5 resultados para Theatre of Witness
em Worcester Research and Publications - Worcester Research and Publications - UK
Resumo:
This article considers the animating role that objects play in the theatre of Philippe Quesne and Vivarium Studio (France). The conventional role of object animation is often characterised by the performer manipulating objects and scenic material on the stage, asserting a control over the environment they are implicated in. In Quesne's theatre, this relationship is democratised. The theatrical apparatus, both materially and conceptually, is set up to enable the flow of animation to be interchangeable, affording an equal agency to the objects being used much as that of the performers. This theatre of animation is drawn through the framing concepts of displacement and humility. Displacement is considered as a compositional strategy that makes us aware of the volume of the stage space beyond the proscenium frame as a plane of composition. The introduction of large inflatable objects, real cars or large roles of fake snow foreground the objects material presence allows Quesne to play with moments of equilibrium, tipping, excess and absence. Humility is traced as a philosophy of objects that transcends the choice, handling and use of material items in Quesne's work. Simple objects take on a specific vibrancy because of how they give shape to the human participants on stage, animating moments of recognition that allows the human figure, its ethics, emotions and humour, to appear.
Resumo:
Like its title, Pyramus and Thisbe 4 You, Alexandru Dabija’s production at the Odeon Theatre, Bucharest, was a tongue-in-cheek invitation to the audience that at once aimed to tease past and recent Romanian endeavours and to tease out the stage potential a Shakespeare play holds today. My examination of the production re-constructs the local cultural contexts the production plays with and against, referring to the Romanian ways of making Shakespeare this production enters into dialogue with. Take 1, an all-female version casting the mature stars of the Odeon, I read against both Elizabethan all-male stage practice and Andrei Serban’s all-female Lear at the Bulandra (2008). Take 2, “an old device” (V.1.50): a teacher-student “devising” session at the Academy of Theatre and Cinema, I read against critics’ “more strange than true” (V.1.2) parlance on “theories of perception and reception” and against hi-tech Shakespeare dominating the Romanian stages in the first decade of the third millennium. Take 3, local political banter on ethnic discrimination, I read as “satire keen and critical” (V.1.54) on both communist censorship and the recent rise of nationalism in Romania. Take 4, a “cold” reading-cum-improvisation performed by the technical crew – this production’s mechanicals – I read as “palpable-gross play” (V.1.376) on both acting and spectating practices. What I argue in this article is that Dabija’s production goes beyond its local context and mores, and proposes a re-assessment of Shakespeare’s cultural currency in (European) Romania and Europe at large by exposing current tyrannies in Shakespeare studies: from translation and adaptation, through directing and acting, to viewing and reviewing.
Resumo:
The role of the director as the individual who harnesses and controls resources to shape the theatrical product to a personal artistic vision, begins to emerge in British theatre in the early years of the twentieth century. What distinguishes the role from that of the actor-manager who had led the profession since the seventeenth century, is that it separates off from the leading actor in performance. The power and authority of the director (or producer as he or she tended to be known initially) is exercised in the pre-performance stage. In the first half of the century there were still old-style actor-managers—Donald Wolfit is a prime example—and many of the new directors had begun their careers as actors and some continued to act their in their own productions. But the perception of the function of the director began to change radically. In part this was linked to the early attempts to create a new model of producing company or ‘repertory’ theatre which required a different set of administrative as well as artistic skills to tackle the challenge of a short-run system of multiple play production. This became especially important in the developing network of regional repertory theatres which were established as autonomous, locally-specific institutions predicated on policies opposed to the dominant commercial ethos. The best-known of the early directors, most notably H.Granville Barker, confined their radical experiments to short-lived metropolitan experiments, or, as in the case of Terence Gray and J.B.Fagan, operated within the influential Oxbridge nexus. Others such as H.K.Ayliff, Herbert Prentice, William Armstrong and William Bridges-Adams remain comparatively obscure because of their long-term ‘provincial’ connections or, as in the case of Nugent Monck and Edy Craig because their creativity was largely channelled through amateur actors. This chapter will explore the evolving role of the director as both a necessary functionary and an artistic innovator within the changing structures of British theatre.
Resumo:
Move on Up! is part of a series of widening participation interactive Theatre in Education programmes at The University of Worcester, designed to raise educational aspirations. It was conceived for year 6 pupils about to go up to secondary school, to reflect on this transition and the challenges and pitfalls it presented to them. I searched for stimulus material to create the dynamic of an adventure story that reflected and generated the excitement and fear of change. The Mysterious Island by Jules Verne provided the structure of this classic genre with characters stranded on a desert island. Directing a team of four student actors and a stage manager I sought to promote the heroic ideal of using the skills needed to survive against adversity and to transpose it to a school context. The four characters discover talents and interests on the year 6 school trip and they endeavour to become the best version of themselves at their secondary school where these attributes have to be tested in a new environment. Using interactive voting software helped to determine whether pupils could achieve the sense of control and ownership outlined in Boal’s theatre practice. The programme provides a number of points of intervention where participants could vote and influence the shape of the character’s stories and perhaps create heroes or anti – heroes depending on the decisions they make. Boal wants participants to become the outspoken protagonists of their own stories or specactors. This paper will investigate whether applied theatre practice can give participants a heroic experience by exploring the process of creating Move on Up! and the response to the programme from year 6 pupils in West Midlands schools.
Resumo:
I wanted to explore whether traditional Forum Theatre approaches can be enhanced by the use of integrated voting software to empower young people. My research is based on two of a series of widening participation interactive TiE programmes focused on the decisions young people make on educational progression. I worked as a director alongside students studying Drama and Performance at The University of Worcester and the programmes have toured widely to schools across Worcestershire and Herefordshire. ‘It’s Up to You!’ (2013 – 2014) was aimed at years 8 and 9 choosing their GCSE options and ‘Move on Up!’ (2014 - 2015) looked at the hopes and fears of year 6 pupils about to go up to secondary school. Finding a voice in Boal’s framework as a ‘specactor’ does not always appeal to a pupil who does not want to stand out from the crowd or is not familiar with a classroom where drama conventions are practised or understood. The anonymity of the voting software with results of decisions made appearing instantly on screen is certainly appealing to some pupils: ‘I also loved the keypads they gave us so that we could answer the questions without having to put our hand up and wait..’ This paper aims to interrogate the idea that empowering needs to not simply be about giving voice to a few confident group members but allowing the silent majority to be able to experiment with decision making in an educational and social context.