- projected scenery, especially film/video, do not work onstage
- projections and images are innately different from the stage, so employing both is simply overwhelming and confusing
- this clash between theater and media involve physiological, psychological, and philosophical reasons
- theater is the only art form to use objects to signify the same object (human = another human, chair = chair, etc)
- we have an intrinsic understanding that we reside in time and space
- this understanding carries over to what is perceived onstage
- projected images derail this sense of time & space producing a separate world on stage
- images, being static, are subject to the angle at which they are viewed (so no single person in the audience sees the same thing)
- photographs while in the present represent something historical, whereas the stage is wholly present and something we can touch
- there is also a spatial dislocation between stage and projected images
- the stage frames each scene much like a painting does
- when a player leaves the stage, our imagination fills in what happened to them
- cinema and projections conflict with the frame onstage and puts into question figure and ground
- images (especially moving ones) cause confusion and dislocation: the projection is seen as the figure and the stage as the ground
- since projections are framed, we perceive them as boundless; the stage, on the other hand, is apparently confined and finite
- moving images also force a competition of focus between it and the actors
- projections have no permanence since it is only light and shadow
- there are cases of contemporary media and theater working together such as the Wooster Group's productions
- as Aristotle warned, spectacle is "the least artistic" aspect of theater
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment