Modern theater like Facebook

The transformation of theatre in contemporary art is the topic of much research because it is concerned not only with the theatre, oddly enough, and even with the “physiology of vision” and new media, which the physiology have changed dramatically. The current generation of young people who actively use new technologies, gadgets, social networks it’s quite different than their parent’s generation of theatergoers.

Appeared definitely new memory properties. Now our main representation of reality Newsline. In front of us flashed the news, posts, pictures, momentary considerations, fragmentary thoughts, pictures of cats and stuff. Fast fixed eye, decrypted, and stored in the next memory tank. We did not develop those “muscles” that are used to train slow reading or other deep immersion in the material. Thus, we get information but not knowledge.

Today knowledge of theatre, as well as other knowledge, replaced details. How this information, there is a certain aesthetics. This aesthetics is also associated with a new type of looking: it is, to my taste, very narrative, it is much less associative. Because reading and deep memory require associative relationships. Today nothing like this happens. It’s nobody’s fault, just the world has changed.

You can note that recent work of many great masters of contemporary theatre, deliberately simple, playing “simplification”; in some ways they are similar to the TV series, something on information from the directory. That is, the viewer is not watching “hamlet” he looks at the contents of “hamlet” receives information about it. The viewer today does not read any interpretation and does not want to understand the thinking of the Director, does not regard the material through deep acting, it scares the “incomprehensible”, he wants to is not so much an impression, but a clear message that the final conclusion. This process of “reduction” can be unsettling, maybe even something interesting; in any case, it suggests that ways of perceiving theatre vary greatly.

Change and evaluation criteria acting: rare experienced viewers are able to distinguish a good game from a bad one. We can’t give a definite answer, what is “good” in art of the actor and what is bad. It is a question of a separate study. But if we talk about trends, here’s one of them: there are Directors who give the actor the challenge “not to play”. Apparently, they are frightened of acting technique, first, as something is unclear to them, and second, as an attribute of the “old” theater, where the line between the profane and professional was more visible. The actor in the modern theater plays, for example, soldier it transmits information.

He, preparing for the role, does not record all the details of his character in the notebook, “takes” the prototype of his hero interview, not going through his life, does not make “observations” and “sketches by the way”, he simply and clearly says: I’m a soldier. Today it is enough to the viewer, he believes he is a soldier, and no more explanation and evidence it is not required. The audience believes in what is happening on stage as he believes the messages from their news feeds, where a combination of post main information message of the day.

Facebook needs no proof. If the viewer of the programs and posters knows that it is hamlet, he does not have evidence in the form of psychological there is disclosure of image, he believes. The modern theatre is the theatre of naivety and trust. It is neither good nor bad, today it is.

Another trend: the theatre takes such a thing as “eternity”. What could be an eternity from the news feed! She lives today. The theatre is easily adapted to this reality because theatre is the art, which also lives here and now. Nevertheless, the theatrical artists of the XX century managed to enter, say, “the higher realms” and create tension invisible. The audience for the performances were under the impression that they were faced with the manifestation of something metaphysical, otherworldly. The theatre was a mystery. Now it also leaves the viewer immersed in the new technologies of viewing and perception. He doesn’t need the mysteries and secrets of the past. In our age many of their secrets and mysteries.

Time in the modern theater has shrunk to seconds. The performances are sometimes really similar to Facebook and authors: the curse of the “bloody regime” are interspersed with references to Dubowski rollers popular artists, about short-term and numerous selfies. It’s not all that vibrant energy.

Many contemporary plays purposely avoided direct active influence on the viewer, sometimes comes to the fact that the performance of even the excluded actors. There are performances and installations. But the audience, I think, always responds to energy. Another thing is that sometimes it can scare you because you get used to sitting alone in front of the computer, not to feel the waves from the person with whom you are, say, in the chat. And here at you from the stage is an energy wave, which still may be tilting. In this sense, theatre of the living energy, the theater high energy forms, it is, of course, total or even an authoritarian, he acts, he is affected, he can “turn the soul”.

Contemporary theatre is diverse. There is a theatre for modern townspeople, townsfolk. Their tastes are conservative. They love the “classic” theater, not really knowing what it was. There is a theatre for advanced hipster youth is a theatre for children. There is a theater for the liberal intellectuals. Still, the modern theater is basically a theater for the bourgeois. Ladies high heels, men in expensive suits that big money want to watch something guaranteed quality and famous; going to the theatre, they believe that this is today the most fashionable and current. Come, look and, even if you do not understand, then at least succinate.

Contemporary theatre is mostly focused on business, money, comfort, the Convention with the audience and only the very rare theatre is capable of this Convention to break to shout from the stage, or at least whisper it very important, but not always pleasant for the viewer of the truth.

As for me and the work that now goes, I want to do democratic theater without VIP areas, without any reservations for a special elite crowd. I wish this was theatre for the people a democratic theatre where you can see different performances. These performances can like or dislike, but they are all United by the understanding very simple rules: all people are equal. And these people are called beautiful “of the public”.

Share via: