The Clyde Fitch Report: Each day, everywhere we go, there are expectations we impose on others concerning their behavior, and privately, in our minds, we enforce those laws with an iron fist. When someone breaks our rules, we proceed with a imaginary slaughter in which we rob them of breath and permit them an examination of their own intestines (maybe not that extreme, but you see my point).
5 comments:
Theatre as a way to feel alive is a striking idea, and one that this article explores in an interesting fashion. The man humming in the coffee shop is an image that resonates with all of us, as we always hear someone humming and wish they would just stop. But the thought that no one ever hums for anyone else, only for their own enjoyment, is something easy to forget. People are inherently self-absorbed, and we don't like to stop and think that maybe someone is humming for their own benefit, not only to annoy others. Theatre is much the same way, in that observers tend to make the art about themselves. However, as certain artists have said, the creator is the most important part of the art, as the meaning that they intend for their art to have is what we see, and then distill through our own lenses. Theatre, as said in the article, doesn't need to strictly be critique of social problems or human faux-paus, but we need to produce theatre to feel alive and to share, much in the same way we would hum.
Yet Malina says, “By observing what is beautiful, we can learn what is meant to be.” I see this crucial notion of having art that must be "deep" and "clever" all over the place across the art world. I heard it a lot when I went to art gallery openings in NYC and even in the halls of CMU's School Of Drama. And while it's not a unworthy endeavor and goal to produce moving and strikingly profound art whether it be performance or visual, sometimes I do agree that it's not all that necessary. Yes, understanding the creators intentions behind a piece can help the audience further deepen understanding of the artwork, but what if the creators intention was just to simply make something beautiful and nice? I don't think that's a bad intention and I've come across a lot of art like this. Sometimes having art that is "cool" is enough to make me like it-- I notice a lot of installation art has this effect on me-- and I love it. By focusing on how it makes me feel rather than how it makes me think, it achieves a higher end goal.
In the beginning this article talked about the fact that sometimes you have to do things for yourself, even if it’s little things, like humming. I think that idea, the one of the self driven work, is so important to art. I have a friend who just graduated college with a BFA in acting. He’s had some trouble finding work, and has been taking a lot of roles he wouldn’t normally take. He’s also been working with directors he doesn’t enjoy. Working has really felt like work for him lately. So when he found an unknown little play that he really loved, he felt compelled to take a brief break from acting and begged a local community theatre to let him direct it. He’s not going to make a profit off of this. It won’t further his career. But he enjoys it so much. I think that feeling is what is essential to theatre, and the reason a lot of us got here in the first place. We should remember to preserve that feeling as time goes on.
Too often today, the arts are relegated to a place of pedestalization or extreme adornment. Many misperceive art's purpose, and position as non-superfluous in our everyday lives. Especially with regards to theater, and the work of Judith Malina and Julian Beck, the arts are critical way in which we are challenged, and our world views are consequently forced to develop and mature. In the same vein, I sincerely believe that arts - especially theatre - must remain grounded in some way in daily life, contemplating on some level the fundamental human condition. Otherwise, a viewer or audience member loses all ability to relate and find inroads toward understanding and utilizing a piece.
This article also brings up two vital points: art must sometimes be merely for the creator, as they metabolize something from the world around them. Also, the point that art must examine the ugly as it examines the beautiful is key, because beauty is not only derived from the good. Moreover, growth seldom comes from the easy and alluring.
This article was really nice to read. I agree with so many of the points the author has, but it was all too perfect. I would love to create the theater he descries, a production for other theater artists that is beautiful and shows life as it is, however that is not practical. No matter what role you play in the theater process, the goal at a base level is to bring in an audience and therefore make a profit. Personally the end goal is probably different for each person, but most of theater is a business and is needed to generate an income, so thats where shows are aimed. I hate to be the pessimist in this argument but it is true. Every now and then a beautiful show can come out that really speaks to some, but it will never make as much as the crowd pleasers like Lion King or Phantom, not to say that they are undeserving of the attention.
Post a Comment