Theatre Of Beauty

Theatre is a finite Art. Once a particular show ends, that is it. If you did not see that show, you never will. Thus theories about theatre all, tend to be about the process of bringing a script to stage, how to act, how to talk, etc. No one can talk about theatre they have not seen. They can read reviews, they can look at directors notes, hear the memories of people who did see, or were in a particular piece, but this is no substitute for actually seeing an historically important performance.

I am told that David Warner's portrayal of Hamlet in the sixties defined the character for a generation, yet I will never see that portrayal, how, therefore, can I assess it, write about it, discuss or analyse it.

This gives theatre one great advantage and one great disadvantage.

Advantage: Ideas are always fresh.
Disadvantage: Ideas are constantly reused.

Occasionally, someone like E. Gordon Craig comes along and introduces some new ideas. In 2000 years of theatre, there are about 30 to 40 people who can be identified as having changed the course of theatre. Shakespeare, Brecht, Stanislavsky, Boal, Artaud, Brook, Pirandello, Beckett, Shaw, Satre, Chekov, Meyerhold, Grotowski, Craig. These are the famous ones.

For one of the oldest identifiable arts to have only had theories applied to it in the past hundred years is incredibly strange.

Also, incredibly most of those people's theories concentrate more on the science of theatre, i.e how to get from the script to the stage by one of several routes, than to the art of theatre.

Artaud, Beckett, Brook, Meyerhold concentrate on the idea of theatre, what and why it is, as an art, rather than as a political engine which is how such people as Boal, Brecht, Satre, Shaw saw it as.

Artaud's theatre of cruelty is an idea of how to attune an audience into an entity capable or recieving his vast ideas, by being cruel and unusual to them. Beckett's plays are symmetrical. Brook attempts to turn theatre into a religious experience, even replacing seats with pews. Meyerhold fought against Stanislavsky's realism, returning symbolism to theatre.

All of these are attempts to find out what theatre is and what it is capable of. They all miss the point. Theatre is everything and is capable of anything.

While each individual production may be part of a particular school of thought and may advance that school of thought.

I have lost my train of thought, it is nearly four in the morning, I shall continue this at another time.

Half Past Two In The Morning

I am currently eating dry cereal because I have run out of milk. I have no other food left.

Actually I have plenty of food.

But it is all in tins.

I've had it for months.

But I have no tin opener.

Keep dropping cereal down my front.

Why am I awake at this ridiculous time of the night/morning?

It will be 5am before I even think of going to bed.

I have to meet Haley at college for midday tomorrow.

I should really start my disertation. It's due in in 21 days.

How do you spell Disertation? Is it one S or two? Neither seem right.

I have done no research.

I have to get Tim amd Deb to sing down the phone at my brother.

Tim didn't like me bragging at him about how England lost.

I have to find a couple of Rapier's from somewhere.

Not an easy thing to find, rapier's.

But possibly easier than basket swords.

Whatever possessed me to think producing and directing Hamlet would be easy?

Damn, run out of cereal.

Now I'm going to get hungry.

Bed would be a good idea.

Except I've been sleeping on the floor for the past fortnight.

Using a beanbag as a pillow.

The superbowl on telly. Why?

Americans should learn how to play Rugby.

That's without padding and helmets, and much more physical.

Silverboots should be elected God.

Definitely no more cereal, just crumbs.

What is beauty and why does it exist?

Is it an invention of our brains?

Or was it created by God?

That is my dis(s)ertation, and how to relate it to theatre.

Because no one else has done that before.

Why did I decide that I wished to reinvent the performing arts?

Especially at 3am in the morning.

Patriots winning the superbowl. I don't care. I don't even understand what they are doing.

I wonder if great Americans like Tennesse Williams, John Steinbeck, Arthur Miller, Ernest Hemingway, cared about American Football.

I wonder why eagles don't eat frogs, probably too small.

What the hell am I doing?

Saturnalia

Death Of The Pope

The Pope, currently a bit ill and in hospital, recovered enough to say mass today.

Not that I dislike him or anything, but dying is about the only useful act he can still perform.

This is how I see it, the Catholic Church is responsible for mass murder in Africa, with it's anti contraception policies being one of the most direct reasons for the AIDs explosion there. This is not the fault of the current Pope, he took office before AIDs was recognised. He was old then and he is older now.

There are certain elements in the Catholic Church which don't appear to want to reverse this belief, whether it's because it will show that the church has been wrong? I don't know.

When John Paul II does finally pop his clogs, let us hope that an intelligent Cardinal makes the grade, someone who will not be afraid to make brave decisions.

The argument goes that every sexual encounter within marriage could result in a child, and so anything blocking that possibility is tantamount to preventing a possible life.

What the Catholic Church fails to realise, is that despite a lot Africans being quite devout Catholics, sex within marriage is not the only sex that happens, hence the massive spread of AIDs across the continent.

Thus thousands of Africans dying, against thousands of Africans not being concieved.

Shouldn't we be more concerned about thouse people already alive rather than those who do not yet exist.

According to the Catholic Church, apparently not. I do emphasise the Catholic Church rather than individual Catholics. There are individual Catholics who believe this, that if you have extramarital sex, then you deserve what you get. Just as the spouses of those people also deserve it, just as the children of those people also deserve it.

These individuals appear to be near the top of the church hierarchy. People who advise the Pope. I've nothing against JP II. On the whole he's been a good Pontiff, but the world has changed during his run. And on this issue at least, he has failed to change along with it.

We need a new pontiff, someone who will be unafraid to face down people who fail to understand this situation. So as I say, nothing against JP II, but his exit is required in order for someone else to become the voice of God on Earth, and let us please please hope that they can make a difference and give these people some spiritual guidance that won't kill them.

Africa cannot afford another ten or twenty years of ignorance.

Mr Walpole's Quote

Life is a tragedy to those who feel, but a comedy to those who think.
Horace Walpole

Very true Horace. Very true.