Hi All

This week’s current issue seminar discussion was on Scenography and Semiotics. Now I had some previous understanding on what a scenographer was. In simple terms it is the person who designs the scenery, lighting etc. Something I wish I was good at.

I can design lighting no problem, I feel rather good at it too-  but if like Diane (the academic tutor for this week) asked us all to draw and design a set based on the script  Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller.

Sounds easy right?

Oh how wrong was I… I was very wrong. My drawing looked like a three year old had scribbled on the paper for five minutes trying to get as much detail drawn as possible. Let’s put it this way – I’m not going into scenography as a career choice. However this task did help me for creating set ideas for my plays. So I thank you for that DD.

Interpreting the stage visually without anything there can be a real difficult task, yet a stage has limitless opportunities to create some incredible performance space – ideal for performers to move and ascetically pleasing for the audiences’ eyes.  “…the stage, regardless of its configuration, functions as an optical focal point and creates the impression that we are looking through this lens into a boundless space beyond” (Aronson, 2005, p. 1).

Word definitions:

Kinesics – is the interpretation of body motion communication such as facial expressions and gestures, nonverbal behaviour related to movement of any part of the body or the body as a whole.

Semiotics – the study of signs and symbols as elements of communicative behaviour; the analysis of systems of communication, as language, gestures, or clothing.

Phenomenology – an approach that concentrates on the study of consciousness and the objects of direct experience.

Metanarrative – a narrative account that experiments with or explores the idea of storytelling, often by drawing attention to its own artificiality.

I will admit all the words above i’d never really heard of them before this class. All I can say it is the words above all link in to the meaning of Drama as we know it.

One person we looked closely at was Edward Gordon Craig, a famous Scenographer set designer who worked closely with the Moscow Theatre Arts. Looking at his work for a production of Hamlet.

Craig’s drawings show in-depth staging, yet I thought of stage space being somewhat smaller in its depth. However his work was designed more with opera styled stages in mind where they have more depth for the sound to travel across the whole space for the audience to hear. Seeing this drawing among others really makes me wish I could draw some amazing sets like Craig but alas that will never happen. I guess i’ll stick to writing plays.

Well my lovelies, until next time.

Bye x

Works Cited:

Aronson, Arnold (2005) Looking into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography, USA: University of Michigan Press.  pp. 1 – 80

Craig, E. (1908) Stage Set Design – Hamlet [https://www.pinterest.com/designlifenet/stage-set-design-edward-gordon-craig/]. Pinterest. [accessed 21 October 2016].

Hi All,

So Week Three into the Current Issues Module, I must admit so far so good with the information being given. I was not aware of issue that is Interdisciplinary and Sociopolitical Engagement in the theatre. Maybe I am completely oblivious when it comes to this sort of issue or that it has never really come up into conversation until very recently.

In the seminar lesson we were introduced to South African artist Brett Bailey. Taking a closer look at his piece from 2014 –  ‘The Golden Age’  The piece of work that was shown to us was Exhibit B.

 

Exhibit B replicates the ‘human zoos’ and ethnographic displays that showed Africans as objects of scientific curiosity through the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Twelve tableaux feature motionless performers placed in settings drawn from real life. Collectively they confront colonial atrocities committed in Africa, European notions of racial supremacy and the plight of immigrants today. (2014)

EXHIBIT B – photo by Sofie Knijff

‘The Golden Age’ – photo by Sofie Knijff

There was a question brought up in the lesson asking whether, in replicating these racist exhibitions, is Bailey repeating also the racism? I don’t think he is (personally). In my opinion he is showing how people were treated in South Africa because of race ans skin colour. I feel he is exposing the harsh truths that many like people deem does not happen in society. Which come to think of it still happens within theatre.

Why I hear you ask?

Take for example: A white actor. The white actor can play any sort of character despite the issue of race. Yet an ethnic coloured actor can not play a white character in a play or television programme, if they did it would some sort of uproar with the audience / viewers. What I don’t understand is how a white actor could possibly play a coloured character. Without the knowledge or experience you could not relate to a character’s struggles if they are facing racial comments (especially if you never had these comments made).

This post has been a hard one to get my head around – however it has got me thinking about the presentation performance we have to do as part of the module. That being the issue of race and religion? Hmmm watch this space….

Till next week.

Bye x

Works Cited;

Bailey, B. (2014) EXHIBIT B.

Knijff, S. (2014) EXHIBIT B [online]. Available from http://www.afridiziak.com/theatrenews/whatson/september2014/third-world-bunfigh-brett-bailey-exhibit-b.html [Accessed 17 October 2016].

Hi all

So I’m a bit late with posting this blog up my apologies, better late than never I suppose. But I present to you my second blog post on the contemporary historical context of the theatre. Looking closely at the form that is called Ghosting.

When I first read Thomas Postlewait’s chapter on ghosting I was rather confused by this term. My first initial thoughts was the haunting of an ‘actual’ ghostly presences on stage or within a piece of text ie: the reference to a person who is never actually seen on stage. Oh how I was completely wrong on this idea.

I felt the reading by  Marvin Carlson “The Haunted Stage: The theatre as a memory machine”, Helped a little bit on what ghosting was about. For an example; An actor who is well known for playing a certain type of character, the paying audience will see a show with said actor in the show and will expect the actor to play that character they are known for. This is seen as one way ghosting will haunt a person. Carlson writes;

‘Everything in the theatre, the bodies, the materials utilized, the language, the space itself, is now and has always been haunted, and that haunting has been an essential part of the theatre’s meaning to and reception by its audiences in all times and all places’ (Carlson 2001, p.15)

In my opinion, what Carlson touches upon is that everything related to theatre is haunted by one form or another. So why is it important to know and how is it related to current issues if we are looking at the past?

In the seminar lesson taught by no other than Kelly Jones, she explained that actually this idea does matter and also connects in with current issues. As she mentioned in her class “All performances are a historical event”. How?

When you see a performance live on stage you get a different atmosphere feeling to a performance you see live on a screen. Okay let’s make this simple; basically if you see two performances of the same production. Neither performance will be the same – Once you have seen one performance it will impact you own reactions for the following performance on sections of the show to pay more attention to.

Going back on what I mentioned earlier on in this post about the “type casting” of an actor being compared to a particular character they are well known for. It could also be similar to people comparing others like for example: A rock band who get a new singer and their fans say that the new singer doesn’t sound the same or looks completely different to the old singer. I feel as humans we all are guilty of making these comments, however we are creating historical context memories for the future audience members who haven’t even been born yet. Huh who would of thought it…

To get a sense of what ghosting and memory in a theatre, we watched about 40 minutes of pre-recorded live performance of “The Duchess of Malfi” at the Sam Wanamaker theatre. Having the leading Lady,  Gemma Arterton play The Duchess, it brought a new group of theatre goers to see this production. It is more likely that people wouldn’t of gone if there was no one who wasn’t well known in the production. Surely does that not bring a new level of haunting to this production?

When watching a performance live at the cinema is doesn’t really give you the same feeling as watching a live performance on stage. The issue with a performance being shown in a cinema restricts you from seeing the full stage as the camera person will focus on what they think the audience wants/ should see. Very much like the performance recording of the The Duchess of Malfi.

Not only did I learn about ghosting and memories in current issues but we touched upon historiography. I can just about say this word, let alone understand its true meaning. Postlewait has a theory to how historiography works;

Everything links to an Event – these are the following connections linked to an event. Possible Worlds, Reception, Artistic Heritage, Agents.

‘These four basic aspects of the context for a theatrical event my help us break out of the two-part division of event and context. Even though we are still thinking in dualistic terms by relating each of the four factors to the event, we have created more clarity by breaking the general idea of context into its several component parts. Within each of these four basic conditions, a plurality of factors can be identified. Various aspects of the world may contribute to the identifying trairs and meanings of a specific theatrical event. Various agents participate in the making of the event. Many traits of the artistic heritage are in play. And the reception engages many people and conditions. Thus, each of these four factors – world, agents, receptions, and artistic heritage – need to be understood as part of the event as well as part of the context.
(Postlewait 2009, pp.14-15)

Postlewait also connects these four words into triangles as they link together making slightly bigger groups or relationships.

It would seem that all historical context is biased opinions by people without proving hardcore evidence that theatre is how it was then as it it is now.

What Shakespeare’s Swan Theatre may of looked like.

So could it change history if we found out we have been performing theatre wrongly? I’m now starting to hurt my own brain here.

Right to basically recap and explain what I learnt from this week’s lesson;

So the art that is ghosting is created in every single performance whether it is performed on stage or not. It is what our own memory creates that stays not only with us but with the particular performance you have seen as an audience member.

For now my dears i’m off to learn more about ghosting.

Bye x

Works cited;

Carlson, Marvin. (2001) The Haunted Stage: The Theatre as Memory Machine. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.

Postlewait, Thomas. (2009) The Cambridge Introduction to Theatre Historiography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hello Everyone.

Today I had my first lesson of Current Issues in Drama, Theatre & Performance module. Now I wasn’t 100% sure whether or not I was considered “smart” enough for this module. But if I wasn’t that intelligent I would certainly not being studying a masters degree. I’m going off the subject here, let me get back on track with this post;

In this first lesson we looked and discussed as a collective group what “Dramaturgy” means and whether or not we had actually done this job role in the past as undergraduates or not. I was not sure if or when I had this role before if it was at undergraduate level or even at school. What I can tell you is i’d never heard the word Dramaturg/y until I started university, Oops. However I have actually been doing Dramaturgy for a fair few years as a collective in the creating of a piece of theatre or performance.

Before this first lesson we had some research and readings to give us a better understanding of some of the ideas we would be covering. Not only in this lesson but throughout this module. Linking in all the different pathways as one, helping each other out with different subject matter.

We had been given a reading from “What is Dramaturgy” by David Copelin, explaining the 10 myths behind what a Dramaturg actually does when creating theatre or a performance. Copelin explains the myths in such a way the reader actually enjoys the passage (I know I did). With the use of humour and somewhat noticeable sarcasm used (secretly) into the text, it gave me a slightly better understanding on what a Dramaturg or Literary managers do as well as giving myself a good old laugh (something I thought would never happen when reading for a class).

One of the myths that was by far one of my favourite answers from a Dramaturg’s point of view and enjoyed by all the class was the following statement and its response;

MYTH #7 : Literary managers and Dramaturgs don’t like most American theatre the way it is. They want our scripts and productions to be more theatrical, more resonant, less naturalistic, less trivial, more aware of the world, better. Can’t they appreciate how wonderful things are?

Reality #7: NO.  (Copelin, 1995).

Okay, So reading this passage, I thought I had the perfect understanding of “Dramaturgy”, Yet I still did not get a definitive answer on what it was. Lots of independent research I did on my own seem to get me more confused on this new creative person. Many different academics and professionals what to explain how not to be a bad dramaturg.  I don’t care for that!  I want an answer so I can explain it in my own work as a playwright. Furthermore what I came away with was actually the definition of the term/ word “Dramaturg” can be upto the individual to decide. However for myself I feel is a dramaturg helps with a director and playwright giving critics in how to make a piece of performance or theatre more appealing to the prospective audience. Similar to a producer or artistic director but minus the money budget.

The other readings given for a read through made me more confused on the whole subject matter on dramaturgy. Why on earth can’t there be a definition I wouldn’t be getting this confused. But then would it be fair to make it that easy without questioning ourselves? I’m not so sure and going off topic.

With having a discussion with the rest of the group I was pleased to hear that I was not the only person asking the same questions I was in my head (Yay I don’t feel as stupid as I thought I was). It was rather interesting hearing others views and opinions on this topic, which makes me want to look a little bit deeper in “What is a performance with the help of a dramaturg”?

Do you feel the help of a dramaturg is relevant or irrelevant when devising and creating a new piece of art?

I feel that is enough talk about dramaturgy for one day. I will continue soon.

For now

Goodbye.

Bibliography:

Cardullo, D. (1995) What is Dramaturgy? 3rd Edition. Peter Lang Press. [New York].