The Theatre of the Absurd…
Reading about the Theatre of the Absurd feels relevent to my work. While reading an article by J P Crabb I came cross the following points which I feel are interesting. These extracts of Crabbs essay encapsulate the elements of Absurdist theatre that I feel follow my own train of thought and demonstrate its lasting impact upon modern-day theatre.
I feel that the impact left by the Theatre of the Absurd relates to my practice in terms of my own desire to break the traditional moulds. My desire to question and challenge someones responses to ‘a theatrical experience’, by asking them to step out of their comfort zone, get involved, interact. Even by calling the experience a theatrical one rather than mere interactive kinetic sculpture, it is my intention for them to be affected, moved and provoked, not only by the physical experience, but in forming their own interpretation of the narrative created before them.
I believe that I am questioning the whole notion of ‘What is a theatrical experience?’ by re-interpreting the traditional mechanics, form, established structure and conventions of theatre. I initially thew out all of them, then slowly one by one have adopted the conventions that I feel are useful and practical in order for me to deliver an enhanced experience, and to help make that definition between kinetic sculpture and theatre.
”The Theatre of the Absurd presented on stage the philosophy articulated by French philosopher Albert Camus in his 1942 essay, The Myth of Sisyphus, in which he defines the human condition as basically meaningless. Camus argued that humanity had to resign itself to recognizing that a fully satisfying rational explanation of the universe was beyond its reach; in that sense, the world must ultimately be seen as absurd.”
”Some writers were not always comfortable with the label and sometimes preferred to use terms such as “Anti-Theater” or “New Theater”. Artaud demanded a theatre that would produce collective archetypes and create a modern mythology. It was no longer possible, he insisted, to keep using traditional art forms and standards that had ceased being convincing and lost their validity.”
”In 1955, the famous character actor Robert Morley predicted that the success of Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett, meant “the end of theatre as we know it.” His generation may have gloomily accepted this prediction, but the younger generation embraced it. They were ready for something new—something that would move beyond the old stereotypes and reflect their increasingly complex understanding of existence.”
”Whereas traditional theatre attempts to create a photographic representation of life as we see it, the Theatre of the Absurd aims to create a ritual-like, mythological, archetypal, allegorical vision, closely related to the world of dreams. In a sense, it attempts to re-establish man’s communion with the universe. The Absurd Theatre hopes to achieve this by shocking man out of an existence that has become trite, mechanical and complacent. It is felt that there is mystical experience in confronting the limits of human condition.”
”One of the most important aspects of absurd drama is its distrust of language as a means of communication. Language, it seems to say, has become nothing but a vehicle for conventionalized, stereotyped, meaningless exchanges. Dr. Culik explains, “Words failed to express the essence of human experience, not being able to penetrate beyond its surface. The Theatre of the Absurd constituted first and foremost an onslaught on language, showing it as a very unreliable and insufficient tool of communication. Absurd drama uses conventionalized speech, clichés, slogans and technical jargon, which it distorts, parodies and breaks down. By ridiculing conventionalized and stereotyped speech patterns, the Theatre of the Absurd tries to make people aware of the possibility of going beyond everyday speech conventions and communicating more authentically.”
‘Absurd drama subverts logic. It relishes the unexpected and the logically impossible. According to Sigmund Freud, there is a feeling of freedom we can enjoy when we are able to abandon the straitjacket of logic. As Dr. Culik points out, “Rationalist thought, like language, only deals with the superficial aspects of things. Nonsense, on the other hand, opens up a glimpse of the infinite.”
‘‘In a revised edition of his seminal work, Martin Esslin disagrees: “Every artistic movement or style has at one time or another been the prevailing fashion. It if was no more than that, it disappeared without a trace. If it had a genuine content, if it contributed to an enlargement of human perception, if it created new modes of human expression, if it opened up new areas of experience, however, it was bound to be absorbed into the main stream of development. And this is what happened with the Theatre of the Absurd which, apart from having been in fashion, undoubtedly was a genuine contribution to the permanent vocabulary of dramatic expression…. [it] is being absorbed into the mainstream of the tradition from which … it had never been entirely absent … The playwrights of the post-Absurdist era have at their disposal, then, a uniquely enriched vocabulary of dramatic technique.”
”Edward Albee agrees with Esslin’s final analysis, writing, “For just as it is true that our response to color and form was forever altered once the impressionist painters put their minds to canvas, it is just as true that the playwrights of The Theatre of the Absurd have forever altered our response to the theatre.”
weblink: http://www.theatredatabase.com/20th_century/theatre_of_the_absurd.html
Citation: Crabb, J, P. (2006) THEATRE OF THE ABSURD [internet], Available from: http://www.theatredatabase.com/20th_century/theatre_of_the_absurd.html [accessed 18th March 2012]
Liz Dees MA project 