Post Modernist Plays notes

Austin - Accidental Death of an Anarchist by Dario Fo 1917

•  Originally written in Italian
• About an anarchist who fell or was thrown from a fourth floor window
• He was blamed for bombing

• Maniac: is interrogated (He impersonates many professions) and is a judge. He Manipulates the police. He is Clever
• Elements of Surprise
• What is truth, what is not?

·       Includes paradox

• Made not to answer questions, but to question answers

·       Redefining the past

• Realism

·       Reflect realistic corrupt society

• Left open ended. There’s no linear ending
• Written for more than art's sake

George -History Boys by Alan Bennett

• Takes place in an English private school in Britain
• 1950's Feeling even though it is based in the 80s
• About the scandals in a school
• Verbatum Theatre
• Non-Linear Theatre
• Language changes from English to French
• Theatre of Difference (Homosexuality)

Joel - Stuff Happens by David Hare (he grew up in Sussex England, isn’t new to play writing) 2005

• Various Topics (politics, war and moral issues, making decision)
• Comedy

·       A LOT OF STUFF HAPPENS

• Shady boundaries
• Tension (Bush vs. Blair)

·       Big name characters (Osama Bin Laden, Bush, Blair)

• Verbatim Theatre
• Based off real politics
• Dangerous Theatre
• Non-Linear Theatre
• Disconnect between actor and audience
• Live narration

·       Interjection of Song: Amazing Grace

• Global Theatre (deals with worldwide issues)

Reca - Angels in America by Tony Kushner 1983

• Follows the lives of homosexual men
•  Struggle with aids, drugs, fitting in, society
• Huge impact on shaping contemporary theatre in terms of sexuality
• Extremely appropriate, still, in today’s theatre
• Dangerous Theatre - gory, gruesome
• 7 hours long
• A lot of repetition
• Altered states of mind
• Dying of aids = heavenly visions
• Raw and honest to life. Nothing is censored

Andy- Arcadia

• ·      Starts in 1809 and then shifts to the present.
• ·      There’s a character in the play that is mentioned throughout the whole play. Lord Byron (British poet). Play is based around him but he never appears.
• ·      Large table in the middle
• ·      Props aren’t removed throughout time periods
• ·      Juxtaposition / non linear theatre
• ·      Extreme symbolism
• ·      Contradictory strategy (art and science) (classism and romanticism)
• ·      QUOTE!!
• ·      Parallism
• ·      Pacing is very important
• ·      Theatre of priority – adding a song or a dance of some sort.

Virginia Wolf – the hours

Annie – the accidental death of an anarchist

• ·      Maniac is a joker type character
• ·      Po-mo – the maniac
• ·      Realism
• ·      Dangerous theatre – questions politics
• ·      Hyperbolised window : window

Justin – Metamorphoses by Mary Zimmer (tony for directing)

• ·      Intro speech
• ·      She’s from Lincoln Nebraska but also moved around between London
• ·      The looking glass Theatre Company
• ·      Play adapted from poem. Based on the free translation of the poem
• ·      How do humans react to change?
• ·      Different characters
• ·      Nonlinear theatre
• ·      Dangerous theatre- incest nudity
• ·      Re contextualism – distance between immersing in the play
• ·      Anthropomolism
• ·      Art for art’s sake
• ·      Songs, poetry
• ·      Props have multiple uses
• ·      Simple set: only a Chandelier and pool of water
• ·      Repetition

Peter – Eurydice

• ·      Greek tale
• ·      Story about Eurydice based in a more modern way
• ·      Dreamlike – nothing seem linear, aspect of remembering versus forgetting and how important things are to us and whether we forget it or not
• ·      Relief
• ·      Music to tell emotion
• ·      Non-linear – skips between scenes
• ·      Non naturalistic – characters are stones that speak
• ·      Altered states of mind – amnesia, state of knowing who you are. World of dead vs world of living
• ·      Play for art’s sake – written for set design
• ·      Blue for death because it isn’t aggressive, it’s sad
• ·      All about music

Georgia – flu season

• ·      6 characters
• ·      no one has names
• ·      Play within a play
• ·      Storyline in a mental hospital
• ·      Prologue: Hopeful, innocent, romantic dreams. Epilogue: cynical
• ·      Non-linear : a lot of stopping/starting
• ·      Art for art’s sake – language use very thoughtful and artful
• ·      Symbol: snow

Sammy – accidental death. Dario Fo – radio comedian, political playwright. He’s been arrested, trial, beaten for his political ‘openness’

• ·      Use of unnamed characters
• ·      Change in perspective – character of the maniac changes his voice
• ·      Reversed narrative – as it progresses you learn more about the play
• ·      Maniac – impersonated character who the audience is unclear about
• ·      Addresses political corruption
• ·      Play was released at a time when this actually happened
• ·      Verbatim – through the lens of a fallible character
• ·      Non art for art’s sake – wanted to show corruption through theatre
• ·      Maniac – the chaos, random in a scenario
• ·      Colours for the different characters that the maniac plays
• ·      Symbol – chalk outline. You have no idea what was inside of the outline

Peter Brook Response: The Deadly Theatre

The Deadly Theatre

1.     Is theatre nothing more than entertainment?

No it is not. In the chapter The Deadly Theatre, Peter Brook says “There are occasional new movements, good new writers and so on, but as a whole, the theatre not only fails to elevate or instruct, it hardly even entertains.” Although it is rather crude, I like Brook’s comparison of theatre as a whore. He says that whores take money and go short on pleasure and this really made me realise what he was trying to get to. Sometimes theatre can be so action packed, lively and bright, but these kinds of shows are often just that. They don’t have any meaning or deep thoughts and ideas that can be left within the audiences’ heads for days. Boring plays, if actually paid attention to, tend to have deeper meanings and messages within them that it would be considered better theatre. The first example that comes to mind is The Last Days of Judas Iscariot. If you were to take out all the meaning behind the story, it becomes just a boring courtroom scene where neither the audience member nor the actor wants to be. But because it has such a thought provoking and meaning message, the actors have a drive and passion to tell the story and it’s this passion that captures the audience’s attention.

Art as a whole must be made to express oneself but while still keeping the viewers in mind.

2.     How does Deadly Theatre take easily to Shakespeare?

Brook pretty much sums this up when he says that people “confuse a sort of intellectual satisfaction with the true experience”. I truly think that since everybody studies Shakespeare in schools it can get really boring (and technically I’m supposed to love it since I’m a literature and theatre student) and people loose the appreciation of Shakespeare’s art and pure genius use of words. People always redo Shakespeare plays the way that they have always been and how they are “meant” to be, but this makes it lose it’s meaning and relatability (isn’t a word but I can’t think of any other way to phrase it) to the audience. His plays were written 400 years ago after all! Different time. Different culture.

3.     Is "boringness" a certain guarantee of a worthwhile event?

No it doesn’t. I think that an artist is a true artist when they can find the perfect balance between boringness and meaning. Thay have to be able to properly get their message across without losing the attention of the spectators while trying to avoid making it too capturing that it loses its meaning and purpose.

4.     What role does mediocrity play?

As I have said before. Artists have to find a perfect balance. Mediocrity can make people lose interest in the performance but too much “over the top”ness can make overwhelm the audience.

5.     What is the difference between passing down "meaning" and "manner?

To me, ‘meaning’ is when the actor knows and understand the messages and emotions and is able to convey them to the audience through this understanding. I think that manner, however, is the method in which the actor chooses to use to convey this message. I’m not entirely sure whether this is correct or not, but I feel as though if an actor doesn’t have the meaning then he is doing nothing but reading the lines in his script. If he does understand meaning, no matter the manner, he will always do an amazing performance.

6.     Is it true that "the best dramatists explain the least"? Can you think of some examples from plays that you have seen or read?

I feel as though if a dramatist needed to explain himself or herself for everything they do and every message they’re trying to get across, then they are not very good at what they do and don’t understand human empathy (?). If the audience is able to understand everything, however, without having to have it explained to them, then that shows that the work of the dramatist is strong and shows that he or she has a good understanding of human nature, empathy and the nature of their audience.

7.     How can you go from Deadly Theatre to Living Theatre as an actor?

Trying to truly understand the idea and message that the writer is trying to get his audience to understand. To know the author and the context of the production. (??)

8.     How did the Peking Opera lose its connectedness to the life of the society around it?

“The gap between the original Peking Opera and the life of the society today became too great”. I think that no matter how much you try to preserve cultures, it will always change. The younger generations who go into performing this art form will grow up in a different culture than performers would’ve generations before. The forced continuity of this art form will make it lose it’s meaning in the modern world.

9.     At the heart of the meaning of Living Theater: "Theater is always a self-destructive art, and is always written on the wind." What is your interpretation of this?

I think that it means that it’s a theatre that changes with time and reflects the lives of the people performing and watching it. It’s a theatre that had real meaning and is true to the artist and isn’t forced. It looks back to past and alters it to suit today (whether telling the story of the past or recreating another play). The Line “written on the wind” makes me think that it really is a reflection of the writer and is written on a lot of experiences and inspirations that the artist encounters.

10.  According to Brook, what should be influencing theater at all times?

The true messaged that the writer is trying to convey and staying true to that. The ways and culture of the audience and understanding what is appropriate to present. I feel like that’s what Peter Brook is trying to say. I feel as though people must stay true to the message and ideals of the play.

11.  Please add two of your own questions for the rest of the chapter.

Is deadly theatre necessarily a really bad thing?

Is it possible to totally rid deadly theatre? Would it be “beneficial” to theatre or is it needed to be able to differentiate types of theatre?