. He expresses that, “The white begat, the red begataˆ¦ the Greeks begat, the Swedes begat aˆ¦starting from Genesis, they begataˆ¦so bless them allaˆ¦” (Lane and Harburg), showing his willingness to admit that all races are equal.

Apart from discouraging discrimination of blacks, discrimination against Irish people was also mentioned in Finian’s Rainbow. Due to the widely expressed racist viewpoints of influential individuals such as President Roosevelt, European immigrants from the early 1900s were also discriminated against by whites (Cruz and Berson adsf 26). Finian’s Rainbow countered the wave of discrimination through numbers like, “When the Idle Poor become the Idle Rich”. In this song the Irish protagonist, Finian, dreams of a future where there is no discrimination and sings “aˆ¦No one will see the Irish or the Slav in youaˆ¦This discrimination will no longer be” (Lane and Harburg 85-98 asdf 9).

Two years after Finian’s Rainbow, South Pacific graced the Broadway stage. Set in the Pacific, the story revolves around the relationships of two interracial couples. Nellie Forbush falls for Emile de Becque, a shady Frenchman who had committed murder at a young age. Although Nellie is willing to disregard Emile’s dark past, her Anglo-Saxon upbringing complicates her feelings towards Emile’s French- islander mixed children. Her confusion and racist view put a barrier in her relationship with Emile, and the two separate. Joe Cable, like Nellie, is unsure how to act regarding his feelings for Liat, an islander, because of his racist upbringing (Ganzl 277 asdf 64). He expresses his background in “You’ve Got to be Carefully Taught,” stating that, “You’ve got to be taught to be afraid of people whose eyes are oddly made, and people whose skin is a different shade” (Henderson and Bowers.) Like Nellie, Joe’s racism ultimately breaks his relationship with Liat. Although Joe and Liat do not get back together, Nellie realizes that love transcends race and manages to salvage her relationship with Emile. Performed to an audience full of whites who had been brought up in the same way Joe and Nellie had, South Pacific spread the message that love is greater than race (Ganzl 176-7 asdf 66). Like Show Boat, its celebration of interracial marriage broke century old barriers and challenged whites to question the decency of Jim Crow laws.

Following Show Boat and South Pacific, West Side Story explored the idea of love being greater than race through retelling the story of Romeo and Juliet, substituting racial feuds for clan disagreements. The plot tells of an American, Tony, who falls in love with Maria, a Puerto Rican immigrant. Due to background and racial differences, their relationship is disapproved of by their friends and families. In one scene, Anita, Maria’s sister-in-law, overtly speaks against interracial relationships, warning Maria to “Stick to your own kind” (Bernstein and Sondheim 180-90). Maria though, replies in the same song that “aˆ¦my heart knows they’re wrongaˆ¦I don’t care what he is” (Bernstein and Sondheim 180-90). In the end, Tony gets involved in stopping a fight between the Puerto Ricans and the Americans (Green 441-2 asdf 75). He dies in the process, and the gangs lay down their arms in the realization that feuding between races has gone too far (FIND THIS FIND THIS AHHH). This realization reveals West Side Story’s theme: that there should be interracial harmony instead of destructive racial disagreements.

Aside from encouraging assimilation through racially themed musicals, Broadway set an example for America in giving minority artists opportunities and recognition. The Wiz, for example, presented the Wizard of Oz with an all black ensemble in a ghetto setting (Henderson and Bowers 219 asdf 2). Apart from The Wiz, shows like Flower Drum Song also provided minority actors with an opportunity to work at a professional level. Employment of minority actors in the early to mid 1900s is significant because artists in some other art forms like ballet and classical music found difficulty in obtaining the right to perform their art professionally. Arthur Mitchell explained that as a black dancer, he had to outshine his white competitors (Cummings asdf 9). Although some may argue that producers and directors in the theatre business often lost opportunities to whites in the same way black performers in other businesses did, Broadway set a precedent because it hired non- white actors for their ethnicity.

While some may argue that black actors and actresses were employed in the film industry as early as the 1920s, film actors often played comedic characters that were stereotyped as opposed to the more serious characters seen in Show Boat and Porgy and Bess. Others may argue that Jazz music had well known performers like Louis Armstrong. However, Jazz, unlike Broadway, was targeted at a predominantly black audience.

Minority artists like Paul Robeson used their opportunities to vocalize equality through art. Paul Robeson, son of a slave, lived during an age when racial segregation was significant. In addition to his family background, Robeson learned about discrimination himself through firsthand experience, being discriminated against and victimized because he was black. As a result, he had great understanding of the detrimental affects of discrimination. This prompted him to take a stand for equality, as seen through the fact that he would only perform for mixed audiences (Clarke asdf 42). Aside from taking a stand through action, Paul Robeson expressed disapproval for unjust violence against blacks through giving speeches (Clarke asdf 41). His influential status as a well-known black performer drew attention to his belief that all should be equal. However, Robeson remarked that while he enjoyed success, many other blacks did not even have basic rights. (Clarke asd 42). Paul Robeson encouraged whites to accept blacks and allow them to “have decent homes, decent jobs, and the dignity that belongs to every human being!” (Robeson qtd. in Clarke asdf 42).

Along with the employment of minority actors, Broadway started accepting works by black composers. Shuffle Along was written by an African-American composer, Eubie Blake, in the 1920s. This show was believed to have launched the Harlem Renaissance, which enhanced the rights of black artists. The fact that the Truman campaign utilized a song from Shuffle Along made the show better known (Tanner) and also shows the power of musical theatre in encouraging assimilation and acceptance because a black musical spoke out to a white presidential candidate in a time when segregation was prominent. Other shows composed by black artists like Runnin’ Wild, 1923, popularized black dance (Tanner). Audiences seeing shows like Runnin’ Wild accepted black culture through accepting their dance and music because it was so integrated in the entertainment. Later on, A Raisin in the Sun written by a black composer, Lorraine Hansberry, (DO I NEED TO CITE THIS?) actually received Tony award nominations in 1960 despite the fact that segregation still existed during the civil rights movement (FINDD). While film actress Hattie McDaniel had received an Oscar in 1939, she received the nomination for playing a stereotyped black maid. The Academy did not nominate black written screenplays until 1972, 12asdf years after A Raisin in the Sun.

The hiring of minority actors encouraged formation of all-black groups like the Negro Ensemble Company. These groups often put on musicals focused on black life, such as Ceremonies in Dark Old Men and The River Niger. The latter ran on Broadway for eight months (Cummings asdf 35). The increase of actor groups dedicated to black rights demonstrated the fact that minority actors understood the importance of using art to encourage audiences to further understand black culture or accept blacks as equals. Broadway’s toleration of black groups putting on black shows increased openness and willingness to let blacks use the stage as a platform for proclaiming assimilation.

A surge of black artists and musicals attracted black audiences to participate in art. Judith Cummings said of The Wiz that:

For the first time in the memory of most black theatre observers, black peopleaˆ¦find themselves with a choice among Broadway shows that offer them something to identify withaˆ¦nearly a dozen others from this season, use black artistic talent or offer a glimpse of black lifeaˆ¦ (Cummings asdf 71).

The fact that blacks sat in audiences shows an extreme growth from black rights of the earlier 1900s because seeing musicals meant spending money and having time for leisure activities, a luxury blacks did not have in earlier time periods. Also, the fact that blacks, too, enjoyed musicals showed the white audiences that blacks were not, essentially, very different from whites, furthering the aim of assimilation. Blacks too, could have been emboldened through realization that as a race, they had succeeded in their aim to gain some recognition since the early1900s. This confidence could have encouraged them to lobby for even more rights.

In essence, the lives of composers such as Kern, Rodgers, Gershwin and Hammerstein reflected the fact that they accepted or encouraged assimilation and wrote musicals in support of their views. Plot and lyrics from musicals such as Show Boat, South Pacific, West Side Story and Finian’s Rainbow also either encouraged acceptance through reflecting the idea of overcoming racial barriers or discouraged segregation through demonstrating the harmful qualities of racial discrimination. Hiring minority actors gave blacks a platform to voice the injustice of segregation. Actors like Paul Robeson and those in the Negro Ensemble Company were able to publicly express hope for assimilation. Black centered musicals like A Raisin in the Sun encouraged understanding of blacks and attracted black audiences. Today, Broadway has carried on its legacy through musicals like Wicked, which explored unwillingness to accept those with a different skin color (DO I HAVE TO CITE THIS?). Asian thespians like Filipina Lea Salonga have also played roles written for white actors such as Eponine in Les Miserables and Cinderella in Cinderella. A 2002 movie version of Gershwin’s Cinderella featured a cast with an Asian prince, white stepmother, black queen, black stepsisters and a black Cinderella. Casting without regard to original ethnicity of characters shows acceptance and rejection of race-based separation, and the racial integration of today would not exist today without the pioneer work of Broadway in the early to mid 1900s.

Konstantin Stanislavski, (born Konstantin Alekseyev, and sometimes spelt Constantin Stanislavsky), was 14 years old when he first set foot on the stage that his parents owned in 1877. His love of the theatre blossomed throughout his life, leading him to become one of the world’s most influential theatre practitioners to date. His work in the field of theatrical rehearsal techniques made him a household name for drama students worldwide. He published many books and guides designed to give drama students an insight into “realism”, including ‘An Actor Prepares’ and ‘Building a Character’, which outline various famous rehearsal methods designed to allow an actor to fully relate to their character, to the point that they are not just pretending to be them, but actually living their lives. He argued that the actor should “Love the art in yourself, not yourself in the art” [1], looking for the emotion within themselves as opposed to the words in the script.

Stanislavski’s pioneering vision for the theatre was that characters should be believable, and the storyline should focus on the emotion portrayed, engaging the audience through means such as empathy. He argued that anything put forward on the stage should be an accurate account of real life, a thought which derived from his distaste for the melodramatic theatre he had grown up with. However, Stanislavski is one of several famous theatre practitioners, all with a completely different concept of what theatre should be. For example, Bertolt Brecht put forward the theory of ‘Epic Theatre’, which taught that the audience should always be alienated from the action onstage, unable to identify with the characters, but rather being left with questions to ask themselves. He believed the audience couldn’t possibly empathise with the characters onstage because there were so many individual differences in society itself- “society cannot share a common communication system so long as it is split into warring factions” (Brecht, 1949, paragraph 55[2]). Brecht wanted the audience to leave the theatre debating their morals. Another prestigious theatrical practitioner is Antonin Artaud, who argued that any performance should deeply affect the audience. In order to achieve this, he used non-naturalistic lighting and sound to create a disturbing atmosphere. Artaud wished his audience to leave the theatre having changed within themselves. With three such different aims from each practitioner, it is difficult to be sure whether any of them had a particularly valid point. All three theories are widely respected, but each contrasts and challenges the next, meaning that, in order to believe in one of them, you must rule out the others as valid.

These conflicting theories became the beginning of the main ideas behind this project. I wanted to know whether there was a solid way to prove whether Stanislavski’s theories are affective to the audience in terms of creating a more realistic performance than one with normal rehearsal, or indeed rehearsal methods devised by other practitioners. To be able to determine this, I needed to conduct deeper research into Stanislavski’s system.

The system itself is deep and intricately detailed, with many different aspects as to what Stanislavski considered a ‘good performance’. However, some points are evidently more significant to him than others. According to the online Encyclopaedia Britannia [3], the main features are ‘Given Circumstances and the Magic If’, and ‘Emotional Memory’. ‘Units and Objectives’ is also a major feature of the system, so these are the three aspects I chose to refine my research to in order to establish a better understanding of Stanislavski’s method of acting.

‘Given Circumstances and the Magic If’

Stanislavski said that “what is important to me is not the truth outside myself, but the truth within myself” [4], meaning that anything put forward on the stage must be true. He recognised this idea was a potential issue because all acting is, essentially, a lie. He therefore said that all actors should be as true to themselves as they can while playing a part. The idea behind Given Circumstances is that actors accept that, with the script of a play, they are given a set of circumstances which they must adhere to in order to create the storyline. Given circumstances can relate to either the character or the play itself, and they include things like character’s age, gender, social class, and the play’s time period, setting and social/historical/political implications. In order for an actor to give a true performance, Stanislavski put a massive emphasis on the importance of research into the given time period or situation so that the performer would truly understand their role. He taught that the research needs to be completed until an actor can fully flesh out his character, and answer any questions given to them about their character’s parentage, childhood, and life events, even if these aren’t mentioned in the script. Once the Given Circumstances had been realised, Stanislavski suggested that the actors utilised a linked aspect of his theory, called the ‘Magic If’, in order to deal with them. The ‘Magic If’ is a technique where the actor asks himself “given the circumstances already decided by the playwright, if I was this character, and I was in this situation, how would I react?”. In his book ‘An Actor Prepares’, Stanislavski talked about the professor using the example of pretending to be a tree. “Say to yourself: “I am I; but if I were an old oak tree, set in certain surrounding conditions, what would I do?” and decide where you are… in whatever place affects you most” (Stanislavski, 1937, p65[5]). Stanislavski asked that his students allow their imaginations to flourish through techniques such as Given Circumstances and the Magic If, to construct deeper, more realistic performances.

‘Emotional Memory’

Another technique which was born from Stanislavski’s belief that acting must be real is Emotional Memory, sometimes known as Affective Memory. Shelley Winters, an example of a famous actress with ultimate belief in the Stanislavski System, said that as an actor you must be willing to “act with your scars” [6], or in layman’s terms, be willing to allow your inner emotions and past experiences to show through. This is essentially the main terms of Emotional Memory, which requires the actor to draw on previous personal experiences which resulted in a similar emotion to which their character is experiencing. Once the actor has identified the experience, they are encouraged to allow the emotion they felt once again take over their mind and body, reinstating the context and mind-set until the emotion is real. The emotion must then seamlessly be applied to the script or character, as Stanislavski felt this would make the performance more believable because the emotion is true to the actor. Peter Oyston, founding Dean of Drama at the Victorian College of the Arts and regular teacher/director at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art in London, created a rehearsal method specifically designed to enhance the feelings from memories. He published this, and other methods referring to Stanislavskian techniques, in a DVD documentary called “How to use the Stanislavski System” (2004). The Emotional Memory section can be viewed on YouTube [7], and teaches the student to remember a time when they personally felt an emotion which shadows or parallels that required from the text. They are encouraged to talk about the situation they are remembering out loud, until the emotion takes over their minds and bodies. Then, they must seamlessly transfer their speech from their own recollections to the script given to them, transferring the emotions at the same time.

‘Units and Objectives’

One of the most prominent aspects of Stanislavski’s method is his idea that any character in any play has a ‘Super-Objective’ throughout the action; an aim or driving force which sustains throughout the play. Stanislavski taught that this Super-Objective must stay in each actor’s mind throughout their rehearsal and performance, and that even though it may not be stated, or even obvious, they must take it upon themselves to research and discover it. Once this has been accomplished, he felt that the script could then be broken down into smaller Objectives, which would change several times throughout the piece as the plot deepened. Each Objective must be a verb, in order to be an ‘active objective’. He asked actors to split their script into Units and Objectives. Most pieces of drama are split by the playwright into a series of scenes and acts, allowing the action to move in time or setting, but Stanislavski found that an objective could run through and overlap into different scenes, or change very suddenly in the middle of an act. He therefore introduced the concept of Units, which are another way of dividing up a play- each unit should contain one objective.

The diagram above outlines the intricate detail of the aspects of Units, Objectives, and Super-Objectives. The Throughline of Action is the aim in a character’s mind throughout the entirety of the play, which culminates in the Super-Objective. Meanwhile, each character has several different Objectives which are split between the Units the actors devised for the script. These Objectives can take the character to many different places, but their Super-Objective will always remain the same.

Furthermore, the Objectives themselves are equally as detailed. Stanislavski said that each Objective could be broken down into the Aim, the Obstacle and the Action. The aim is what the character is trying to achieve in that particular unit. The obstacle is something which stops or restricts them from fulfilling their aim, and the action is the steps the character takes in order to avoid or overcome the obstacle.

Stanislavski accepted that it is impossible for a play to achieve a smooth finish where objectives are concerned because often, the action takes place off stage. The characters come and go, and the time changes, so we as an audience cannot witness the whole story. Stanislavski said that in order to overcome this, actors must always be consciously aware of their Super-Objective.

A familiar example of this aspect of the Stanislavskian Theory is Shakespeare’s story of Romeo and Juliet. Romeo’s Super-Objective is to experience true love. He begins the play with the objective of marrying Rosaline, and this continues to be his objective until the Unit shifts at the Capulet party. Here, Romeo’s objective becomes to find out more about Juliet, and later becomes to marry her. Towards the end of the party, however, Romeo speaks with Juliet’s nurse, who tells him that “her mother is the Lady of the house” -that Juliet is a Capulet(Shakespeare, 1973, p. 910 [8]). This provides the obstacle, since Romeo’s family, the Montagues, have an ancient feud with the Capulets. Romeo then takes on a new action, which is to overcome the feud between the families, even if it means the couple have to lie about it. Romeo doesn’t manage to fully achieve his Super-Objective, because he never experiences the simplicity of love he was looking for- both he and Juliet have to die in order to truly be together.

Of all the aspects of Stanislavski’s method, these three prove to be the most popular among modern day performers.

Having researched the key aspects of Stanislavski’s system, I devised a way to be able to assess the effectiveness of them on a live performance by young actors, as this would allow me to establish whether the method does in fact help to produce a more believable performance. I decided to conduct an experiment into the effectiveness of Stanislavski’s system. I decided to utilise my contacts at a local youth drama group, which is made up of young actors and actresses aged between 11 and 17 years old. In order for the experiment to be a fair test, I determined to split them equally into two groups, and give each group the same scenario to work with. I planned to leave group one, the control group, to rehearse to their own methods, while conducting group two’s rehearsal processes myself, giving them tasks similar to those set by Stanislavski to his own pupils. After the groups had had the same period of time to rehearse, I wanted to invite an audience to watch their performances. The audience were to be given a questionnaire after the performances, asking which group’s interpretation of the scenario they found more convincing and realistic. I intended to film both sets of rehearsal processes in order to put together a short documentary. The results of the audience questionnaire were intended to ascertain whether Stanislavski’s rehearsal methods have a real influence on making modern day performance more realistic.

In order for this experiment to work, I firstly had to create an idea. Originally, I devised a script which revolved around the issue of teenage pregnancy, which is a growing concern in today’s society. The script included four gender specific characters, and I intended to have both groups perform the same piece; one using Stanislavski’s techniques, and the others using generic rehearsal processes. Having written the short play, and talked briefly to the children at the theatre, it became apparent that there was more interest in the workshop than I had expected. Another problem with using a script would have been that the audience would have watched the same piece twice, and would be comparing the actor’s individual performances as opposed to the believability of the pieces. Since it would have been unfair of me to cast the roles, I instead decided to take a different approach in order to include everyone. I devised a scenario, again based around a teenage pregnancy, that each group would be able to use as the core of their piece of drama. They would then devise the rest of their plays alone. This meant that each group could incorporate a flexible amount of participants, and ensured two unique, original performances.

With my idea in mind, I next needed to devise some Stanislavski-based rehearsal techniques for my group to use during their preparation for the production. Keeping the themes of ‘Given Circumstances and the Magic If’, ‘Emotional Memory’, and ‘Units and Objectives’ in mind, I devised three rehearsal techniques specifically tailored to Stanislavski’s ideals. With these techniques devised, I had to actually carry out the rehearsal and performances. In order to do this, I would need a space, two groups of actors, a party of responsible adults with CRB checks and an audience. I contacted the chairman of the theatre and booked myself a studio performance room for Saturday the 3rd of April. I then sent out letters to the actors involved with the Nonentities Youth Theatre. The letters outlined the project and the experimental side of the day, offered the chance to look at the technical side of theatre, and asked for a response. I received 18 positive responses back, which was many more than the original 12 participants I had in mind, making the scenario idea far more usable. I then had to split the actors into two different groups, a control group, who would direct themselves, and the experimental group, who I would direct using Stanislavski’s methods. The groups needed to be equally weighted with talent, as it was important to make this experiment as fair as possible by not allowing acting ability to throw it. I therefore split the actors into groups myself, aiming to balance the ages in each group while placing responsible actors I could trust to work independently in the control group, and actors open to co-operation and willing to listen in the Stanislavski group. The Independent Variable of this study was ‘whether Stanislavski’s methods were applied to rehearsals’, and the Dependant Variable was ‘whether the performance was more believable based on the rehearsal method used’. My hypothesis was: “The techniques used in rehearsal will have an affect on the performance given”.

I experienced my first problem of the day when the actors arrived in the morning. Shortly before the workshop was to take place, a letter had been sent to all members of the youth theatre outlining the need for a new leader and the cancellation of sessions until another letter was sent out. It became apparent that many of the actors who had wished to be a part of the workshop had assumed that it, too, was cancelled, so the final number of actors I had to work with was just 10. Although I had to adjust the group list, the smaller number of participants made the day as a whole more intimate, and the group sizes more manageable, so I feel it was a beneficial circumstance. Once everybody had signed in, I conducted a brief warm-up, asking all members to think of the way different characters moved and spoke in real life, asking them to act believably, not just as caricatures. I then split up the actors into groups, and chose the two girls who I felt would be most capable of acting the part of the pregnant teenager. I asked both groups to create a piece of drama focussing around the pregnancy that would last between 10 and 15 minutes, and I gave each group a list of criteria that they must adhere to, including aspects such as using the younger members in the younger roles, including a number of monologues from different characters, and that they must write down the decisions made in early rehearsal. I told the control group that they were allowed to use music, and dramatic techniques such as physical theatre and freeze frames, while the Stanislavski group had to endeavour to make their characters and circumstances applicable to real life, and were told not to use out-of-place techniques like freeze framing. The video was set to record as the groups split up into two different rooms, and I allowed the control group to keep to themselves for the majority of the day, while I worked with the Stanislavski group, asking them to use my previously-prepared rehearsal techniques.

The first technique I gave them was designed to support ‘Given Circumstances and the Magic If’. I asked each group to use the first stages of rehearsal to create mind-maps around the pieces of drama. Whilst the control group’s map outlined the storyline, the Stanislavski group were asked to spend an hour and a half fleshing out their characters, and the relationships and links between them. They gave each character a name and an age, they wrote about their belief’s and opinions, and decided upon how their characters met. Each actor developed a detailed history for their character, pulling from personal experience and their imaginations to create steady backgrounds. These are aspects relating to ‘Given Circumstances and the Magic If’ because they invite the participants to firstly realise the Circumstances the script gives them, and secondly to flesh out their characterisation by putting their characters in different situations through use of the Magic If.

The second technique I devised related to ‘Emotion Memory’. I used this technique when working with the actress playing the pregnant girl. We applied it to the scene in which she is told that the test is positive. I asked her to think about a time when she felt lost, and perhaps didn’t have anybody she could talk to about it because nobody had been in that position before her. She talked of a time when her parents were going through a messy divorce, and she felt cut of from the both of them. She spoke openly and freely, and answered my questions honestly. As time went by, she was drawn further and further into her memory and the emotions that were present at that time, so that when I finally asked her to begin talking from her character’s perspective, her acting became real. She didn’t need to fake the tears, because she was filled with the emotion her character was filled with.

The third technique was designed to compliment ‘Units and Objectives’. Once the actors had created their storyline, I asked them to divide it up into scenes, so that it was as close to a normal scripted piece of drama as possible. We talked about each of their characters, and what their Super-Objectives would be. The actors decided upon everyone’s objectives as a group, which brought a deeper level of understanding to the piece. They decided that the father’s Super-Objective would be to protect his children, while Rosie, the pregnant daughter, aimed to face her future head on. I then asked each actor to divide up the play into their own Units, focussing on the shifts in emotion. This process proved difficult for the younger members of the group, so the group as a whole helped them to identify their Units. There proved a great variety in the amount of Units in the piece for each character; while the pregnant girl had almost one per scene, the father had only two. Furthermore, the switch between Units for him came suddenly in the middle of his monologue, which was right at the end of the piece- before then his character had wanted the same thing throughout. I asked the group to physically improvise the scenes they had written about, and to stop the action when they encountered their obstacles. Once they had all found their obstacles, they were asked to continue acting while finding a way to overcome this obstacle- their action. I then asked them if they had noticed the other actor’s actions in the scene, so that everybody was aware of the decisions their group was making.This in-depth workshop class on ‘Units and Super-Objectives’ made the young actors aware and knowledgeable in the field, while also allowing them to know their characters inside out by knowing what they want, and how they might go about achieving it.

A couple of hours before the performances were scheduled to begin, I took notes on the rehearsal processes of both groups. The control group had included an omniscient narrator who could stop the action and introduce new characters. The narrator sat in the middle of the piece throughout the majority of the action, until the final scene where he became an involved character. A narrator is generally used to create a sense of dramatic irony, where the audience gain knowledge that the characters don’t yet know. However, this type of narration is rarely set within the piece itself, more often a voice over or such like. It is also unrealistic that the narrator, who is generally removed from and neutral to the action, suddenly become ‘real life’ and jump into the scene. The group also used a split-screen technique to enable them to show two different apartments at the same time, which is effective to the audience but unrealistic, as while action is playing out in one space, the characters in the other must be frozen. This creation of ‘freeze-framing’ is difficult to hold for long periods of time, and does not occur in a genuine situation. Another technique they used was audience-participation, where one member of their cast sat in the audience until the final moments of the play, where she rose, walked across the stage, took out her mobile and called the police. I concluded that the control group had included various aspects of performance which were designed to make the action more interesting to the audience, and add the element of surprise, but were not designed to look or feel realistic. They had spent only half an hour mind-mapping their decisions, and talked about their other decisions while physically rehearsing.

The Stanislavski group spent an hour and a half developing their characters, and another hour developing their storyline, so they ended up with four A3 sheets of paper detailing their entire performance. They used only one location, the teenager’s bedroom, so that there was never a set change needed, because it would interrupt the storyline and distract the audience. The group’s monologues were delivered to a person, as opposed to the audience, so that the barrier between the audience and the characters stayed strong. Had the actors been talking to the audience, their speeches would have seemed less realistic.

After five hours of rehearsal, it was time for the final performances. Each actor had been asked to invite some family members or friends, and members of the theatre came along to participate too. Each audience also included the actors from the other group, making the final audience figure 19 members. I watched the performances, but didn’t participate in the questionnaire, as I would have been biased toward the Stanislavski group. I introduced the pieces, and talked about the work the actors had undertaken over the day. The audience weren’t told which group was the control group, and which group was the Stanislavski group, until both performances had finished, meaning that they couldn’t be biased in favour of Stanislavski either. I also asked them to be open minded, and not answer the questionnaire in favour of the production their child was associated with, telling them they were judging my direction, not the individual actor’s talent. The audience watched the control group first, and were given time to fill out their questionnaires while we set up the stage for the Stanislavski group. After both performances had finished, I thanked everybody for taking part and collected in the questionnaires.

Having extrapolated my results, it became apparent that there was a general feeling that the Stanislavski production was more believable. When asked “was the main storyline believable”, 66% of the audience thought that the control group’s piece was “a dramatised and exaggerated version of real life”, while 95% thought that the Stanislavski group’s piece “could credibly happen in real life”. Having worked extensively with the pregnant character from the Stanislavski group, I was pleased that 42% of the audience thought that she portrayed the pregnancy flawlessly, while a further 42% felt that she portrayed it very well, while in the control group, these percentages combined only reached 44%. I asked the audience to rate how believable they felt the overall performances were, and 56% rated the control group’s performance at an 8/10 or higher, while 94% rated the Stanislavski performance at an 8/10 or higher. Overall, it is evident that the Stanislavski group’s performance was more widely believed.

It is important to note that the effectiveness of the performances given may not be entirely down to the methods of rehearsal used. Although I tried to make the experiment as fair as possible by attempting to make the rehearsal methods the only variable, other extraneous variables may have had an affect on the final results. For example, since there were fewer participants than planned, I had to shuffle the groups a little. This meant that the control group had two of the younger members in their piece, while the Stanislavski group had four older members. The younger members of the theatre are less experienced and therefore don’t have as many creative ideas to bring to the mix. It is also apparent that almost half of the audience were family members of the younger actors, meaning that they are liable to vote in favour of their child’s piece as they are proud to see them on stage. Although I asked the audience to keep an open mind, they may have been bias towards their family or friends, and this is a factor which could have affected the final results.

At the beginning of my project, I asked myself “What is Stanislavski’s Method of acting, and how far has it influenced modern day performance?” Having undertaken a considerable amout of research on Stanislavski and his methods, it became easier for me to define them, and to easily distinguish the difference between his teachings, and those of other practitioners. I found that Stanislavski’s method of acting is largely based around the actor’s own interpretation of the character, aiming to keep the emotion real. I found that Stanislavski wanted the audience to connect with both the storyline and the characters, and he achieved this connection by keeping th acting real, thus allowing the audience to connect empathetically. Having created an experiment to see whether Stanislavski did indeed influence modern day performance, I found that the audience were effected by the group that used the Stanislavskian rehearsal techniques, so much so that one person wrote on the bottom of their questionnaire that their performance “actually brought tears to my eyes”. While researching, I came across a website [9] where Jeni Whittaker (1999) argues that “Stanislavski is rightly called the ‘father of modern theatre’, his System of acting became the backbone of twentieth century theatre craft. Nearly all other practitioners use him as a starting point, either to build from or to react against”. This substantiates my initial hypothesis that Stanislavski has a major influence on modern day theatre. In conclusion, I feel that Stanislavski has an extended influence on modern day theatre. Audiences of today wish not to be challenged or alienated, but to see characters they can relate to on the stage, and the majority of theatre today follows this teaching, whether the director realises he is adhering to Stanislavski’s theory or otherwise. Furthermore, when watching two similar pieces of drama, it became apparent that the audience are more drawn towards that which used Stanislavski’s rehearsal techniques because the characters and storyline were portrayed in a true to life manner. I found that Stanislavski is not only used in theatre, as many famous screen actors choose his methods when getting into character. I feel that the world is exposed to Stanislavski’s teachings more than it realises, and therefore the influence of Stanislavski on modern day acting is significantly higher than I believed when I began the project.

References:
Source unknown, Stanislavski.
Brecht (1949). ‘A Short Organum for the Theatre’, paragraph 55.
Encyclop?dia Britannica (2010). ‘Stanislavsky method’. Encyclop?dia Britannica Online; Retrieved February 22, 2010, from: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/563178/Stanislavsky-method
Source unknown, Stanislavski.
Stanislavski (1937). ‘An Actor Prepares’, (reprinted 1988) United Kingdom: Methuen Drama LTD.
Harry Governick for TheatrGROUP. (1992). An Interview with Shelly Winters; Retrieved February 22, 2010, from http://www.theatrgroup.com/Shelley
Peter Oyston, ‘How to use the Stanislavski System’ DVD(2004). Retrieved (via YouTube) April 12, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmhggaEuJj8
Shakespeare (1973). ‘Romeo and Juliet’, from ‘The Complete Works of Shakespeare- The Alexander Text’. London and Glasgow: Collins.
Jeni Whittaker for DramaWorks. ‘Stanislavski through Practice’ (1999) Retrieved April 13, 2010, from http://www.dramaworks.co.uk/stanislavski.html

Site Specific Performance: How has the nature of site-specific performance as a hybrid art-form influenced approaches tosite-specific work in Britain over the last decade?

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

Site-specific performance emerged out of the radicalartistic milieu of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s that also gave birth tosite-specific work generally. It represents perhaps the most ambitious andrevolutionary re-interpretation of theatre and performance devised in thetwenty-first century. Site-specific performance has influenced site-specificwork in Britain in the past ten years in many ways. This dissertation examinesthree especially strong influences: (1) site-specific performance and its useof audience (2) site-specific performance and its internal debate as to whethersite-specific art is site-exclusive or site generic, and (3) site-specific practitioners’theory of the selection of sites. Before these three principal investigations arediscussed the dissertation briefly reviews the history and origins ofsite-specific performance and its key practitioners.

The first major section of this dissertation investigatesand analyses the relationship between site-specific performance and itsaudience. The questions and debates that have arisen from the novel andintimate participation between site-specific performers and their audienceshave had considerable influence upon site-specific work as a whole. Site-specificperformance understands the audience as a vital element of the total productionand not merely as paying members of the public who are isolated from thecreative process. Many performances depend intimately upon the energy andmutual fascination of the subject that exists between performers and audience.Often the audience are part of the performance itself. This intimacy points toa basic philosophical and professional principle of site-specific performancethat reacts against the perceived coldness, frigidity and eliteness oftraditional theatre buildings and instead maintains that theatre andperformance ought to be a socially-levelling enterprise. The dissertation thereforeasks the prominent questions: Can audience self-identity be altered by aperformance? And: Can original and multiple spectator identities be created bysite-specific performances? The answers to these questions have beeninfluential throughout the whole of the site-specific world.

The second-subsection of this section explores therelationship between site-specific performance and the community from which itsaudience is drawn. The success of site-specific performance theorists andpractitioners in showing the great extent to which the community in which aperformance is situated affects the ambiance and attitude of the audienceechoes throughout the site-specific world and informs it of vital lessons. Thisinvestigation of community and audience also highlights how site-specific performancecan work to bring theatre to the masses in an inclusive format that protestsagainst the elitist forms of the past. The final sub-section of this sectionreviews some of the problems – variability and limitations of audience forinstance experienced by site-specific performers with respect to audienceand then suggests how these may teach valuable lessons to the rest of thesite-specific world.

The second major section of the dissertation examines thekey debate in the literature of site-specific performance as to whether suchperformances should be site-specific or site-generic. That is, whether suchperformances should be free to tour and travel or not? The answers anddiscoveries furnished for this question by site-specific performers arerelevant and influential upon this same debate which penetrates the whole ofthe site-specific community. This debate reaches to the philosophical centre ofsite-specific performance and threatens to bring about a fundamental changewithin the genre. At the heart of the issue is the question of whether aparticular performance, conditioned as it is by the particular environment inwhich it is created, can be moved either physically or spiritually to anothersite. Vehement arguments have been made on both sides of the debate, with manypro-tour performers refuting Richard Serra’s famous dictum that ‘to removethe work is to destroy it‘.The dissertation considers as one solution the theoretical postulate of a’pure’ model of site-specific performance from which various performancesdeviate in healthily diverse ways. The dissertation then considers in depth theproposal of Wrights & Sites whether that the solution to this dilemma mightdepend upon a change in terminology and vocabulary of site-specificperformance. Such a shift of terminology provides site-specific performancewith a greater subtlety of definition and self-identity and therefore overcomesthe apparent impasse suggested by the site-specific site-generic dispute.

The final major sub-section of the dissertation considersthe ‘use of space’ by recent site-specific performers and the influences ofthis use upon site-specific work as a whole. The ‘space’ within which atheatrical performance may take place was given its most radical revision andprogressive drive in the twentieth- century by the practitioners ofsite-specific performance. ‘Space’, in terms of performance, had before theadvent of site-specific theatre been confined near exclusively to traditionaltheatre buildings and to their conventional shapes. The outstanding achievementof site-specific performance has been to vastly extend the range and types of spaceand venue in which a theatrical performance can take place. The dissertationconsiders the implications for performance of such a radical break with thepast, as well as looking at the notions of ‘uninhabitable space’ and ‘culturalspace’. The discoveries made about ‘space’ by site-specific performers arerelevant for the whole of site-specific work in Britain.

The dissertation concludes with an evaluation and summing-upof all the previous discussion and with an analysis of the future influence ofsite-specific performance upon site-specific work as a whole.

SECTION 2: SITE-SPECIFICPERFORMANCE HISTORY

It is important to know something of the history ofsite-specific performance when seeking to determine its influence uponsite-specific work in the past decade in Britain. Such a glance at the historyilluminates the evolution of ideas within the genre and shows how they came totake their present form in the twenty-first century.

Site-specific performance originated as an outgrowth ofsite-specific artwork movement that began in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.Site-specific artwork was a form of art that was created to exist in a certainspace and was conditioned in form by the environment and space of that place.At the centre of the site-specific artwork movement was an attempt to take artout of what was perceived to be the affected and pretentious atmospheres of thegalleries and theatre buildings and to transpose them upon a wider variety ofoutdoor and indoor venues. One useful definition of site-specific performanceis that of the Dictionary of Video Art which states ‘Locations andenvironments may have some kind of drama or meaning for ordinary people butthis has no significance for the bourgeoisie until interpreted by theheightened sensibilities of the director‘.In other words, the purpose of site-specific performance and its reason forexistence is to make the public aware of the artistic merits of ordinarybuildings and spaces that have always been of interest to ordinary men butpassed over by the elitist and institutionalised artists of the past. Site-specificperformance often ‘ involves a (more or less) political decision to workagainst the dominant discourse of London, its theatre buildings, and itstheatre tradition‘.Site-specific performance is about a fundamental reorientation of space awayfrom its traditional understanding in British theatre.

Site-specific performance has emerged out of this generalartistic milieu in the works of artists and directors such as Peter Brook,Ariane Mnouchkine, Deborah Warner, Gof Brith, Janet Cardiff and in festivals orproduction companies such as Grid Iron, Wrights & Sites and the EdinburghFestival. Other recent practitioners include Mac Wellman, Meredith Monk andAnne Hamburger. From the first list two names in particular have been pivotalto the development of site-specific theatre: Peter Brook and Deborah Warner. PeterBrook was one of Britain’s greatest theatre directors and much of thisgreatness came from his radical style and use of stage – both of which are seenas pre-cursors of modern site-specific performance. Brook was deeply influencedby the Theatre of Cruelty by Antonin Artaud and this lead to dramaticproductions such as Jean Genet’s The Screens in 1964 and Peter Weiss’s Marat/Sadein 1964 – a huge success after its sharp and revolutionary break withtheatre style to that time. Brook brought a new philosophy to the theatre thatimbued it with a new sense of potential and manipulation of space andenvironment – shown well in his productions of Seneca’s Oedipus and TheEmpty Space. More recently, Deborah Warner has made further developed theseearly origins of site-specific performance with radically different productionssuch as Titus Andronicus (1987), Richard II (1995) and JuliusCaesar (2005).

SECTION 3: SITE-SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE: AUDIENCE

(A) Audience: General

Perhaps the singlegreatest contribution of site-specific performance as a hybrid art-form tosite-specific work as a whole has been the radical transformation andre-constitution of the concept of audience and of how audiences experience liveperformance. When site-specific art first emerged in the late 1960’s it appealedto audiences primarily because of the novelty of the form and the novelty ofthe viewing experience. Nonetheless, site-specific art, whilst novel in itself,did not go make any profoundly novel contributions to the nature, identity andconstitution of its audiences. Site-specific work had no yet developed asite-specific critique or paradigm, and this was left in large measure to thepioneers of site-specific performance. The great advantage and breakthroughachieved by modern site-specific performance is that it draws the audience ofinto an intimate participation with that performance; the audience become anessential part of the performance itself. Notable historical examples haveincluded Siren’s Crossing’s Trace and Flight (2000), Wrights & SitesThe Quay Thing (1998), Anne Marie Culhane’s Night Sky (1997) and TheWhalley Range All Stars’ Day of the Dummy (1999).

Consequently, withsite-specific performance, both performers and spectators reach a profounderdepth of empathy and understanding with the performance that they havewitnessed, than with traditional theatre and even from site-specific work as awhole. In this sense, site-specific performance represents an evolution of thegeneral site-specific art-form towards a level of greater spectator-involvementand identity.The philosophy and theory that underpins this evolution has much to do with areaction against the perceived coldness and unnaturalness of the traditionaltheatre (where the audience are always separated from the performers) and itstendency to promote the values and aims of elite members of society above theaspirations of the ordinary citizen. Site-specific performance however can besaid to be an ‘equalizing art-form’: it holds as a basic philosophicalprinciple the belief that the members of the audience are of equal importanceand significance for the meaning and successful execution of a particularperformance as the performers themselves. As such, site-specific theatre andperformance have taught and continue to teach practitioners of site-specificwork generally – be it site-specific conceptual art, community art,installation art, public art etc., that the greater the participation andsense of involvement of the audience, the greater will be the efficacy of thatperformance upon both performer and viewer. Site-specific work therefore hasmuch to learn from the techniques, literary interpretations, scene-designs andso on of site-specific performers.

This use of audienceby site-specific performers has achieved for the first time, according to FionaWilkie, ‘the sense of a collective audience identity, a knowing audiencethat constructs itself appropriately as an interpretative body via a cumulativeframework of contemporary framework experiences‘.Thus, site-specific performance asks of the audience members themselves certainbasic existential and artistic questions. For instance: how is an audience’ssense of self forged? How and in what ways is an audience’s purpose decided?The extent to which site-specific performance achieves this intensive audienceself-interrogation is perhaps unrivalled in all twentieth-century performance art-formsand promises to be one of the few genuinely unique artistic discoveries ofrecent years.

Traditional theatremaintains a clear space between audience and performer no matter how elatedor ecstatic a spectator may feel during a traditional performance he is alwaysnonetheless still a mere spectator with no direct influence upon the directionor outcome of the performance. Site-specific performance radically reverses theaudience situation and role and instead makes them central actors in theperformance itself. Site-specific performance also raises the questions of: Canaudience self-identity be altered by a performance? And: Can original andmultiple spectator identities be created by site-specific performances?On the first question it is noted by authors such as Williams and Kwon that theunique process of audience participation in site-specific performance oftenleaves the audience with changed perceptions of identity once the performanceis completed. On the second question, it is also clear from the growingliterature that now surrounds site-specific performance that the form has thepotential to create new audience identities as well as to leave differentgroups of the audience with different identity perceptions at the end.From these various observations of audience participation in site-specificperformance it is evident that site-specific work has benefited and learnt anenormous amount about the role of audience and its possible stages oftransformation. Moreover, the far more diverse nature of members ofsite-specific performances alters the mood and atmosphere and perceptions ofthat audience. Rather than being an elite experience attended by only one classof people with, broadly speaking, a single artistic attitude and expectation,the audience is instead a diverse melting-pot of different classes andprofessions of people.

(B) Audience & Community

Site-specificperformance has also raised for general site-specific art the notion of theimportance of the community in which a particular performance or art exhibittakes place. One particular site-specific performance company, The Olimpias,base their work upon questions of site ownership and in line with the theme ofdisability. According to Petra Kuppers, company director, site-specificperformance ought to be ‘attentive to the local community and its ways of inhabitingits environment the company (The Olimpias) work with the community to takenew forms of site, re-interpret the site, keep its history and presence alive‘.’Community’ then is a crucial extension of the audience and the site factorsinvolved in a site-specific performance. It is the community about a specificwork that is most intimately affected by a performance since that performancethrows new light on and reinterprets that community’s existence in a particularway. Site-specific performance can help to re-invigorate and breathe life intoa community by making it more aware and perceptive of the sites that itoccupies. So too the site-specific performances of Wrights & Sitesis ‘interested in the place and in the people who meet us in this place’. Thecompany Welfare State International have also expressed a ‘commitment todrawing in local energies and leaving behind a residue of skills and confidenceafter the company’s withdrawal’ .For many companies then site-specific theatre is a performance that takes placein the living space of a particular community and is enacted alongside andwithin the working life of the community. Thus there is an experientialauthenticity that is unique to site-specific theatre.

(C) Issues WithAudience

Nonetheless, somewriters such as Jan Cohen-Cruzhave argued that taking theatre from established buildings in specific placesto a specific-site does not necessarily create a more intimate audienceenvironment or sense of identity or multiple identities. On this Cohen-Cruzstates: ‘Space is always controlled by someone and exists somewhere, so itis inevitably marked by a particular class or race and not equally accessibleto everyone. one must question whether access to a broader audience really isa difference between performance site-specific and in theatre buildings.‘Cohen-Cruz’s quotation is useful because it sounds a note of caution tosite-specific performers who automatically assume that by merely creatingsite-specific performance of any sort they will immediately achieve a deeper ormore profound sense of audience participation and diversity than would be foundin a traditional theatre. Site-specific performance is a relatively newart-form that is treading into new territory – especially with respect to theunderstanding of audience participation and identity. It is therefore to beexpected that a certain exuberance and robust enthusiasm amongst its performersmay sometimes lead to idealizations of the potential of the art-form; that is,a tendency to assume that site-specific performance is a panacea for all limitationsexperienced by traditional-theatre audiences in past centuries.

It is prudenttherefore to agree with writers such as Fiona Wilkie that the potentialaudience range and diversity of a site-specific performance is decided not byonly by the nature of the genre itself but by the particular features of thesite itself. Access to such site-specific performances depends nearly entirelyupon the location and type of site chosen for a particular performance.If, for instance, the site chosen for a particular performance is an abandonedwarehouse or factory floor close to several housing estates or residentialareas then it is likely that that performance will be accessible to many peoplewho would be traditionally excluded from a theatre experience. If, however, asite-specific performance is held in a country-estate or at the top of acommercial tower-block then it is far less likely that the audience thatattends will be as diverse and kaleidoscopic as at the performance of in theabandoned factory or warehouse. For instance, the site-specific performancecompany Kneehigh Theatrehave reflected how their performance of Hell’s Mouth in the ClayDistrict of Cornwall – a poor and dilapidated area – encouraged a far broadersection of the community to attend than would have done the traditionaltheatre. In Kneehigh’s words: ‘In Hell’s Mouth last summer, bikers from thearea performed the English/Cornish skirmishes in the Mad Max style Cornwall ofthe future. This theme … and reasonable ticket prices, encouraged a stronglocal percentage of audience, who would not normally see the company’s work ortheatre of any sort‘.So too the breadth of the audience of any site-specific work will be determinedalso by the theme and nature of the performance. A site-specific performancethat deals with an esoteric or abstruse subject will not guarantee for itself abroad audience simply by virtue of the fact that it is a site-specific performance.

Several site-specificperformance companies have sought to maintain the diversity of their audiencesin the following ways. The Lion’s Part company, for instance, seek to ‘escapethe bureaucracy of the theatre building‘by providing free access to all performances and free financially also. InFiona Wilkie’s eloquent phrase:

‘The notion of the performance moves away from thehigh-brow associations of the theatre and closer to reaching a publicwell-versed in the popular culture of gigs, festivals and celebrations. Itemphasizes the significance of the spatial encounter and is conceived as awhole experience for the spectator‘

Wilkie here identifiesa key strength of site-specific performance: its ability and capacity tosynthesize myriad different forms of contemporary art, culture and society andto fuse them into a relevant and meaningful whole. Moreover, site-specificperformance has the unique advantage of being able to manipulate space inwhatever way it likes. A traditional theatre is severely limited in the sensethat its performance can only take place within the predetermined and setdimensions of the theatre building; these dimensions remain the same for everynew production no matter how different such productions might be from eachother. The space and dimensions of a site-specific performance are howeverdetermined and limited only by the space and dimensions of the site itself andthey therefore have a far greater range and flexibility than traditionaltheatre. For instance: a windmill, an abandoned factory, a coffee shop, adoctor’s surgery, a former nuclear silo all offer different and uniqueexperiences of space for the audience. So too, a site-specific performance mayeven have two separate audiences: one that pays admission and is conscious ofthe performance and another that attends the event for free and is an integralpart of the performance itself. To take an example: when Grid Iron held thesite-specific performance Decky Does a Broncoin numerous children’s playgrounds some audience members bought tickets whilstthe children (attending free) that played in the playground were urged tocontinue their activities and so became part of the setting and the performanceitself. Ben Harrison, director of Decky Does a Bronco, recalls howchildren came to and fro different parts of the performance depending upon thelevel of excitement raised for them by a particular moment or scene from thatperformance; when bored the children would retire to the quieter parts of thepark. In Harrison’s useful phrase, this double audience ‘adds to thecomplexity of the event‘.

SECTION 4: SITE-SPECIFICPERFORMANCE: ‘SITE-SPECIFIC ORSITE-GENERIC?’

Site-specificperformance has contributed significantly to the site-specific as a whole onthe pressing question of whether site specific art should be site-specific or sitegeneric. That is, whether site-specific work should remain rooted in at theexact site of its creation or whether the idea created in a particular site maybe transferred to other similar sites. This question is perhaps the mostvociferously argued debate in site-specific work at present. At stake is thephilosophical and intellectual basis of the movement itself. Site-specific workemerged in the late 1960’s as an art-form that made a unique use of site andsite features to influence the shape and form of the design: these sites wereusually highly different or unique from all others and so each sculpture,art-work or performance had its own unique characteristics. Traditionalsite-specific artists of this old-school therefore refute the idea that theidiosyncratic features of a particular site can simply be uprooted andtransferred to another site – no matter how similar to the original. In RichardSerra’s famous phrase ‘to remove the work is to destroy the work’.In other words: once a site-specific art-piece has been torn from its originalcontext it loses the one thing that made it powerful and unique. Nonetheless,in recent decades such notions of the immovability from and inseparability of asite-specific work from its original setting have been assailed by artistsdriven by market forces and institutional changes in attitude. In one criticswords: ‘Site specificity has become a complex cipher of unstablerelationships between locations an identities in the era of late capitalism.‘Miwon Kwon’s work One Place After Another: Site-Specific Art and LocationIdentityis of enormous importance in elucidating the contours and features of thisshift in the direction of site-specific art.

The internal movementsof site-specific performance have done much to inform and influence the widersite-specific art of the last decade. In site-specific performance the keyquestion of recent years has been: Can site-specific performance travel? Or:Does ‘Site-specificity’ mean ‘site-exclusivity? Within the site-specificperformance community this debate as to exclusivity of site has been arguedwith near equal tenacity by both opponents and supporters. Thus, in many ways,the debate appeared recently to have come to a standstill. One way found by site-specificperformers to step beyond this impasse has been to define levels ofsite-specificity. For instance the company Red Earthhas stated:

‘Someprojects are completely site-specific, i.e., they could not take place anywhereelse without losing a strong thread of meaning and connection; while other moreflexible projects may work around a certain sense of place, i.e., the spirit orconcept at the heart of the project would work in several – but not all -locations’.

This quotation then suggests that the term ‘site-specific’has a degree of inherent relativity and flexibility. At one end of thespectrum, the term stands for certain performances that are absolutely rootedin the exact and unique site and community features in which they are set; forsuch performances there is no possibility of moving their ideas to differentsites. At the other end of the spectrum, certain performances can be moved fromsite to site if they preserve or enhance the ‘spirit’ or primary idea thatbegan the original performance. Between these two poles are various types ofsite-specific performance whose transferability rests upon ambiguous or dubiousprinciples. Justin McKeown of the Whalley Range All Stars suggests that thisrelativity should be defined in terms of site-specific performances that are ‘directlyderived from a chosen site‘and therefore have to remain at that site indefinitely, and on the other handbetween performances that can be transferred since they acknowledge and expandupon ‘the inherent meanings within a site‘. Paul Pinson, of Boilerhouse,has argued further that the relativity of site-specific performance isconditioned by the way that the company engages with the space that it occupiesat a particular site. Pinson suggests further that a performance can bepartially site-specific and partially of another genre and that this hybridity thereforejustifies a company to tour its performances. Pinson states: ‘You canrecreate a work in response to a number of different sites, which is totallyvalid in itself and is an element of site-specificity but is different frommaking a piece of work in response to one specific site.’

The site-specific or site-generic debate and is plethora ofinterpretations have raised questions about the present ‘purity’ ofsite-specific performance. Above all: is it possible for theoreticians andpractitioners of site-specific performance to find or derive a ‘pure’ model ofsite-specific performance, against which hybrid forms of this model might becompared? That is: can one set up construct an ideal paradigm of site-specificperformance and then show how variations of this paradigm are beneficial intheir individual ways? Miwon Kwon has suggested that one definition of thispure model might be ‘To make a truly site-specific piece means it sitswholly in that site in both its content and form, otherwise if moveable, itbecomes more about the site as a vehicle.‘Variations from this pure model are healthy natural growths from themother-model; the work of site-specific theoreticians is to define thesevariations and to ascribe to each of them independent areas of operation.

An alternative to this model of deriving variations ofsite-specific art from a pure or perfect model is to invent a new terminologyfor the art-form. Wrights & Siteshave suggested that the terms ‘In theatre building‘, ‘Outside theatre‘,’Site-Sympathetic‘, ‘Site-Generic‘ and ‘Site-Specific‘ beused to describe the various degrees of theatre performance. The first two ofthese are clearly beyond the pale of any generally accepted definition ofsite-specific performance. Interestingly however Wrights & Sites propose athree-fold division of the genre of site-specific performance. The advantage ofsuch a hierarchy is that it allows greater freedom and subtlety of descriptionwhen deciding to which exact genre a performance of site-specific work belongs.The term ‘site-specific’ is accordingly reserved for performances that have aprofound and absolute relationship with the specific site in which theperformance is prepared and enacted. Such performances work only at one site,never tour or travel, and do not use pre-existing props or scripts.Nonetheless, one major problem of such a terminology is the difficulty ofassigning the large number of performances that seem to fall between thecategories of ‘site-generic’ and ‘site-specific’.

These disputes about definitions and terminology that havearisen in the particular field of site-specific performance are or considerablerelevance and have been of considerable influence upon similar disputes insite-specific work generally. The central question of the debate – cansite-specific performance tour – is equally relevant to all others types ofsite-specific work, be it sculpture, community art, painting and so on. Byadopting a similar terminology to that of site-specific performancesite-specific work generally might clear up many of its own internal disputes.

SECTION 5: SITE-SPECIFIC:TYPES OF SITE

Internal debates within the literature of site-specificperformance as to what kind of site to select for its performances hashad considerable influence over similar decisions within site-specific workgenerally.

What then can site-specific work generally learn fromsite-specific performance? Above all, perhaps, is the extensive andcomprehensive analysis and exploration of the medium of space undertaken byleading site-specific performers. Richard Schechnerhas stated that ‘theatre places are maps of the cultures where they exist‘and Hetheringtonthat ‘Certain spaces act as sites for the performance of identity’. Artisticmanipulation of space is vital to successful site-specific performance, and theunique development in this quest has been the exploration of alternatives typesof space and site in which to perform site-specific theatre. Theatre had forcenturies been largely confined to theatre buildings of one sort or another;the advent of site-specific theatre saw the use of a plethora of differentvenues for performance from coal mines, to hospital wards, to libraries, tocoffee shops and so on ad infinitum. These ventures into alternativesites for performance raised amongst scholars of site-specific performance thekey questions: What are the consequences of such diverse selection of sites?What association will each site bring to the site-specific genre? What are thecommon themes that bind such eclectic choices of venue? On the last question,some attempts have been made by figures such as Hetheringtonto classify these venues in groups: for instance, parks and children’s playareas can be classed with beaches as ‘public spaces’. Cohen-Cruzhas argued that such spaces allow site-specific performers to use space that isnormally thought of as ‘publicly inhabitable’ to entice passers-by to attendthe performance therefore symbolising for the performers the theme of ‘makingperformance accessible’. The spaces found in venues such as museums, churchesand galleries are used somewhat differently however. In contrast to ‘p

What does sensory theatre mean to the modern audience?

Asone of the oldest art forms and as one of the primeval kinds of humanexpression, the nature of theatre is as varied across the continents aspainting, pottery, sculpture or any of the classic art-forms. Each civilization, each society, each gathering of humankind has had its personalform of theatrical performance from street artists to court jesters to nomadicplayers. Many would say that this variety at the very core of theatrical achievement is what has permitted theatre to take such a respected and crucialpart of our modern societies. Too often it is claimed that our present daylifestyles leave little time for abstract thinking and artistic appreciation orachievement. This is lamentable but thankfully not usually true. One need only observe the continuation of events such as the Welsh National Eisteddfod forhundreds of years to realize that the human desire and need for theatre willnever diminish.

However, this is not to say that modern society has not changed theatre. It is only natural that artistic output should be modeled by the lifestyle surrounding it. After all, warlike civilizations such as the Vikings delighted in the narrating of age-old sagas whereas more enlightened peoples like the Ancient Greeks would draw inspiration from mythical dramas which detailed the flaws at the heart of humanity and their relationships with their gods, representing a search for elements greater than themselves.

However,we can take it as certain that the theatrical productions of the last fiftyyears have overwhelmingly been part of a resurgence of theatrical diversity. Asthe free market has made nations more accessible to each other, a rise ininterest for all sorts of artistic expression has been felt around the world.Herein, we shall focus on the analysis and comprehension of one of these.Sensory theatre, or at least the old meaning of the term, is not a new concept.At its very core, much of what constitutes theatre relies heavily on the senses,both those of the audience and that of the actors. Nevertheless, at a time whenour fast-paced lifestyle seems to reject anything out of the ordinary or whichcan be labeled as different, it is refreshing to feel that this resurgence hasregenerated one of the truly great aspects of theatre, oft labeled as post-modernistbut one which links so much of relatively recent artistic output across theboundaries of different art forms:

‘Post-modernity,in attacking the perceived elitist approach of Modernism, sought greaterconnection with broader audiences. This is often labelled ‘accessibility’ andis a central point of dispute in the question of the value of postmodern art.It has also embraced the mixing of words with art, collage and other movementsin modernity, in an attempt to create more multiplicity of medium and message.Much of this centers on a shift of basic subject matter: postmodern artistsregard the mass media as a fundamental subject for art, and use forms, tropes,and materials – such as banks of video monitors, found art, and depictions ofmedia objects – as focal points for their artPostmodernism’s critical stance isinterlinked with presenting new appraisals of previous works. As implied abovethe works of the “Dada” movement received greater attention, as didcollagists such as Robert Rauschenberg, whose works were initiallyconsidered unimportant in the context of the modernism of the 1950s, but who, bythe 1980s, beganto be seen as seminal. Post-modernism also elevated the importance of cinema in artisticdiscussions, placing it on a peer level with the other fine arts. This is bothbecause of the blurring of distinctions between “high” and”low” forms, and because of the recognition that cinema representedthe creation of simulacra which was later duplicated in the other arts.’ (Wikipedia,2005)

Inthis dissertation, we shall be analyzing aspects of sensory theatre as has beenexplored and toyed with by some great artisans of the craft. Despite anyproblems we have with wholesale rejection of this type of theatre, in the interestof fair-minded and complete research, we shall pay due attention to theAristotelian school of thought. That which claims that theatre is a particulartype of experience, one from which the audience member should feel cleansed andhave learnt a lesson. This is a valid point of view, one which we shallthoroughly explore in order to see if it is indeed more artisticallyjustifiable than sensory theatre.

Afterexploring Aristotle’s opinions, we shall look in further depth at the nature ofsensory theatre. What does this term mean? How is each sense tapped? Can themelding of experiences of several senses which are simultaneously stimulatedprovide an elevating experience? For this exploration, we shall use the casestudy of Dwr (water in Welsh), a sensory piece of theatre put on in2003, using water, light and various materials to explore reactions amongst itsaudience. The reasons for using this play are that it was an audiovisualexperience as well as a mere theatrical one as projections and cameras were anintegral part of the performance. Furthermore, the sensory effect of theaudience can be better analyzed as members of the audience were also used inthe play, their reactions helping to define the type of sensory experience.

However, Dwr also gives us a good example of Brechtian theatre for the number of levels the play takes on. The actors themselves act as facilitators for the audience to receive personal sensory experiences. With only a minority of audience members taking part in the play, we can gain two further levels of emotional depth and complexity. The general background of the audience will see their emotions and senses assailed by the movements, gestures and decisions of those taking part while this minority will be subjected to sensory input and emit feedback with no room for forethought or planning ahead.

Thus, we shall provide a very definite and interesting example to back up any clear defining of sensory theatre we come to. We shall also look at how Dwr fits into the patterns of sensory theatre created by Brecht and Artaud and how its attitude towards its audience defines this multi-tiered theatre as one of the crucial points of sensory theatre.

However,no analysis of sensory theatre without detailed research into the works ofpioneers of the genre. Here, we have chosen to look at Bertolt Brecht andAntonin Artaud, each for specific reasons. Brecht’s attitude, utterly inconflict with the age-old Aristotelian views of theatre, helped build hisreputation as an agitateur who decided to stamp his own distinctive markupon an art form he viewed as static. Thus, the habits of Brechtian theatre oftotal acknowledgement of the audience caused as much mirth as it did anger. Onthe other hand, Artaud provided his audience with a completely integralexperience. By using sensory theatre to deny audience members their usual rightto involve themselves in a performance to a degree of their choice, Artaud madesure his plays would deeply shock his audiences. We will be exploring Artaud’stechniques as well as his reasons for providing this kind of theatre.

It is the goal of this dissertation to highlight the differences that make sensory theatre an integral genre of its own, containing so many outlets for creativity, expression and emotional impact as to make it not only an interesting part of theatre but an essential one. Its recent resurgence will thus provide us with an ideal platform from which to assess its meaning to a modern audience.

TheAristotelian view of theatrical norms

Goodoratory can blow the walls off brick buildings. Not just in the real world ofpolitical speeches or rallies but in the arts as well. As one of the only formsof human expression where no point of view is unheard, no eventuality unconsidered,no leaf left unturned, theatre has throughout its history naturally overthrownand shrugged off any shackles or conventions attached to it. This idea couldgive rise to an impression of mayhem and anarchy in an art form that had runaway with its own importance. As one of the leading figures in the history ofliterature, Aristotle’s views on the nature and importance of theatre arewell-documented and naturally thought of as still relevant today.

‘Aristotlehad the very human characteristic of harking back to the good old days, andthinking them much better than the days in which he lived. Taking scant accountof Aeschylus,he regarded Sophoclesand Euripidesas models in tragedy. His chief complaints were that the poets of his own timespoiled their work by rhetorical display; that the actor was often of moreimportance than the play; and that the poets tampered with the plot in order togive a favorite actor an opportunity of displaying his special talent. He saidthat the poets were deficient in the power of portraying character, and that itwas not even fair to compare them with the giants of the former era.’ (FletcherBellinger, pp.61, 1967)

However,in the matter of sensory theatre, we run into an area of some problems. Beingof a conservative mind-set which appreciated theatre for the moral lessonscontained within the narrative, Aristotle worshipped Sophocles with hisstraight and narrow approach to theatrical drama whilst eschewing the work ofhis contemporaries as being too popular, too watered down to meet the needs ofa public desirous of less preaching and more fun within the theatre.

Aristotlepossessed perhaps what could be interpreted as a rather narrow view in that hesaw tragedy as the greatest form of dramatic expression, almost utterly passingoff on comedy as mere fluff as compared to tragedy with the great lessonscontained within it. Furthermore, Aristotle also considered tragedy to bemagnificent when it also contained a clear and well constructed narrativeframework and mythological references to the deeds of greater men and gods in anobler past. Although Aristotle’s writings on these topics did make a lot ofsense, they are considered somewhat restrictive and far too imbued with theirown authority to be seen as of much use today. After all, in a society wherethe possibilities of theatre are slowly catching up with those of television orcinema as directors, playwrights and stage designers are always exploring newavenues of performance, Aristotle’s three unities of time, place and actionseem ready to be retired. Their far-too stringent requirements of both cast andcrew make them almost impossible to operate in the modern world of freetheatre.

This is no longer a society where the writings of one man, whoever he may be, carry enough influence to truly make as significant an impact as in Ancient Greece. It is not to say that Aristotle should be disregarded but concerning sensory theatre, rules relating how plot should be more important than character and how all the action in a tragedy should be centered around a personage of importance to better capture the attention of a fickle audience seem slightly moot. Its relevance is in the fact that much of what is known of theatrical conventions among a lay audience is heavily based on Ancient Greek theatrical philosophy, particularly Aristotle. It is precisely this philosophy that sensory theatre will have to overcome in order to claim its place as a rightful and deserving genre of theatrical achievement across the globe.

Visual,auditory, tactileDwr

Choosingan example to illustrate the nature of sensory theatre is a tricky balancingact as one must therefore, in some way at least, pre-define one’s understandingof the genre. How do we choose between the senses? After all, since the name ofsensory theatre does not make any kind of distinction, do we consider thesenses of sight and hearing more important than the other three since they areoverwhelmingly the most stimulated in matters of theatre? A distinction such asthis would make sense certainly but since sensory theatre is often seen asstanding alone from usual theatre, perhaps it would be unfair to appraise itthanks to assumptions based on more conventional modes of theatre. Instead,the best way to gain a true idea of sensory theatre’s range of potentialimpacts would be to base an example upon several criteria. Firstly, although itwould be somewhat over-expectant to try and find a play which could tap allfive of our senses, several attempts at sensory theatre have successfullyengaged audiences on three senses, if not four. Herein has been chosen Dwr,a Welsh piece put on in 2003 in Aberystwyth and then broadcast on S4C on thearts programme, Croma.

Theset-up of the piece was simple. The audience were seated on one side of thestage on a raised-up area, overlooking a long perpendicular dinner table. Theinside of the table, rather than being an ordinary flat surface, had beenhollowed in order to form a shallow pool about six inches deep along thetable’s entire length. The pool was filled with a level amount of clear waterat the bottom of which a table had been set ready for dinner, complete withplates, cutlery, glasses and napkins. Above the audience, shining down upon thetable was a strong projector which reflected the pool of water onto a backprojection screen in a way which magnified and increased the shadows cast byany ripples in the water. Six audience members were asked to be seated at thetable, as if for dinner before being submitted to a range of experiences by theactors whilst cameras recorded their reactions. These sensory experiments allinvolved stimulation of an audience member in matters of sight, sound, taste orfeeling. We shall look at the manner in which each of these senses was tappedas well as Dwr‘s technical set-up.

Firstof all, if one were to ask any theatre-goers, it would be certain that even themost intermittent of these would claim the two most stimulated senses in thetheatre are that of sight and hearing. Whilst conventional thinking would allowthis to be true, a cynical perspective would add that since our behinds orfeet, depending on posture, contribute much to the enjoyment of a theatricalperformance three senses, not two, must all be satisfied for a performance tobe considered praise-worthy. After all, although stage design is an oftforgotten art among those who are not privileged to the inner workings oftheatre, the choice of venue often signifies how an audience will feel duringthe performance. Stage design is often considered only in terms of sets, propsand technical apparatus whilst the idea of crowd comfort is often overlooked.

In the case of Dwr, the crowd comfort was adequate but the truly interesting phenomenon for the audience of this play was that their peers were submitted to the action contained within it. The stage design was such that the light poured onto the water was bright enough to cause the right amount of shadow reflection whilst not blinding either the audience or the actors. This careful use of projection in order to achieve the desired effect was a technique made famous of Josef Svoboda who pioneered the use of audiovisual projection in theatre to enhance the general experience. The stimulation capabilities of a performance, when combined with camera and sound equipment, is vastly heightened thus cementing Svoboda as one of the great names of sensory theatre.

Asfar as the audience members who became a part of the performance itself, thesenses stimulated were done so in a way which gave every sense the time tofully absorb the impact of its experience. First of all, each audience memberwas seated at the table in the guise of a dinner guest but asked not to talk toeach other or carry out any action except if indicated to do so by one of thesurrounding cast. First of all, each dinner guest was asked to remove theirshoes and socks before climbing onto the table into the water. The stage itselfwas kept at a warm temperature in contrast to the cold water, making the changein surroundings quite drastic. Then, the audience member was asked to burst aplastic bag full of water with a long hooked pole. The water would thus droponto the audience member along with a fake plaster egg.

The audience member would then be lead back to their seat, given a towel to dry off before being given two chopsticks. After breaking the egg on the side of the table, the contents would then be spilt onto the plate just below the surface of the water. Each egg contained some food coloring, spreading across the table along with the ripples, along with a small piece of paper. Each piece of paper showed the face of a man, wearing different emotions, whilst a brief poem on the back seemed to explain the expression, a poem that would be read by one of the surrounding cast to the relevant audience member. The relationship between the pictures and the poems may not have been immediately obvious but the reactions of the audience members were still assured to be both personal, if not natural due to unusual surroundings and odd experiences.

These reactions were filmed by the technical crew on video cameras, adding another level of complexity to the performance as the traditional boundaries between cast and crew become blurred. Furthermore, Dwr‘s entire performance was played out under a constantly shifting pattern of music which although always instrumental would speed up in tone or gently slow down in function of events happening in the play.

Thepurpose of using Dwr as an illustration of the modern applications ofsensory theatre and its meaning to a present-day audience is threefold. Firstof all, the timing of the piece and its broadcasting on a national channelalong with subsequent interviews with the chosen audience members proves theinterest placed in it by a major broadcaster as the BBC has major impact uponS4C scheduling. Secondly, the sensual experience of the show provided afascinating outlet for the audience members, both for those who took an activepart or a passive part, to find out more about what constitutes modern sensorytheatre.

Although the audience numbers for this show were relatively small and thus can only provide us with a minor cross-section of theatre-goers, the positive feedback gained at the end during the interviews can give a lot of hope as to the future of sensory theatre. Finally, to use an example such as Dwr gives us a view as to what kind of reaction this genre of theatre would meet with. Dwr covers a broad base of sensory theatre as its performance, not only stimulating several of the senses themselves, dealt with a range of theatrical theories and ideologies which we shall look at in further detail. By separating audience members from each other, creating many layers of reality between crew and cast, audience and cast and audience and crew, Dwr rejectedmany traditional aspects of theatrical performance.

However, by engaging its audience/cast members with an individual experience through the messages contained within the eggshells and filming their response, Dwr could be said to have engaged with a more conservative Aristotelian version of theatre. Each audience member not involved with the show directly as a dinner guest will have experience the play as a visual and auditive experience but it is for the six members of the audience at each performance that Dwr transcended the limits of ordinary theatre and became a emotional and sensory journey felt by each in their own individual way.

Below, we will be casting an eye at the ways in which theatrical pioneers such as Brecht and Artaud tackled the rigours and the conventions of an art form that they viewed as being a free form, lacking in any structural restrictions. Before doing so, we can still observe that even if Dwr did pander even the slightest bit towards an Aristotelian theatre, the main body of its performance was firmly in the territory of Artaud as we can see when applying this passage to precisely the type of theatre Dwr tries to avoid.

‘If people are out of thehabit of going to the theater, if we have all finally come to think of theateras an inferior art, a means of popular distraction, and to use it as an outletfor our worst instincts, it is because we have learned too well what thetheater has been, namely, falsehood and illusion. It is because we have beenaccustomed for four hundred years, that is since the Renaissance, to a purelydescriptive and narrative theater – storytelling psychology; it is becauseevery possible ingenuity has been exerted in bringing to life on the stageplausible but detached beings, with the spectacle on one side, the public onthe other – and because the public is no longer shown anything but the mirrorof itself. Shakespeare himself is responsible for this aberration and decline,this disinterested idea of the theater which wishes a theatrical performance toleave the public intact, without setting off one image that will shake theorganism to its foundations and leave an ineffaceable scar. If, in Shakespeare,man is sometimes preoccupied with what transcends him, it is always in order todetermine the ultimate consequences of this preoccupation within him, i.e.,psychology.’ (Artaud,No More Masterpieces, 1976)

Evensuch divides as between audience and actors, theatrical conventions that are sohabitual as to often be altogether forgotten, were not sacrosanct enough fordirectors, playwrights and actors such as Brecht, Artaud and Svoboda.

TheBrechtian impact or the alienation of theatrical tradition

Earlierin this dissertation, it was suggested that Aristotle’s views on theatre andsubsequent impact thereon had diminished somewhat with the dawn of a time wherethe philosophies of the Ancient Greeks mattered little. However, the centuriesthat his views transcended have signified that they could not dissipate soquickly. Many modern opinions on theatre, however avant-garde or post-modernistthey wish or claim to be, are still formed largely on the back of the opinionsof men such as Aristotle. However, this obstacle would be taken to piece by menand women like Brecht, who wished not to merely co-exist with existing viewsbut confront their defenders and destroy the ideological entrenchment that manytheatre critics had resorted to in the face of the changes sweeping throughtheir beloved art form.

‘In his early plays, Brechtexperimented with dada and expressionism, but in his later work, he developed astyle more suited his own unique vision. He detested the”Aristotelian” drama and its attempts to lure the spectator into akind of trance-like state, a total identification with the hero to the point ofcomplete self-oblivion, resulting in feelings of terror and pity and,ultimately, an emotional catharsis. He didn’t want his audience to feelemotions–he wanted them to think–and towards this end, he determined todestroy the theatrical illusion, and, thus, that dull trance-like state he sodespised. The result of Brecht’s research was a technique known as”verfremdungseffekt” or the “alienation effect”. It wasdesigned to encourage the audience to retain their critical detachment.’ (Imagi-nation,2003)

Thisis not to say though that to achieve such an accomplishment was possible formerely any theatrical commentator. It took men of special gumption, gravitasand guts to dare attack such a powerful establishment as that of traditionaltheatre. Bertolt Brecht was one of these. Blessed with the ability to fightbattles on several fronts whilst still maintaining a clear head, Brecht beganto cause controversy early on in his career. Looking to fulfill a desire formore relevant and modern theatre amongst German theatre-going audiences,Brecht, through plays such as Drums in the Night and with therecognition of director Erich Engel, flirted with an expressionistic style thatbefitted his rising status but left Brecht himself feeling uncomfortable.Although his style was becoming fashionable and it would undoubtedly havebrought him his time in the spotlight, Brecht felt that he should discover aplaywriting identity which was his own and not borrowed from anybody else. Ifwe consider that at this time Brecht was writing in post World War I Germany,we can observe the bravery it must have taken for him to make this type ofdecision.

Duringthe turbulent years of the socialist rise in Germany and the Weimar Republic,Brecht knew a modest amount of success in both theatre and literature thanks toplays such as In the Jungle of the Cities and his partnership with Engeland Hans Eisler but he was only just beginning to find his feet in a style allof his own. The final step in this direction would be his years with his owncollective of writers, the most famous fruit of which would be the Lehrstuckewhich would form the root of the theatrical changes and theories we thinkof as Brechtian today. Lehrstucke propounded that passive audiences werea thing of the past in matters of theatre and that it was necessary foraudiences to become more actively involved in a performance whilst keeping astrong level of emotional distance in order to remain capable of rational thoughtand criticism. This collection of thoughts would slowly pass into commonpractice in theatrical troupes and communities around the world, a practiceknown as ‘epic theatre’.

Epictheatre today may seem as historical and passAA© as Aristotle’s views did forBrecht but the truth is that the numerous and varied adaptations of epictheatre have formed much of today’s common theatrical practices. Before Brecht,the demarcation between the audience and the actors was sacrosanct. SinceAristotle, the status of the star actor had risen so much that now actors wouldmerely be cast in a role that was known to be in their repertoire, a fact whichcould lead to truly spectacular levels of diva treatment or ridiculouscastings. Take for example Sarah Bernhardt whose notoriety had reached suchproportions that she cast herself as Hamlet. This is not to say there isanything wrong with female actors playing traditionally male Shakespeareanparts but it is the manner in which Bernhardt carried out this casting that madethe situation ridiculous. Aristotle lamented this type of situation as beingone of the great plagues striking tragedy theatre whilst Brecht merely laughedat it and lambasted it in his own style.

His patented Verfremdungseffekt (or estrangement effect) was a sweepingly original style which not only acknowledged the audience as a part of a theatrical production and encouraged them to change their own attitudes to theatre. Instead of allowing traditional suspension of disbelief and letting audiences feel as if they were watching a truthful event, Brecht went out of his way to remind them that what they saw was a representation, a mirror onto reality and never reality itself. This was carried out by having actors suddenly break character and address the audience to explain the plot, grossly over-exaggerated props or sets in the middle of an otherwise serious play or great placards on the stage asking the audience to behave in a certain way by ignoring a particular happening or to stare less romantically. These unusual situations for an audience confused them and alienated them from the play, hence the name alienation or estrangement effect. This separation from conventional theatrical theory became very fashionable after the war in both America where he lived until being pestered by HUAC and in communist East Germany where he resided until his death in 1953. The appeal of Brecht’s type of theatre across the globe speaks volumes about how the traditions of theatre were rejected by a large section of theatre going audiences.

The sensory feel of the Verfremdungseffekt were indirect but by creating this new separation of audience and stage in an allegorical as well as in a physical sense, Brechtian theatre enabled its audiences and directors to experiment with new sensations. The greatest example of this is in some of Brecht’s later plays such as The Good Person of Szechwan and Galileo. For example, in Galileo, the portrait he paints of the astronomer is of a tortured soul wracked between his scientific duty to tell the truth to an unsuspecting world and the threat of vengeance from the dark figure of the Grand Inquisitor. This moral dilemma was planned by Brecht as a way to get his audience to think rationally about the situation and contemplate what they would do in such a situation rather than feeling sorry for Galileo.

However, if Brecht had one failing, it was that despite his ability to meld together a myriad of sources into a convincing single narrative, he did not understand the human nature of his public. Persuaded that with the right play, he could force his audience into abandoning their emotional side, whether he realized it or not Brecht was asking people to set aside the precise reason most of them came to the theatre.

His theories resulted in a number of “epic” dramas, among them Mother Courage and Her Children which tells the story of a travelling merchant who earns her living by following the Swedish and Imperial armies with her covered wagon and selling them supplies: clothing, food, brandy, etc… As the war grows heated, Mother Courage finds that this profession has put her and her children in danger, but the old woman doggedly refuses to give up her wagon. Mother Courage and Her Children was both a triumph and a failure for Brecht. Although the play was a great success, he never managed to achieve in his audience the unemotional, analytical response he desired. Audiences never fail to be moved by the plight of the stubborn old woman. (Imagi-nation, 2003)

Anemotional journey where characters could and should be empathized with orcondemned was much of what has always constituted theatre’s engagement. Eventhe averagely smart and aware audience member does not need the moral absolutesof right and wrong as claimed by Aristotle but the desire to identify with oneor more of the central characters instead of merely rationalizing about theirfates without feeling was too strong in the vast majority of theatre-goers.

Brechtis claimed doubly to be both a modernist or one of the first post-modernists.Although some claims have been made that a taste for his kind of theatre quicklyinspires in the face of so much cynicism, his importance and the size of hisimpact upon world theatre cannot be underplayed. Today, many of his conventionsare so common as to be taken for granted whilst a collective of ‘Brechtians’still operates and remains as long-standing proof to the glory of his genius.

Conventionalrelief in theatre and Artaud’s rejection of it

Everygeneration is locked in a perpetual struggle with those that come both beforeand after to break free from the shackles of their ancestral traditions, carvetheir own identity and thus prepare the way for a similar fight with thegenerations that are to follow. Although social morays may seem to remain stilland constant, this is only an illusion, one that can only too easily be piercedby artistic expression. Artists have often been marginalized as second-ratemembers of society, ones that are not indispensable to the everyday running ofour lives. Seen as not producing useful since all their efforts did not feed,clothe or warm anybody, it became a painful reality that if actors or musicianswanted to survive, they were required to curtail any creativity and pander toprecisely what their audiences desired.

While this unfortunate turn of events could be passed off as a mere passage in the history of theatre, it left behind some highly tell-tale signs. The simplest of these is that from the Renaissance onward through the Classical period, theatre had become significant with escapism. The majority of plays, and here one cannot deny Aristotle’s continuing influence, harked back to former days lamenting a fallen age of glory, honour and noble deeds. Whilst this fond reminiscing was unimpeachable in its desire to awaken a better side of humanity in audiences, it often met with boredom and

Discuss Samuel Beckett’s handling of identity in his plays Waiting for Godot and Happy Days.

The work of Samuel Beckett can be seen to span both the Modernist and Postmodernist paradigms (Bradbury and McFarlane, 1991; Green and LeBihan, 1996), on the one hand being influenced by such canonical Modernist writers as James Joyce and Luigi Pirandello (Knowlson, 1996) and on the other relying heavily on Postmodern notions such as the transgression of the body, the performative identity and the failure of grand narratives such as language and truth. This point is made by Richard Begam in his study Samuel Beckett and the End of Modernity (1996):

“Beckett’s conception of his undertaking, what we would now call his postmodernism, recognized that an absolute break with the past, a complete supersession of what had gone before, was itself the product of a teleological or modern form of thinking. Proust and Joyce therefore became not figures to be replaced or surmounted but telling points of reference in an ongoing dialogue between past and present.” (Begam, 1996: 14)

Beckett’s position as a liminal writer, spanning two distinctly different but obviously connected intellectual regimes, allows us to examine not only his work but the larger context of critical and performance theory. With this in mind, in this essay I would like to look at two main areas of Beckett’s work that are both metonymous with changes in post-War theatre (and perhaps literature) as a whole. Firstly I would like to concentrate on the notion of Postmodernism as it relates to performance, looking at leitmotifs and tropes as they appear in Waiting for Godot (1955) and Happy Days (1961), and secondly I would like to go on to look at the whole notion of identity and its dissolution in these same texts before drawing conclusions as to what this treatment says about the place of performance in contemporary theatre and, perhaps, the wider context of society itself.

First of all, however and as a foundation for my later exposition, I would like to offer a brief summary of Postmodernism.

Postmodernism, as Fredric Jameson points out, can be best understood through its relationship and difference to Modernism, a philosophical and artistic concept that had it roots in the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century (Bradbury and McFarlane, 1991). In an artistic sense, the Modernist work was characterised by experiment and a rejection of the Romantic subjective self. Works such as T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land (1989) and James Joyce’s Ulysses (1977) exemplify both the Modernist propensity for innovation and the removed authorial voice and we can certainly see this in many, if not all of Beckett’s theatrical works.

Postmodernism, as Jean Francois Lyotard declared in his essay “The Postmodern Condition” (1991) reflected the breakdown and disillusionment felt by the failure of the very foundations of Modernism; foundations that included such hitherto accepted givens as truth, the self, the homogeneity of Literature and the Arts and many of the other systems of thought that Lyotard termed the ‘metanarratives’ (Lyotard, 1991: 36). Whereas Modernism sought newness and innovation, Postmodernism resulted in the adoption of style over content (Robertson, 1996: 3), the questioning of accepted constructs of knowledge (Foucault, 1989) and the language (Derrida, 2004) and, as we shall see with Beckett the exposure of the artistic machinery.

This last point, I think, is crucial to an understanding of Beckett’s place as both a Modernist and a Postmodern writer. As I have already stated, we can recognise certain Modernist images and leitmotifs in Beckett’s work (Eagleton, 1992: 186): the starkly bare characterisation, the dour vision of humanity that we also find in Eliot and Woolf and the conscious effort to experiment and innovate but, underneath this, we also detect a distinctly Postmodern sensibility; one that delights in the deliberate exposure of the performative nature of both the theatre and life.

In Waiting for Godot, for instance, there is a constant comic antagonism created between actor and audience, as ideas and lines of narrative are picked up and abandoned without the usual dramatic sense of resolution (Schechner, 1988). In the first Act for example, Estragon begins a joke that is never finished:

“Estragon: Tell it tome!
Vladimir: Ah, stop it!
Estragon: An Englishman having drunk a little more than usual goes to a brothel. The bawd asks him if he wants a fair one, a dark one, or a red-haired one. Go on.
Vladimir: Stop it!” (Beckett, 1955: 16)

The antagonism and frustration engendered by this un-ended joke is more than a mere literary device it is also a performance device that sets up a markedly different actor/audience relationship. Unlike, say, classical Aristotelian dramatic theory that asserts the imperative of the “incentive moment” (Hartley and Ladu, 1948: 14) the “rising action” (Hartley and Ladu, 1948: 14) and the resolution, here Beckett (as indeed he does throughout the play) creates a deliberate anti-climax that immediately calls in to question the binary between reality and performance.

The same also could be said about much of the dramatic structure of Happy Days, as the workings of the performance are constantly exposed to the gaze of the audience. Here, for instance, Winnie second guesses the thoughts of the audience members as she talks to a passer-by:

“Winnie:…What’s she doing? He says – What’s the idea? He says – stuck up to her diddies in the bleeding ground – coarse fellow – What does it mean? He says – what’s it meant to mean – and so on.” (Beckett, 1961: 32)

Here Beckett deconstructs the very essence of the performance itself, exposing the bewildered reaction of the audience to his own drama. In a Postmodern dissolution of identity boundaries, the performer here becomes playwright, audience, character and actor as not only are the thoughts of the character exposed but so too the thoughts of the audience. This is not the only deconstruction of performance Beckett employs in the play. We see, for instance, the questioning of dramatic convention; Happy Days is, for all intents, a monologue but it features two characters, it is about the movement of time but, ironically, the main actor is static throughout and although it is primarily a play about words and not actions it is peppered with pauses and space. All factors that point to both plays as being as much rooted in Postmodernism as Modernism.

We have touched upon it already but the overriding sense in both Waiting for Godot and Happy Days is the search and struggle for identity and this also, as we shall see, has a marked impact on the performance of the play and what it means regarding the audience/actor dialectic.

The social background to Happy Days was described, in an affective way by Harold Clurman in an early review:

“Beckett is the poet of a morally stagnant society. In this society fear, dismay and a sort of a stunned absent-mindedness prevail in the dark of our consciousness, while a flashy, noisy, bumptious, thick-headed complacency flourishes in the open.” (Clurman, 1998: 235)

It is against this backdrop that the characters in the play struggle to maintain their scant identities. Even before the action begins we are made witness to the difficulties in establishing an individual existence as the characters’, names, Winnie and Willie, straightway blur their respective personal boundaries. We see this also to a greater extent in Waiting for Godot, as Gogo, Pozzo and Godot, combine to form a linguistic homogeneity that suggests a group rather than an individual identity.

The mise en scene of Happy Days is part Eliotesque wasteland:

“Expanse of scorched grass rising centre to low mound. Gentle slopes downto front and either of stage. Back an abrupter fall to stage level” (Beckett, 1961: 9)

part Postmodern irony, as the backdrop reveals itself to be a self conscious trompe-l’oeil that represents “unbroken plain and sky receding to meet in far distance.” (Beckett, 1961: 9). Within this, Winnie literally stands as part of the scenery, only half visible that is, in itself, a symbolic representation of both time passing and the extent that she has already lost a great deal of her personal identity.

As I have already hinted at, Winnie deconstructs the notion of movement and stasis; on a psychological level she moves quickly between times as in this passage where she and us are taken back into her personal history prompted by the news of a death of a friend:

“Winnie: Charlie Hunter! (Pause) I close my eyes – (she takes off spectacles and does s, hot in one hand, spectacles in other, Willie turns page) – and am sitting on his knees again, in the back garden at Borough Green, under the horse-beech.” (Beckett, 1961: 14)

Physically however she is literally trapped, unable to move or stop the flowing of time swallowing her completely. Her identity becomes fashioned by her memories as at first, in the initial Act, they form a reasonable homogeneity and then, in Act Two become more and more diffuse, more and more fractured until by the end of the play she exists as merely snapshots of a life that has been:

“Winnie: Win! (pause)Oh this is a happy days, this will have been another happy day! (Pause) After all (Pause) So far.
Pause. She hums tentatively beginning of song, then sings softly, musical box tune.” (Beckett, 1961: 47)

As John Pilling suggests in his study of Samuel Beckett (1976: 85), the playwright twins the enormity of the search for identity in an alienating world with the minutiae of everyday living, as Winnie spends a great deal of the play’s time conducting worthless searches for toothbrushes, or lipsticks or many of the other incidental objects of existence.

Ultimately, her search for a personal identity is proved fruitless as she becomes subsumed in that which surrounds her, perhaps a particularly twentieth century vision of the struggle of the personal psychology in the face of the modern city. Waiting for Godot, I think, concerns itself with similar themes and similar characters.

Martin Esslin characterised Beckett’s Waiting for Godot as “concerned with the hope of salvation through the workings of grace” (Esslin, 1968: 55) and we can see that is certainly a major thread in the play. However, we can also note that it concerns itself not with a general salvation but with a very a personal one, with each character desperately searching for their own identity amid the alienation and ennui of the surrounding environment. Most of the play’s linguistic rhythm arises out of the characters’ attempt to assert their own identity in the face of the others:

“Vladimir: Charming evening we’re having.
Estragon: Unforgettable.
Vladimir: And its not over.
Estragon: Apparently not.
Vladimir: Its only beginning.
Estragon: Its awful.
Vladimir: Its worse than being in the theatre.” (Beckett, 1955: 34)

The tooing and froing of the dialogue here is a perfect example of this point, with neither Vladimir nor Estragon willing to surrender themselves to the other. The same can be seen in a more graphic sense with the Pozzo/Lucky relationship that is, at its heart a Hegelian dialectic of the master and slave, with each party attempting (and failing) to break away from the other.

In the comic scene towards the end of the play that depicts Vladimir and Estragon exchanging symbolic identities in the form of their hats (Beckett, 1961: 71-72) we can note Beckett’s observation on the ironies of Postmodern life:

“Vladimir takes puts on Lucky’s hat in place of his own which he hands to Estragon. Estragon takes Vladimir’s hat. Vladimir adjusts Lucky’s hat on his head. Estragon hands Vladimir’s hat back to Vladimir who takes it and hands it back to Estragon who takes it and hands it back to Vladimir who takes it and throws it down.” (Beckett, 1955: 72)

The absurdity of this scene arises from the fact that each hat is the same, or at least very similar, so that it makes very little difference which hat ends up on which head. This is, I think, symbolic of the larger treatment of identity within the play; with the playwright suggesting the absurdity of the search for personal individuation. Are not identities much like hats, asks Beckett, remarkably the same?

If Happy Days is a study of the search for identity under the crushing weight of time passing, Waiting for Godot is the search for identity within the lightness of forgetfulness. Time in the latter is meaningless, it passes with no affect in fact Estragon can not even remember the events of the day before. Within this, the characters desperately cling to the remnants of their identities whether that be in the form of an oppressive relationship to another, an item of clothing or the feint hope of someone who will never arrive.

We can see then that the treatment of identity within Beckett’s two major plays mirrors the questions arising out of Postmodernism, questions that concern the nature of identity and the Self. For Postmodern theorists like Judith Butler (1999) and Michel Foucault (1990) the Self is a performative construct, both given to us by society and adopted as a mask and we note some of this sense in Beckett. Ultimately, then, Beckett’s work deconstructs the very notion of a theatrical performance, suggesting that this is merely one of a number of performances that occurs at any one time.

The relationship, then, between the audience and the actor changes from one of passivity to one of dialogue as the former is exposed as relying as much on performance as the latter. This can be seen to be a reflection of Antonin Artaud’s assertions on the Theatre of Cruelty in his second manifesto:

“…just as there are to be no empty spatial areas, there must be no let up, no vacuum in the audience’s mind or sensitivity. That is to say there will be no distinct divisions, no gap between life and theatre.” (Artaud, 1985: 84)

Beckett’s work says as much about the identities of the audience as the characters and as much about the performative nature of the wider society as the performance of the theatre.

References

Artaud, Antonin (1985), The Theatre and its Double, (London: John Calder)
Beckett, Samuel (1961), Happy Days, (London: Faber and Faber)
Beckett, Samuel (1955), Waiting for Godot, (London: Faber and Faber)
Begam, Richard (1996), Samuel Beckett and the End of Modernity, (Stanford: Stanford University Press)
Bradbury, Malcolm and McFarlane, James (eds) (1991), Modernism: A Guide to European Literature 1890-1930, (London: Penguin)
Butler, Judith (1999), Gender Trouble, (London: Taylor and Francis)
Cormier, Ramona and Pallister, Janis (1998), “En Attendent Godot: Tragedy or Comedy?”, published in Culotta Andonian, Cathleen (ed), The Critical Responses to Samuel Beckett, (London: Greenwood Press)
Clurman, Harold (1998), “Happy Days: Review”, published in Culotta Andonian, Cathleen (ed), The Critical Responses to Samuel Beckett, (London: Greenwood Press)
Eagleton, Terry (1992), Literary Theory: An Introduction, (London: Blackwell)
Esslin, Martin (1968), The Theatre of the Absurd, (London: Pelican)
Foucault, Michel (1990), The History of Sexuality: Volume 1, (London: Penguin)
Green, Keith and LeBihan (1996), Critical Theory and Practice: A Coursebook, (London: Routledge)
Hartley, Lodwick and Ladu, Arthur (1948), Patterns in Modern Drama, (London: Prentice Hill)
Jameson, Fredric (1991), Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, (London: Duke University)
Kenner, Hugh (1973), A Reader’s Guide to Samuel Beckett, (London: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux)
Knowlson, James (1996), Dammed to Fame: The Life of Samuel Beckett, (London: Bloomsbury)
Lyotard, Jean Francois (1991), “The Postmodern Condition”, published in Jenkins, Keith (ed), The Postmodern History Reader, (London: Routledge)
Pilling, John (1976), Samuel Beckett, (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul)
Robertson, Pamela (1996), Guilty Pleasures: Feminist Camp from Mae West to Madonna, (London: Duke University)
Schechner, Richard (1988), Performance Theory, (London: Routledge)

An analysis of the life and works of the choreographers Jerome Robbins and Agnes de Mille and therole of dance in musical theatre

Agnes de Mille and Jerome Robbins worked in musical theatre in what is widely regarded to be the industry’s Golden Era. Many would say that it was their innovative approach to choreography in musical theatre that brought an energy and a dynamism to the musical, accounting for its surge in popularity. It is certainly true that they did much to elevate the role of dance in musical theatre, which was previously largely merely as an accessory to the main dramatic event; pretty women with bare flesh parading around the stage. Robbins and De Mille regarded dance as a serious art form and strove to portray it as such on the stage.

Musical theatre, as we know it today, did not come into being until the twentieth century, but song and dance have been a part of theatre for thousands ofyears. From as early as the 5^th century BC the Ancient Greeks employed music and dance in many of their comedies and tragedies to entertain the public. The Romans carried on this tradition from the 3^rdcentury BC, with many plays by Plautus including song and dance. They invented the first tap shoes by attaching metal plates to their shoes so that the entire audience, who would sit in a colossal open-air theatre, could hear the dancesteps (1). In the Middle Ages travelling minstrels and troupes of actors, dancers and singers performed popular songs and slapstick comedy. The religious dramas of the 12^th and 13^th centuries also included liturgical songs, although no dancing. In the French court of the Renaissance Louis XIV insisted that song and dance be incorporated into his entertainments.

In America, some of the first dramatic roles to be performed by dancers were in melodrama, which is unsurprising considering the highly stylised movement of melodramatic actors lends itself more to dance than to anything else. Mlle Celeste, who was later to become one of the most famous dancers of the nineteenth century, was first billed in America as the celebrated melodramatic actress (2). Across the nineteenth century, circuses, showboats and pantomimes all included dance in some form. Stars such as Mlle Celeste and Fanny Essler helped create a popular demand for dance and companies began to include more elaborate dances in their evening’s bill. Melodrama and pantomimes would often incorporate complex ballets into their entertainments. In England the most popular form of entertainment for the working- and middle-classes was the music hall, which staged vaudeville entertainment in the way of singers, dancers and speciality acts. Vaudeville was also extremely popular in America in the nineteenth century, and by the 1890s dance acts were ever more in demand. Dances were still, however, largely performed in between the acts of the main production or before the end-piece to fill the gaps. The role of dance in the theatre at that time was limited mainly to entr’actes. They existed purely to appease the audience, to show piece a star, or to titillate predominantly male audiences with allowing spectacle of female limbs in tights(3). Jack Cole referred to the dances and the dancers in theatre at this timeas wallpaper (4).

It wasn’t really until the 1930s that dance began to be an important part of the musical. George Balanchine, who trained at the Russian Imperial Ballet School before working with Serge Diaghilev’s Ballets Russes, regarded dance as a legitimate and important component in musical theatre. He believed dance to be the greatest expressive medium and first introduced ballet onto the popular musical stage with Ziegfeld Follies. Dancers in the theatre began to be taken seriously, rather than regarded merely as pretty girls baring a lot of leg; Into a choreographic world that was a mA©lange of decorative movement, legs and taps,Balanchine opened the door and ballet leapt on to the popular musical stage,directed by a supreme artist (5). Whereas previously only routines had been performed on the theatrical stage, Balanchine choreographed dances.He refused for his dances to be merely bite-size slices of entertainment sandwiched between the main attraction and insisted that they be part of the plot, integrated seamlessly into the action. For the first time in a musical the dances in Balanchine’s On Your Toes actually helped to advance the plot. When, in 1982, On Your Toes returned to Broadway, Carol Lawson of the New York Times wrote;

On YourToes was a turning point in the history of musical comedy, for Mr.Balanchine’s dances were more than mere interludes. Instead they served as essential aspects of the plot, and were thoroughly integrated parts of the production.(6)

Balanchine paved the way for AgnesDe Mille and Jerome Robbins to totally change the dynamics of dance in musical theatre, and thereby in musicals has a whole. De Mille introduced the concept of using dance as a vehicle for story-telling and Robbins transformed the role of choreographer in a musical to being director of the entire show, making dance the driving force.

Agnes De Mille

Asa child, although she came from a theatrical family, De Mille was not permitted formal dance training, but would improvise pieces to perform to guests and nightly improvised to the accompaniment of her mother on the Orchestrelle (7).She would practice her melodramatic acting skills every night before performing flexibility exercises to limber up her body in readiness for the stage. When in Hollywood with her family her true dancer’s instinct became evident as she fell in love with the wide open spaces of the country surrounding the town;this would be a recurring theme in her later choreography. In her autobiography, Dance to the Piper, she exclaimed;

The descendinggrassy slopes filled me with a passion to run, to roll in delirium, to wreck

mybody on the earth. Space means this to a dancer – or to a child! The descentthrough

theair, the finding of earth-footage, the embracing and struggle with thefundamental

ground.These are to a dancer what strong scents are to an animal. (8)

Theday De Mille first watched Anna Pavlova perform only increased her desire tobecome a dancer. She was enthralled, awed, and dumbstruck, and describes thatmoment with passion and gusto (9). It was this that encouraged de Mille toorganise her first dance show with a group of other girls but she was still notallowed dance lessons and became frustrated with the limited dancing she coulddo. It wasn’t until her sister was advised by an orthopaedist to start balletdancing that she too was permitted to attend the Theodore Kosloff School ofImperial Russian Ballet. Whilst there she learnt technique and poise andtrained her body into that of a dancer’s. She worked feverishly hard, perhapseven more so because her parents would not allow her to have lessons more thantwice a week, leaving her lagging behind the rest of the class. She resortedto practicing in her mother’s bathroom, where she had installed a barre for her.

Bythe time De Mille had finished high school however, she had grown to loath therigours of daily practice and decided to abandon her classes and her solitarypractices and go to college. During her time at UCLA De Mille occasionallystaged dances for student rallies and towards the end of her college life shestarted exercising with the mind to getting back up on her points. She decidedto dance professionally after meeting Douglass Montgomery, who convinced herthat she could. Things were never going to be easy for her though. She movedto New York at a time when dancers [were] hired on the sheen of the stockingand the wink of their agent, and when the few dance companies that existed onBroadway were small and dedicated to the personal exploitation of some star(10). I have mentioned earlier the limited opportunities a dancer had in thistime, where no ‘pure’ ballet was being performed in either music shows ormoving picture shows and there was no such word as ‘choreography’. Whenrehearsing for a concert of her own choreography Montgomery taught De Mille howto act through her dancing; he taught me that every gesture must have someexplicit meaning (11). She decided to perform character studies whereby thedancing revealed personality and was natural in the course of the story. Rightfrom the start she wanted to employ dance as more than light entertainment, asa vital story-telling vehicle. These first attempts, being only charactersketches, were quite light by nature, and the style was folk rather thanballet, but it was different to what anybody else had done on the stage before.When she performed some of these at a concert she was received well but whenshe auditioned for Charles Cochran and Noel Coward they told her that she wasmore suited to the concert hall, and that she would never make it in thetheatre.

Aftertouring with Adolph Bolm, she was commissioned as a dancer-choreographer on ChristopherMorley’s revival of The Black Crook but the drunken, noisy audience madeher hand her notice in. It was in the thirties that the dance scene in NewYork began to stir. Every Sunday a couple of dance concerts were given, withsoloists experimenting with every dance form imaginable. De Mille remembers,we were out remodel our entire craft there were no rules we struck sparksfrom one another (12). For five years De Mille taught herself to choreograph,but she was trying to learn to compose dances, not pantomimes, nor dramaticstories, nor character studies, but planned sequences of sustained movementwhich would be original and compelling (13). She viewed dance as a seriousart form and wanted to choreograph dances that would present it as such, butwith barely any formal training behind her she found this very difficult.After disastrously choreographing Flying Colours De Mille and her mothermoved to London where, as in New York, she choreographed and danced in her ownrecitals to critical acclaim but with no financial gain. At one recital though,Marie Rambert and Arnold Haskell were amongst the audience and were impressedenough to ask her to stay in London to continue her recitals and be taught atThe Ballet Club.

Itwas at The Ballet Club that De Mille met Anthony Tudor and Fredrick Ashton,both of whom would go on to become important choreographers and who, with her,would revolutionise the dance world. In 1933 she choreographed the dances forCharles B. Cochran’s Nymph Errant in London but during the thirties DeMille returned to America several times, dancing in her uncle’s production of Cleopatrain 1934 and choreographing Irving Thalburg’s film-version of Romeo andJuliet. On the latter project she had to endure her dances being cut topieces as the camera cut out most of the group work and showed only snippets ofthe rest. The custom at the time was not to show a whole dance but to providelight entertainment with cuttings of dances.

OnHooray for What De Mille came up against the type of men that insisteddancers were hired for their sex appeal and that dances were performed to sellsex. These were the sort of men that were keeping dance from becoming aserious, important art form and that issued it with only a decorative functionin theatre and films. The management wanted the girls exposed as much aspossible, face front always, bosom bared, legs just visible to the waist, DeMille recalls (14). As she refused to conform exactly, wanting her owncreative input, she was fired with one word, before her choreography was rippedto shreds. Without the security of Equity many of the dancers and actors werefired without warning as the Business Manager exacted his vision of abosoms-and-legs chorus-line extravaganza. At this time on Broadway dances, attheir best, were slick and well-formed, but with no great moments of dramaticrevelation (15). When De Mille returned to Broadway some years later she wasto dramatically change this notion.

In1940 Ballet Theatre was formed and De Mille was invited to become one of thechoreographers, on the understanding that she was not to dance herself. It wasa highly creative time for De Mille and she was able to work with some of thefinest dancers and choreographers of the time. It was at Ballet Theatre thatDe Mille created her first ballet, Black Ritual, a controversial piecewith black dancers; the first time this had ever been attempted by a seriousballet company. Having had only brief and frenzied flurries with commercialtroupes of mixed prostitutes and chorus dancers she had not had the experienceof setting a schedule of choreographing and rehearsing and was extremelynervous. Her dancers did not help matters by being consistently late and byarriving unprepared. The ballet was not received well but shortly after shewas hired by a successful booking manager for a national tour. De Mille andher dancers prepared for the tour through blood, sweat and tears but it was atotal success, and De Mille discovered something vital: although the managersmay not, the public liked and appreciated her work.

Notlong after returning to New York, De Mille was asked by Ballet Theatre tocreate Three Virgins and a Devil, which was a huge hit and dA©buted theyoung Jerome Robbins. In 1942 she was commissioned to create a ballet for theBallet Russe de Monte Carlo. She extended a piece she had partly choreographedyears earlier, and Rodeo was the result. The ballet formed the basisfor a uniquely American dance style, using folk themes, tap dance andenergetic, fast-paced movements, capturing the essence of a cowboy’s manner.Teaching male dancers who were used to the precision and elegance of balletproved to be difficult so De Mille resorted to acting lessons to help herdancers find their characters. She wanted them to be cowboys; shewanted them to communicate dramatic meaning. Come opening night they wereprepared and the audience adored them. De Mille had created an entirely newand exciting dance style; it was the first of its kind, and the moment wasquick with birth (16). De Mille successfully turned ballet into musicalcomedy, and gave the form real energy and gusto, with movements never beforeseen in this very precise of dance forms.

Wehad breached the bulwarks De Mille exclaims in Dance to the Piper (17).She, with a few choreographers before her, had created a new tradition, onewith a different root impulse to traditional ballet. She asserts that tocreate a style that truly differs from ballet one must base that style onanother technique. De Mille integrated folk dances into her work, withoutlowering the performances to comedy caricatures. Her work, like that of fellowchoreographer Anthony Tudor, conveyed theatrical meaning through dance steps;the line between actor and dancer was blurred. Rather than dancers usingtraditional technique and performing well-known steps, where the human bodiesare used merely as units of design, grouped, lumped, and directed intopredetermined masses, De Mille strove for originality and dramaticcommunication in her choreography. She writes of Tudor’s work;

Tudordeveloped the story-telling quality of his choreography to such a degree thateach gesture, formed out of the emotional components of the moment, is almostas explicit as though the dancers spoke. The new choreography does not arrangeold steps into new patterns; the emotion evolves steps, gestures, and rhythms. (18)

Reading De Mille’sexplanation of her method for creating dance in Dance to the Piper, oneis reminded of a director beginning to stage a play. She spends much time oncharacterisation; finding the right gestures and stance for each character actsas a stimulus for the choreographic process (19). De Mille did not createimpersonal dancers but characters acting out, through dance, a story.

Fromthe success of Rodeo, as well as for its all-American style and theme,De Mille was asked by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein to choreographdances for their new production, Oklahoma! De Mille knew the projectwas going to be difficult as, unlike ballet where the choreographer is themaster and ruler of the show, many elements other than dance contribute to formmusical theatre. The performers must take direction from the director, thecomposer, the author of the book, and the producer. The dance director gotlittle say in the arrangement. Singing and acting were the main components inmusical theatre at the time; dance was merely for decoration. When casting thedancers, De Mille insisted on talent and personality, Rodgers wanted faces,although his idea of a face had frequently to do with the character in it,but Mamoulian, the director, wanted slim legs above all (20). It was assumedthat the public, also, were far more interested in the singing and the dramathan the dancing. The numbers of dances were therefore limited. De Milleinsisted, however, that every dancer was hired for just one reason – that heor she was the best available performer for the role (21). She did not cavein to the whim of the director; she wanted her dancers to be seriousprofessionals, and Rodgers agreed. Once, during rehearsals, a note was playedout of tune and one of the chorus’ faces winced with pain, but it was notannoyance or amusement, it was agonised concern. When Rodgers saw herexpression – one he had never seen cross a chorus girl’s face – he realisedthat responsible artists had entered the ranks (22). The chorus dancers wereno longer pretty faces, good legs but nothing between the ears; everyperformer, including the dancers, knew their craft. Another difficulty DeMille would have was that the dances would have to be created from the impetusof the book, they would have to build the author’s line and develop his action(23), rather than being created from scratch from characters developed by her.De Mille was also faced with the problem of swiftly travelling from dialogue,to song, to dance, and back to dialogue again without it looking farcical. Asthe choreographer she was going to have to learn surgery, to graft and splice(23).

DeMille achieved all this and more. She succeeded in elevating her role aschoreographer to that of equal importance with the playwright, the composer andthe lyricist, and she did what no choreographer had successfully done before -she integrated the ballets into the story. Her dancers were not merelydecoration but characters, and she worked with them to achieve depth ofcharacter, motivation and emotion. Dancers could no longer project theirpersonal response to a piece of music. They needed to move as the charactersthey were portraying. Their reactions, their facial expressions, all needed tofurther the audience’s understanding of their character. This requiredin-depth script readings and analysis of character motivations, just as adirector would insist on for his or her actors. De Mille realised that this canreally help the dancer. Whereas in ballet the dancer has to rely on what theyfeel to give the dance energy and dynamism, they now had the singing and actingto give them background and motivation to help give their dancing, as thesecharacters, expressive movement (24). If the role of dance in Oklahoma!was to communicate dramatic meaning to the audience, and to further the plot,the dancer had to become the character, and know it inside-out.

AsDe Mille herself notes, it was Anthony Tudor who first shocked audiences intoviewing a ballet dancer as an individual capable of dramatic communicationthrough her body, by clothing them in long Edwardian dresses (25). No longerwas the ballet dancer the stylised, typical image that made it acceptable forwomen to bare their legs and arms and wrap their limbs around a man. She wasnow familiar; like their mothers and aunties. They could now communicate humantruths and take part in the telling of a story. Dressed as the characters of aSouth-western town, rather than tights and a tutu, the audience was able to seethe dancers as humans with a story to tell.

Thecrowning glory of De Mille’s choreography on Oklahoma! was without doubtthe dream-ballet which occurs at the end of Act 1. With this De Milleexperimented with something entirely new in musical theatre, and for many yearsto come barely a musical was made without it containing a dream ballet. Inthis extended ballet Laurie acts out her quandary through dance; a highlyimaginative method of moving the story forward. Dance was inextricably boundto the plot of the musical. Whereas in previous musicals dance was merely aside entertainment and could be cut without the story losing any of itsmeaning, one could not take the dream ballet out of Oklahoma! withoutruining the plot. By using dance the thoughts and feelings in the mind and theheart of Laurie could be conveyed and explored far more effectively thanthrough straight dialogue. The dances were intended to strengthen theaudience’s understanding of the characters and further the plot, as well ascomplement the lyrics and the dialogue, and it worked. Now, as well as singingand acting, dancing added to the dramatic impact of the musical on theaudience.

AsKislan notes, dance also adds to the important theme of open space in Oklahoma.It is the guiding metaphor for the promise of the American Dream and thelimitless opportunities for the ‘brand new state’ the lovers are destined tolive in (26). The audience is always aware of the physical space on stage asthe dancers never seem crowded, no matter how many occupy the space. In thedream ballet Curly lifts Laurie up in the air, reaching for the sky, and theballetic style danced in constantly opens the body up, extending arms and legsto give the impression of limitless space. In Dance to the Piper DeMille writes of the sense of space ballet dancers work with; Every joint andsinew is pulled long, the arms are wide and free the stretching up and out,the liberating jump, the racing over and away from the earth (27). Thefeeling of space conveyed on stage through dance complements the songs, withlyrics such as plenty of room to swing a rope/plenty of heart and plenty ofhope (28).

Atlast dance as more than an accessory, but as a serious art form, had arrivedonto the popular stage, and the audience were roaring. They were howling.People hadn’t seen girls and boys dance like this in so long. Of course, theyhad been dancing like this, but not just where this audience could see them(29). Perhaps the most important accomplishment for dance in Oklahoma!was that De Mille was a choreographer on the show, not a dance director. Thedifference being that dance directors worked for audience approval;choreographers work for audience enlightenment (30). Her dances were integralto the story – they added and enlightened rather than decorated. This was anew role for dance in musical theatre.

DeMille went on to choreograph the dances for many more Broadway musicals in the1940s and 1950s, including One Touch of Venus in 1943, Carousel in 1945, Brigadoon in1947, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes in 1949, and Paint Your Wagon in1951. Tally-Ho(1944) and FallRiver Legend (1948) provided her with the opportunity to further herrevolutionary style. She continued to cast dancers that were skilled at projectingcharacter as well as performing the correct steps. Kislan records that dancersthat worked with De Mille have testified to her fantastic ability to sense eventhe smallest dramatic quality in their dancing, and, together, manage to set itfree and integrate it into the choreography so that the dance is alwaysexpressive of the drama (31).

De Mille was still responsible to the director, the lyricist andthe author of the book though. Her choreography had to fit the other elementsof the musical, and dance was often of secondary importance to those elements.Choreographers such as Jerome Robbins were to change the role of thechoreographer, and thus the role of dance in musical theatre, forever. Banishedwas the mindless aesthetics that enslaved dance to the colossal, opulent, andlavish needs of the producer, the star, or the specialty act (32). Dance wasto be given the highest status of the production. The choreographer was torule the show. Indeed, the choreographer would no longer be merely the dancecreator, but the director-choreographer; the dance-director follows, thechoreographer adapts, but the director-choreographer leads (32). JeromeRobbins was a pioneer of this change in status for the role of dance in musicaltheatre.

Jerome Robbins

Robbinswas born into a devoutly Jewish family in 1918, but resented being Jewish, withits conservatism and old ways. His large family, however, provided him withmany theatrical contacts and influences. His uncle, Jack Silverman, startedout as a ballroom dancer with the two men he was living with, Bing Crosby andGeorge Raft. Edward G. Robinson was also related, and another of Robbins’uncles, Daniel Davenport, owned a chain of vaudeville and burlesque theatres.Davenport’s father and his brother performed on the vaudeville circuit underthe name of the Davenport Brothers, staging acrobatic acts. It is to this partof the family that Robbins owes his zest for vaudeville-comedy.

Robbins’parents ensured that both their children were educated in the arts, and this iswhere Jerome shone. He saw it as an escape route, a way by which he could haveaccess to the possibilities which lay beyond his community; When I was a childart seemed like a tunnel to me. At the end of that tunnel, I could see lightwhere the world opened up, waiting for me (33). Both he and his sister,Sonia, were strongly encouraged by their mother to aspire to the stage. Soniatook dance lessons and Jerome music lessons, and by the time he was three and ahalf he was composing pieces and giving recitals on the piano. Indeed, heexcelled in anything creative that he tried, but admitted that this wasbecause, the only world that was really exciting for me was the world in whichI could make believe that things were not the way they were (33). The worldof musical theatre was therefore the perfect world for him, later, to live in.

Robbinshad to keep his love of dance a secret from his parents, especially his father,and his school friends, who were all into sports. As his sister danced her wayinto the spotlight Jerome was left practicing in private, often with the helpof Sonia. At the Weehawken schools he attended Robbins performed in manyschool plays, but it was at his summer camps that he fell in love with Gilbertand Sullivan musicals, and played the comic leads in HMS Pinafore, TheMikado, and Pirates of Penzance. Jerome’s knack for comedy was madeevident through his performances in these roles. A fellow camper latercommented, Jerry had a tremendous sense of humour in everything he did (34).He still kept his dancing a secret though. At one parent’s day at the camphowever, Robbins performed a dance on the table-tennis table and, as anothercamper remembers, had the adults in tears. Furthermore, This was a bigaudience and he was completely uninhibited (34).

Robbinseventually took dance lessons with Sonia’s dance teacher in modern dance, theform that was the emerging trend in the Depression years of the 1930s, whenpeople wanted a dance form that could more readily express the social realismsof the time than could ballet. Jerome witnessed many pioneering greats of thedance stage, such as Martha Graham, Charles Weidman, and Doris Humphrey, but in1932 he was to meet the man he would later call his ‘guru’, Gluck Sandor (35).Sandor directed, choreographed and danced in many of the productions staged atthe Dance Centre, at which Sonia danced. He worked in vaudeville and onBroadway in the 1920s and was a tremendously expressive dancer, manipulatingevery gesture for dramatic effect, which was to a have profound influence onRobbins’ future work. As Robbins himself has cited, We dancers were taught toperform with the concentration of an actor (36). Anzia Kubicek, a dancer,remembers that Sandor, preferred to do things with a story line hisimagination would just go a mile a minute, and he worked with the bodies he hadto work with, which were sometimes very limited (37). Robbins would work withboth principles in his choreography, starting with a story from which hisdancers could develop their characters, and therefore their movements.

Aftergraduating from Woodrow Wilson High School in 1935 Robbins entered New YorkUniversity to study Chemistry, but in his second year his father’s corsetbusiness was in danger of going bankrupt and he could no longer fullyfinancially support Jerome’s education. Jerome was by this point desperate todrop out and follow his dream of becoming a professional dancer and, throughhis sister, he managed to successfully audition for an apprenticeship withSandor’s company. With the help of Sandor, Jerome convinced his parents tolet him try to make it as dancer, and he left the university. Sandor persuadedan unconvinced Robbins to concentrate on ballet rather than modern dance but itwasn’t until he saw Alexandra Danilova perform with the Ballet Russes that Robbinsagreed that ballet held many opportunities for him. Jerome progressed quicklyand Sandor recognised him as a natural dancer, recalling years later;

Oncehe saw something, he could do it backward. Before I would do a thing he had it.He could anticipate what was to come. He was sensitive and he was musical. (38)

In1937 Robbins secured his first part in The Brothers Ashkenazi, whichintensified his passion for the theatre. Throughout its run he would practiceon the barre, much to the bewilderment of the Yiddish cast of the play. Hisfellow performers recall him constantly dancing (39). After two years trainingat the Dance Centre, and having procured roles in various plays, Robbins leftthe company in search of more commercial work. He found work in the chorus ofa number of musicals which, in the thirties, were largely comic. AlthoughRobbins went on to choreograph and dance in such musicals, he also wanted totake the medium further, and use musical theatre as a vehicle for explorationinto the human psyche. He would later say, Musicals tend to be facetious. Noone has ever used them as a medium to depict deep personal struggle, and Ithink this can be done (40). He would go on to do just that.

Aswell as his brief encounters with Broadway, in the summer of 1937 Robbins startedworking as part of the entertainment staff at Camp Tamiment, a summer job hewould have for five years. The resort played host to many up-and-comingtalents, such as Danny Kaye, Imogene Coca, and Carol Channing. It was avirtual breeding ground for musicians, comedians, singers and dancers. Robbinschoreographed and danced in many of the performances held in the social hall.It was a very creative atmosphere, with new productions performed every week.Max Lieberman, director of the entertainment program at Tamiment, strove forBroadway-quality pieces, and with only a week to create and rehearse each one,ideas had to flow. Robbins’ work was of two extremes; burlesque sketches onthe one hand and socially serious dramatic dances such as Strange Fruit andDeath of a Loyalist on the other. Some of his pieces were performed atthe 92^nd Street YMHA, under the auspices of the Theatre ArtsCommittee, as well as in the Straw Hat Revue, which Tamiment opened onBroadway in 1939. The revue was an amalgamation of many of the sketchesperformed at that summer’s camp but, due to the sensitive atmosphere followingthe outbreak of war in Europe, they were only allowed to include the comedysketches. Robbins suffered a huge blow to his ego when Jerome Andrews, who hadbeen brought in by the backers to supervise the dances, was given sole crediton the billing for the choreography. It did however give him a determinationto be wholly in charge of

After reading and researching into Raymond William’s quotation, this essay will produce the main outlines of the naturalistic movement within Theatre and how important it is in modern day society. The main outlines discussed in this essay are the social and technological change after the Restoration period, what is the content of naturalistic plays, the audience’s response to naturalism and its future development and dominance within society today. At the end of the nineteenth centaury, naturalism became a revolt against previous conventions of theatre, and it strived to destroy everything the world thought was true; naturalism was the revolution of man. However, prior to this was both the Renaissance and Restoration periods; these both had a considerable impact on theatre. This essay will argue that without these generations of theatre, Naturalism could not of developed.

The Renaissance period held Elizabethan Theatre, which composed of the most famous playwright even today, William Shakespeare however considered to being Shakespeare’s superior was Christopher Marlowe who was another successful playwright within the sixteenth centaury. The early plays of this period were performed almost anywhere, mainly courtyards and Inns. During the end of the sixteenth century, performances eventually advanced into being presented in established Theatres, as we know them today; the most famous of these early buildings being the Globe:

“This entailed daytime performances without lights or a stage curtain and very few, if any, props, thought the actors were dressed in rich costumes. There were no scene changes in the modern sense and the action moved fluidly from one scene to the next without an apparent break.” (The Routledge history of literature in English: Britain and Ireland, 2001, p67)

This contrasts competently to the major outlines of the naturalism movement, without the technological change of lighting through the nineteenth century naturalistic theatre would not have been possible to convey on stage. Before gas lighting and the limelight, the only light used with indoor theatres was candlelight, however many performances were presented outdoors in the daylight. Using only candlelight indoors would make it impossible to portray naturalism on stage. Another clear difference to where theatrical naturalism progressed from Renaissance theatre is through scenery and props. The Elizabethan’s used as little props as possible and relied on backdrops to convey a sense of place, however naturalistic theatre moved from backdrops to three-dimensional scenery and highlighted props as being highly important to make the space look real and lived in:

“August Strindberg, in his preface to Miss Julie, complained of canvas walls that shook when doors were slammed, and painted pots and pans on the walls instead of real ones.” (The Cambridge guide to Theatre, 1995, p1096)

Thus suggesting that when the curtains opened to these detailed naturalistic sets Strindberg wanted a reaction to occur from the middle class audience as it reflects their homes; the use of canvas’ within naturalistic performances wouldn’t have given the audience anything to relate to.

Another major contribution to the movement of Naturalism is the role of women. During the Renaissance period, it was unheard of for a woman to perform professionally on stage alongside men; young adolescent men would perform women’s roles. Conversely, during the late seventeenth century, the beginning of the Restoration Period, Women began to act professionally in Theatres; without women performing on stage, naturalism could not have taken place.

Another contrast before naturalism, is the restoration’s Pantomime’s and Melodrama’s, these two genres are both established by stereotypical characters with exaggerated emotions. Pantomimes were hugely associated with cross-dressing and stock characters, singing songs and breaking down the fourth wall by talking to the audience. Melodramas were publicly taken more seriously although they to included stock characters and songs; naturalism advances away from these exaggerated performances and developed characters on stage. Characters were becoming more naturalistic, psychologically complex and were people the middle class audience could relate.

However, it was not only the transition through the Renaissance and Restoration period creating Naturalism, but the influence of science and scientists:

“Its origin owes much to Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution, based in turn on his theory of natural selection. Darwin created context that made naturalism – with its emphasis upon theories of heredity and environment – a convincing way to explain the nature of reality for the late nineteenth century.” (The Cambridge companion to American realism and naturalism: Howells to London, 1995, P47)

Science explains human behaviour and this is why Darwin’s evolutionary theories are a big influence on Naturalism; his theories determine someone’s character through social environment and heredity. Sigmund Freud was also another influence of Naturalism; his studies excogitate human psychological behaviour and how humans function. Karl Marx also had an input to the movement; his studies were the economical and industrial analysis on society. Without these theories characters could not have developed in Naturalistic plays being written as well as performed.

Naturalism became an atheistic revolt against previous theatre conventions; plays and performances contrasted from Renaissance and Restoration where they were solely devout, to being irreligious in the late nineteenth century. Naturalism sought to abolish what society believed and changed the revolution of man, society and morals. The four acknowledged playwrights who determined and developed theatrical naturalism are Henrik Isben, Anton Chekhov, August Strindberg and Emile Zola (Who was also a well established novelist in naturalistic literacy). Constantin Stanislavski helped intensify and direct these plays so the audience would encounter lifelike productions on stage. These distinguished playwrights composed scripts would consist of particular attributes. The first feature of these plays this essay is going to elaborate on is the use of contemporary issues within these naturalistic pieces such as contraception, women’s rights, adultery, and sexual diseases, the key issue however is female identity within society. One clear example of this feature exists in Strindberg’s preface to Miss Julie where he outlines his ideas for his play:

“The passionate character of her mother; the upbringing misguidedly inflicted on her by her father; her own character; and the suggestive effect of her fiance upon her weak and degenerated brain.” (Miss Julie, 2006, Preface Ixxxix)

The main theme of this play is the degeneration of women, and throughout the play, we see the different beliefs Miss Julie’s parents brought upon her upbringing and how they have torn her apart to being psychologically distracted. Her mother who was a highly obsessive feminist believing in equality between men and women and opposingly her father who brought her upon his own beliefs that women and men are not equal, that women are lower than men. Through the influence of Sigmund Freud and Darwin, Strindberg had a high interest in human psychology and evolutionary history; the scientific research on humans is another clear feature within naturalistic plays. Two relevant psychological paths are relevant to Miss Julie that are relevant to when Strindberg wrote this play, hysteria and feminine masochism. Women throughout this movement were being represented in a much different manner than during Restoration period; women became considered as sexually assertive and independent. Miss Julie is clearly both sexually assertive and independent to a certain extent but she is psychologically preoccupied. With this, it is apparent to say that all naturalistic pieces of theatre include psychologically complex characters, which the actors themselves are required to understand. The actors performing naturalistic plays would have researched through subtext and the text to find out who their characters are and how they can run the character through their own emotions. Stanislavski had an acknowledged impact of directing the actors through the Stanislavski system whilst producing naturalistic plays:

“While he himself was often at pains to demonstrate that his system was not limited to naturalistic plays, Stanislavski’s theory and practice clearly articulated a response to the development of naturalism as a major movement in Western drama.” (The purpose of playing: modern acting theories in perspective, 2006, p37)

Gordon expresses that Stanislavski’s theories linked and worked better with naturalism, and through his methods, he helped to influence the naturalism movement.

Another feature of naturalistic theatre is the detail of sets, each of the playwrights set out to mirroring the bourgeoisie audience; as noted earlier on in the essay, the sets were to be three-dimensional without the use of painted backcloths. The directions for how the set is to be on each scene is outlined with as much detail as possible within the scripts:

“A large kitchen, the roof and side walls of which are concealed by drapes and borders. The rear wall rises at an angle from the left; on it, to the left are two shelves with utensils of copper, iron and pewter.” (Miss Julie, 2006, p3)

It is clear to see from the beginning of a very long detailed extract on the stage setting that everything has to be as it is written in the script. Strindberg would not have written such detailed descriptions of the scenery if he had no reason, and his reason was to represent and mirror the middle class audiences homes. He directly points to which materials should be used and how things are arranged on the stage; these props are meant to be there to make the life on stage as real as possible creating a tangible presence for the audience to watch.

The bourgeoisie audience were middle or merchant class people known for their ownership of capital and related culture; they benefited out of capitalism. Naturalistic plays sought to mirror the bourgeoisie’s lives and homes on stage; capitalism became scrutinized. These audiences contrasted highly to the classical audiences of the Renaissance and Restoration theatre, the audiences became silent, as conventionally they would be today; there was no more booing and hissing within the audiences. Another attribute to the social classes within theatrical naturalism was the lower working class and social outcasts becoming the protagonists thus moving away from the aristocrat protagonists of classical drama. This can be argued in Miss Julie, as there are two protagonists both from different social backgrounds, the two being Miss Julie who is an aristocrat and Jean who is a lower class servant; despite their social status’, they are both outcasts. When it comes to morality Jean is Julie’s superior as he is a man and she is a degenerated woman.

There is also a clear theme of family life; there was more emphasis on family than the wider society and characters were individualised and shown in their social and economical contexts. Miss Julie again clearly represents those naturalistic attributes and themes:

“There have been many family tragedies, and Julie is the Count’s only heir; the family name will die with her.” (Strindberg and the poetry of myth, 1982, p71)

This suggests that there is no males in this play that control family life, and the family’s fate is down to Julie. From this also arises the theme of female identity in society once again, and dramatises the deterioration of men as a dominating figure of society as well as their authority in the home.

There have been playwrights and practitioners who have criticized naturalism, one of the most famous being Bertolt Brecht who has formed the practice of epic theatre. He disagreed with the illusion of reality on stage and he disliked Stanislavski’s practices of staying close to the characters on stage in order to represent real life, and through his own theory, he believed in distancing the actor from the character using the verfremdungseffekt.

Even in today’s society, naturalism throughout the arts is still used vastly. Playwrights are still producing naturalistic performances, for stage, film and television. Raymond Williams quotation explores the main outlines of naturalism and through researching this I have discovered that before the naturalism movement there was minimal or no attempt to show a sense of place on stage or any development of character; Naturalism sought to explore what was real, real characters, real homes, real life.

I choose the musical Cabaret as it is a very powerful story, set in 1931 Berlin as the Nazis were rising to power; it focuses on different controversial issues of its time period. A number of issues are explored throughout the unfolding story of the cabaret such as sexual freedom, politics and anti-semitism

I feel audiences will be attracted to this Musical because of its powerful lyrics and storyline, in particular, the two love stories: Cliff Bradshaw and Sally Bowles; Fraulein Schneider and Herr Schultz, and the way the different characters are portrayed in the musical.

2. Text: What are the ideas the playwright/ librettist is trying to express? What is the relevance of the musical to contemporary Australian audiences?

The romantic love stories of two couples and the impact society has on their relationships: the story of a young English cabaret performer Sally Bowles and her relationship with the young American writer Cliff Bradshaw; and the other story of a German boarding house owner Fraulein Schneider and her elderly suitor Herr Schultz, a Jewish fruit vendor. Both relationships are doomed to failure.

The musical is very relevant to contemporary Australian audiences

Audience will want to see this production, not only does it have excellent music but it portrays some very strong controversial issue of the time period. These issues are still present in our time. It is also important that we as Australians are reminded of the historical past and what we can learn to fight intolerance.

3. Costume, Sets and Props: What requirements are there in each of these areas?

Costume

Emcee wearing a long black leather coat and boots, eyes highlighted with blue eye shadow, lips coloured blood red, bowtie attached to parachute harness

Each cabaret girl to portray a distinct personality need to sing, dance, act and play musical instrument, they do not have to look spectacular, look like scanky low class girls. Cabaret girls wear scant lacy undergarments with holes and ladders in the stockings. The figures onstage look ghoulish.

Sally Bowles various – refer to photograph images below:

Ernst Ludwig dressed in trench coat in Act 1, Scene 2, and brown suite, etc.

Cliff Bradshaw dressed in woollen suit and vest + tie.

Herr Schultz -see photograph images below

Fraulein Schneider -see photograph images below

Fraulein Kost -see photograph images below

Sets

Act 1 Scene 1: Cabaret Scene – Broken light bulbs surrounding stage – see model.

Act 1 Scene 2: Train Carriage – Front of stage

Act 1 Scene 3: Fraulein Schneider Boarding House – Backdrop of 3 doors – with light fixture dropped from ceiling, see model.

Act 1 Scene 4: Cabaret Scene – Kit Kat Klub – full stage

Act 1 Scene 5: Cabaret Scene – Kit Kat Klub near spiral staircase – Sally’s dressing room

Act 1 Scene 6: Cliff’s room -backdrop of 3 doors – left side of stage

Act 1 Scene 7: Cabaret Scene – full stage again, focus on kit kat klub

Act 1 Scene 8: Living Room of Fraulein Schneider’s boarding house – right side of stage

Act 1 Scene 9: Front of Stage

Act 1 Scene 10: Cliff’s room -backdrop of 3 doors – left side of stage

Act 1 Scene 11: Living Room of Fraulein Schneider’s boarding house – right side of stage

Act 1 Scene 12: The Fruit Shop – window suspended

Act 2 Scene 1: Cabaret Scene

Act 2 Scene 2: The Fruit Shop

Act 2 Scene 3: Front of Stage

Act 2 Scene 4: Cliff’s room -backdrop of 3 doors – left side of stage

Act 2 Scene 5: Cabaret Scene – Kit Kat Klub

Act 2 Scene 6: Cliff’s room -backdrop of 3 doors – left side of stage

Act 2 Scene 7: Railway Station / Cabaret Scene

Props

Optional – 6 tables with telephones in cabaret scene

Train carriage bench seat or 3 chairs

Brown suitcase x 2

Black briefcase

Typewriter and case

Newspaper

Table or large trunk and 2 chairs

Optional – dressing table, mirror to one side near stage left spiral staircase front of stage

Suitcase (Sally) + 3 more

Sally wearing fur coat

6 chairs. Girls dance on them for caberet scene

Brown paper bag containing pineapple

Small wind-up gramophone

Table and 2 chairs

Bottle of Gin + 2 glass

Large gift-wrapped package

Envelope with money

Box containing fruit bowl

Suitcase (Schultz)

4. Briefly outline how lighting and sound will contribute to your production. Prepare a list of the sound and light effects you would like and indicate when they occur in the production.

Lighting Design –

A single normal house bayonet light hanging down in the centre of stage, this would be used for a symbolism of inside a room and the lighting which would normally illuminate the room.

For this musical, the lighting design will have to be very carefully planned, in terms of position such as, angles and thrust distance. As well as fixture selection taking into consideration the physical characteristics such as beam size, wattage, luminosity, fixture type, etc.

To light this stage effectively the stage will be broken up into a grid and each part of the stage will be illuminated

I would like to use intelligent fixtures with conventional fixtures. The intelligent fixtures would be great for scenes like the Kit Kat Club as this scene depends on colours and shadows to give the audience the right illusion of a seedy night club. Also, the beam of an intelligent fixture is quite sharp and doesn’t really produce much spill on stage so it would be fantastic for solo spots.

I would incorporate the use of follow spots, as I would like to keep the show in its traditional form and in keeping with the historical context. Follow spots are good for things like the Emcee as he moves around the stage.

For the cabaret scenes, use of deep blues, purples and pinks colours silhouetting the Kit Kat Club girls on stage. Lightings surrounding the stage and suspended window, door arches (e.g. I have included photos from previous shows I have designed to illustrate my ideas – see at the end of this report), and the second stage level floor will be bordered with festoon lights. These lights can then be chased. I want to portray a very dingy, run down club where some of the globes will be broken or missing, at the same time as the girls on stage will look sexy, as well as giving the set a very seedy appearance.

There are three main different sets common in this production: train scene, inside Fraulein Schneider’s boarding house, and inside the Kit Kat Klub. Each one of these different sets has a different appearance where the lighting is used to highlight and mark the difference to the set. For the train scenes, the lighting on stage will be focused mainly in front of the proscenium line with the rest of the stage in darkness. The colours used for this particular scene will consist of open white, fixtures will not be at full intensity as I want to achieve a dull Tuscan amber appearance. Lighting in the train carriage is not really bright and the majority of the light source will be coming from windows letting in the outside light from outside lights.

The second set scene is inside Fraulein Schneider’s boarding house – the lighting will be very much the same as in the first scene inside the train carriage. However, more of the stage will be lit, up to the back walls revealing three doors. Top level of the set remains in darkness as it is for the cabaret scenes for the Kit Kat Klub. There will be at least 3 hot spots for the boarding house scene where both Cliff and Fraulein Schneider move in most of the scenes. These hot spots will be located along the front proscenium line along the edge of the stage, and 3 lighting hotspots along in front of each door. Colours used will remain dim; most of the light on stage will look like its coming from the one hanging lighting batten as a light fixture which is incorporated into the set. The lighting will aim to show an old run-down boarding house where maintenance has been neglected.

The final set is inside the Kit Kat Klub, the entire stage will be washed in purples, pinks, reds, blues and a bit of white thrusters to illuminate faces. The scene is set in a seedy and dirty-looking night club. For the lighting of this scene I want the lighting to cast a silhouette effect on the girls dancing for the cabaret numbers. As the music changes and different scenes are set in different parts of the Kit Kat Klub the lighting changes with the mood. The majority of the lighting for these scenes will be coming from sources side, top, and behind of stage. The lighting creates a powerful perspective illustrating the emotions portrayed on stage. An effect only seen when we are inside the Kit Kat Klub is the festoon lights surrounding the edges of the stage and the suspended mirror in the backdrop of the set. When inside the Kit Kat Klub these lights are just on still, but when during song numbers these lights will be chasing forward, the classic Broadway lighting effect.

Main actors will be lit with use of the follow spot, the rest will remain in silhouette.

Sound Design –

All the music for the songs would be performed live by the band/orchestra which I intend to incorporate into the production by having them seen by the audience and positioned in acting blocked areas – framed upstairs in the suspended picture frame.

Various sound effects will be used to help portray to the audience realism. For Act 1 Scene 2 Cliff is on a train to Berlin – a screeching sound effect of a steam train travelling is used as background sound as if they are actually in a train carriage. To mark the opening of scene 2, a train whistle sound effect is used. Another effect used is of a crashing symbol to mark the change of scene. A sound effect used for act one scene 9, is of a voice of a young boy singing beautifully and the sound of a steam train in the background. Another sound effect is of a window shattering to mark the end of Act 2 scene 2.

5. Characters and actors: what kind of people are the characters of the musical? In what kind of world do they exist? If you had complete freedom of choice, what actors would you cast in your production?

Emcee

Sally Bowles

Cliff Bradshaw

Fraulein Schneider

Herr Schultz

Fraulein Kost

Ernst Ludwig is a member of the Nazi Party and befriends Cliff

Cabaret Girls

Cabaret Boys are homosexual and work at the Kit Kat Klub

6. How many production crew/ staff are required to stage this production (during the season – ignore pre-production)? Draw up a running crew list, with a description of what each person will be responsible for.

Title

Quantity

Description of responsibility

S7tage manager

1

Production week

ensure all set building, lighting equipment, props, costumes, furniture and equipment ready.

Do cue sheets, prop settings and running order

Prepare assistant stage managers running plot

Do lighting and sound synopsis

Organise time fro technical rehearsal and dress rehearsal

At technical rehearsal, make all final checks and discuss all effects with Director

Time cues and calls in prompt book

Finalize all elements of prompt book

Attend dress rehearsal and note any problems.

First night and performance run

– Check everything

– Remain calm

– Reset play after performances

– Give calls and check all actors and crew present

– Liaise with front of house staff

– Note any alterations or repairs necessary.

Lighting Designer

1

Rehearsal: Go though the musical scene-by-scene with the Director to plan precise lighting details.

Work out presets and cues and help stage manager to mark the prompt book

Buy or hire equipment as needed

Work out a lighting synopsis with the stage manager

Production week: Rig and focus lighting fixtures

Attend technical rehearsal and test lighting and solve problems

Make final adjustments and prepare controls

Lighting Operator

1

Program lighting cues as discussed during rehearsals with stage manager and director.

Attend technical and dress rehearsals.

Fix any problems with lighting designer.

Assist with lighting designer with making final adjustments.

Makes sure has all cues written in script

Operate the lighting console for the session

Sound Engineer/ operator

2

Attend Production meetings and rehearsals

Research, planning and purchasing sound effects recordings, equipment, supplies

Met with Director

Hire and rig sound equipment

Sound plot, mark in script with Director

Attend final dress and technical rehearsals

Operate the sound console for the session

Orchestra

8 – 12

Rehearsal all music parts from the score with all members of the orchestra

Conductor meets with director, stage manager and sound engineer to discuss cues for lead in and out. Organise the running of the show

Attend all shows of the session,

Stage Hands

4-6

Assist the stage manager.

Move props and set pieces around the stage for each scene change.

Organise the actors and escort and cues actors to when to come onto stage and off.

Director

1

Is to organise and meet with every department to ensure that everyone is ready for the upcoming session week leading up to the opening night

Polish final rehearsals.

Make sure all problems have been solved before show commences.

Attend light and sound plotting sessions

Attend all rehearsal leading up to the show discuss notes.

Set Designer

2

Attend Dress And Technical Rehearsals

Make minor alterations

Load in the set and help with the construction

Supervise the Set Builders.

Organise props

Make notes of any problems in the last rehearsals leading up to opening night

Make sure all props and sets have been finished been built and ready to be put in place on stage

Transport set from work shop to theatre venue

Costume Designer

And makeup artist

6

Check all costumes are finished

Make sure any last minute orders have arrived ready in time for opening night, eg wigs

Attend all rehearsals leading up to show opening

Have all actors in costume for the dress rehearsals

Check make up, and add suggestions to individual makeup artist, check how all actors look on stage.

Administration

10-12

Organise the box office

Sell tickets

Work in FOH; sales, bar, ushering

Organise and arrange FOH displays,

Print Programs

Look after the audience.

Organise the theatre ready for the audience members

Attend final rehearsals

Set Builder

6

Install the set

Repair any wear and tear damagers

Fix all the minor details and finishing touches to the set.

Paint the set

Assist the set designer

7. Design: How would you describe the imaginative world of the musical? What is its Location? What is the period of your production?

The period of this production is set in Pre-World War Two – 1930’s in Berlin, the capital city of Germany.

This should be a minimum of 300 words, and rather than giving a synopsis of the productions. Should give an understanding of what you liked about it – why it inspired you. It should be a personal response to the production, and should at least touch on how the technical elements of the production supported the narrative.

Wicked

My experience in theatre has been with amateur productions – it was exciting to see a professional show of the magnitude of Wicked. The stage for Wicked was imaginative and impressive. The lighting in Wicked was particularly inspiring and I could easily make connections to my past lighting experience such as in Wizard of Oz, an amateur production I was involved in with a similar storyline. I can see how aspects of Wicked could be incorporated into the Wizard of Oz production to make it more professional.

Special effects were projected throughout the production to add to the set and properties, to portray illusions into the audience. The image of Glinda opening entrance when she descended in a bubble onto the stage was fabulous. Another example was seen in the creating of rain. I was awed by the lighting effects produced by the projectors to create the backdrop of the magical green sparkle on the backdrop of the map of Oz which was seen as the opening and closing of the production.

In the final scene in Act one – during the song ‘Defining Gravity’, Glinda is singing about her feelings of being scared, after she was tricked by the wizard to use her magical powers to turn the talking monkey into an evil flying monkey unable to talk. She uses her flying broom stick to escape, I was inspired by the lighting as it was used in a dramatic way as she rises into the air, use of prism scattered gobos in all 5 intelligent fixtures focuses on her as she ascended into the sky, creating a powerful silhouette of colour and rays of light in all directions, ending in a quick blackout to end the song a very powerful ending using the lighting.

The use of lighting elements such as colours to create mood, gobos to add patterns and shapes allows the audience to move from reality to the imaginary world of Oz. In Wicked the attention to detail was very obvious. The use of fairy lights built into the set and the use of tracks to move sets on and off stage was amazing and resulted in an impressive production. My goal is to produce theatre as amazing and as professional as what I saw in this production especially in lighting and sound.