HowlRound Theatre Commons: If theatre is going to fundamentally change the way we think about climate change—and the way we relate to our planet and other species on it—we must change the way we make theatre so that it embodies new ways of sustainable thinking. Aesthetic theories reflect and shape ways of thinking, being, and interacting. Aesthetic theories are not, then, politically neutral; they require particular dramaturgical structures that are in turn political. In order to make theatre that embodies a politics of sustainability, I suggest we replace the aesthetic theory of catharsis—and all it implies and entails—with the Sanskrit aesthetic theory of rasa.
1 comment:
This article is not what I imagined it would be based off of the title, but it is still rather interesting. This idea of rasa vs. catharsis is intriguing to me. I have never really thought of theatre as an intrinsically cathartic experience, but I guess it largely is. At least, the kind of theatre I am used to is. It really is all about the climactic structure that we have become so accustomed to in Western theatre. Everything has to lead to something, and when it does not, we end up disappointed. This idea of enjoying each individual part of the show without the expectation of what it is going to lead to is really powerful, because it allows a show to exist for what it is and not what you are expecting it to be. I just saw “Us” at the movie theater, and I was disappointed in it, because it did not live up to what I had expected, but if I had gone in without expectations and had just enjoyed it as it came to me, it would have been a completely different experience. Each part individually was aesthetically nice and did contribute to the whole in a good way, it just did not conclude in a very appealing way.
Post a Comment