So I was trying to remember the word "vestigial" - don't ask - and that got me thinking on the nature of modern theater and Feed the Bird's approach.
Yeah - try following that mental leap.
Warning: The following is just my thoughts on this theater group. (Scary, I know.) There is no overarching point I'm trying to prove or argue.
*Ahem*
My ponderous pondering focused primarily on the "lean and/or mean" structure of Feed the Bird - minimal actors, no lighting cues, only as many props as we can carry, etc. We chose this feature to be one of our theater's defining characteristics. Why? Partially because we have too, considering the realities of no-budget productions in NYC. Yet this was an artistic choice as well - our plays tend to disdain big set-piece productions.
From a FtB standpoint, the trappings of modern theater tend to distract from the point of it. We don't need a full helicopter a la Miss Saigon. We don't need a parade of animals a la The Lion King. Would the (hopefully) witty word-play of our Tradegy! A Series of Chorious Incidents really improve with a rotating stage and full choir? Perhaps, but I doubt it.
So - back to my original thought: "vestigial" & "theater". Is FtB shedding the much ado of major theater and moving forward? (Not alone, obviously - we're certainly not the only no-budget group in NYC. However, no-budget is currently experiencing a real resurgence.) Or are we regressing back to an earlier form of theater? Shakespeare did the travelogue "Antony & Cleopatra" on a blank stage. The original Greek productions took place in barren sandy amphitheaters.
If I was pushed, I'd probably argue that we're regressing, despite the negative connotations that word raises. My personal creative focus has always been on finding & manipulating the rules and conventions on media and genre. This, to me, doesn't seem like any kind of step forward. People have been messing with this sort of thing as long as "this sort of thing" has been around.
All said, I'm okay with where we are. I look to entertain - myself and my audience. I have no desperate desire to push the art of theater forward. In fact, I tend to think the people who actively set out to "progress" are pretentious assholes. Doing something successfully is, for me, more than enough.
I'll leave the argument about regression versus evolution of theater to those who care. At least, more than those who care for more than the length of a blog post.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Maybe regressing isn't the word you're looking for. "Returning" may be more like it--returning to a form of theatre where the focus is the drama taking place between actors, not where the focus is how many special effects can wow the audience. Ok, now I'm probably the one sounding like a pretenious asshole. :)
ReplyDelete