Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Why Theatre? (Kevin Birkel)

Subject: Why Theatre?

Upon reflection of my previous experiences, I realized that theatre provided me with the opportunity to get out of the regular activities in my life and enter an imaginary world, one that I could never have experienced. For example, when we watched Shakespeare in love, I felt as though I was actually experiencing life during the 16th century. We see Shakespeare walking through the dirty, crowded streets of London, passing horse- drawn carts on his way to globe theatre. The director filmed the scene for the purpose of adding a considerable level realism making it seem as though Shakespeare’s walk was actually happening in real place. It seems that during a live production on stage, this illusion of setting can be portrayed only to a more limited extent. Props don’t bring the level of realism to the stage that can be captured through film, because it obvious in looking at them that they were crafted solely for the use of setting up the scene. I remember the stampede scene from the “Lion King”. Though admittedly, the artistry involved in producing that scene was amazing, there was no mistaking that the scene was an artistic portrayal of the stampede and not a stampede actually happening whereas in film it is difficult to see the difference between what what is actually happening. Nevertheless, the theatre allows you to experience interactions between the characters in person. As a result, the audience is able to notice distinct details in the actors’ interactions with each, allowing the playwright to add to their complexity. For instance, it can be observed that in many scenes, there are many actors on-stage at once, each engaged in their own interactions. We see this complexity during large gatherings in a play, such as the rehearsal during the opening scene of the Phantom of the Opera, when most of cast gathered on stage for the event. These many intertwining interactions combine to convey certain messages to the audience about what is happening. It would be very difficult to capture this complexity on film, and still have all of these messages noticed by the viewers. Theatre therefore has its own method of bringing the imaginary to life, one very different from film.

Written by Kevin Birkel February 13, 2007
Posted by Kirk Andrew Everist

1 Comments:

At 10:31 AM, Blogger Brad said...

You bring up an interesting point here. You talk about realism of what is being presented. You compare the realism in a film such as Shakespeare In Love with the realism in a play on in an actual theatre with props. I agree that it does seem more real in a film since the props are real than the fake ply wood props on a stage. You go on to say that though theatre lacks this sense of reality, it picks up where film drops the ball in that theatre can have many different interactions going on at once whereas it would be very difficult to do this in film. Are you trying to say that this is the purpose of theatre? Theatre isn’t meant to seem real? Do you think that advancements in film technology have caused us to expect these performances (film or otherwise) to seem as close to reality as possible? That we expect Shakespeare In Love to make us feel as if we are actually in the 16th century?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home