Despite the theorical musings of Brecht, Grotowski, Boal, et. al. over the 20th century, it is curious as to why no theatre has made broad strides to bring their forms into the mainstream. Could this ignorance be linked to the overt political stances and personal idosyncracies of their creators?
Brecht was nothing if not a communist. Boal's theatre illuminates oppression throughout any situations, however it arose out of a direct critique of capitolism. Grotowski's political stances were greatly outweighed by the view that he was a "mad genius".
Given that some regional theatres attempted to break away not only from commercial, Broadway tastes, but also their stage spaces, it seems logical that they would be willing to adopt more risque, more engaging forms of theatre. After all, aren't they supposed to be forming more intimate relationships with their respective communities? Why then are we twice as likely to see a production of My Fair Lady on the stage of "Regional Theatre A" than something like The Caucasian Chalk Circle, or another play revived through an interesting, more audience-engaging staging?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment