BREAKING THE FOURTH WALL CONCEPT OF THE PROSCENIUM THEATRE
Dr. Satyabrata Rout
-1.jpg)
There is always
an attempt to come closer to the audience for better communication. But
proscenium theatre restricts the possibility of creating intimacy with the
audience. This happens because of two major reasons;
a) In
Proscenium theatre there is a clear cut aesthetic distance between the
audiences and actors which easily separates the actors from the audiences.
Active participation between these two groups is practically not possible because
of this separation.
b) The
conceptual imaginary wall; the fourth wall which is the characteristic feature
of Proscenium theatre can’t be broken logically. The audiences only have to
peep through this imaginary wall to watch what is going on inside the frame.
Accordingly, a performer also can’t interact
directly to the audience by involving them in the dramatic situations. Participation
of the audience is not possible in a proscenium performance. The audience can watch
a play, enjoy and appreciate it passively.
From inception,
theatre remains the most powerful communicative medium. The Primitive Theatre,
Greek Theatre, Roman drama, Indian Sanskrit Theatre, Folk traditions, Comedia
del Arte, Noh and Kabuki theatre and all other kinds of performance cultures
over the world have served the humanity as major community activities. But the
proscenium somehow limits the power of communication. But irrespective of its
limitations, the presence of apron in the down stage is a clear attempt to
break the imaginary wall in order to reach nearer to the audience.
One must have
observed that in a traditional or folk performance, the performers are
surrounded by the audiences from all possible sides; three sides, four sides or
even in round. There is no restriction for the audience to participate directly
or indirectly during the show. The audiences associate themselves with the
characters, consider the feelings of the character as their own; believe it as
a part of the happenings of their own life and enjoy the performance to the
heart content which can’t be possible in a proscenium situation with a
conceptual fourth wall in between the actors and audiences.
Attempt has been
made in every period of history to break away with this fourth wall concept.
The designers and the directors have tried many times and in many ways to get
rid of this black box and to involve the audience as active participant rather
than a passive viewer. Out of many visionaries who contributed to this
experiment were Bartolt Brecht, Jerzy Grotowsky, Badal Sircar and Augusto Baol.
These theatre activists are
known to the world for deliberately encourage the audience to participate in
the productions psychologically and physically and forced their audiences to think
critically about the social issues. Brecht’s theory of [1]alienation,
Augusto Baol’s [2]invisible theatre or Badal Sircar’s [3]Third Theatre provides
ample materials to break through the fourth wall. The performers in these conceptual
plays interact with the audiences and comment on the social issues frequently.
In Dorothy Hitchcock’s Drama- in-
Education for the school children in England or Barry John’s Theatre-in-Education programme with
National School of Drama, New Delhi, the children frequently asked to carry out
the project—an activity taken from their school syllabus-- somewhere in between
the play along with the actor-teachers who allow them to interact the plot to
lead them to a total education through the experience of theatre.
-2.jpg)
So many people over the world have tried in
their own ways to break away of the proscenium arch. Particularly for the creative
designer, proscenium stands as a barrier to pass through. Since the structure
and form of the proscenium is so massive and solid that it needs a blow to
crack the nut. Designers and directors found the possibilities in other kinds
of theatres like; Thrust stage and Arena stage or in Environmental and Site
specific presentation.
Continued....
Excerpts from my book “Space, Performances, Developing design: An Indian perspective.
[1] Theory of Alienation: A concept developed by Bartolt Brecht where
the actors alienate themselves from their characters and critically analyse the
situation and social issues which they are presenting in the play. This became
possible by soliloquies, songs and other theatrical elements used in Brecht’s
plays time to time.
[2] Invisible Theatre: Invisible theatre is
a form of theatrical performance that is enacted in a place where people would
not normally expect to see one, for example in the street or in a shopping
centre. The performers attempt to disguise the fact that it is a performance
from those who observe and who may choose to participate in it, encouraging the
spectators to view it as a real event. The Brazilian theater
practitioner Augusto Boal & Panagiotis Assimakopoulos
developed the form during his time in Argentina in the 1970s as part of his Theater
of the Oppressed, which focused on oppression and social issues. Boal went on to develop forum theater.
[3] Third Theatre: Badal
Sircar’s Third Theatre deals with a social commitment which reflects in
his plays time and again. Third Theatre was formed by imbibing ideas from the
traditional and folk theatre with the amalgamation of urban theatre. At the
same time it had an identity of its own. It creates awareness among the common
people on many social issues. There is no concrete characterization in the
plays based on third theatre concept. The actors play according to the
situation. Even the audience can take part in the live performances. Further,
there is the freedom of movement and there is no restriction of space. Body
language becomes important than facial expressions. The play can be performed
anywhere.
5 comments:
i really like the article...gained alot of information from this..n yes the proscenium makes it difficult to involve audience at some extent..
DEAR SIR I READ YOUR ARTICLE , I HAVE BEEN SUPPORTER OF THEATER TO COME OUT OF SO CALLED ELIDE AUDIENCE AND BE THE PART OF REAL WORLD AS IT IS THE MOST POWERFUL MEDIUM OF CHANGEOVER HOWEVER I AM EXTREMELY SORRY THAT MY REASON OF IT IS BEING DIFFERENT I Want IT TO COME OUT AND THROUGH ITSELF TO MASSES WHICH WILL GIVE IT SELF SUFFICIENCY NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF MONETARY BENEFIT BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF REACHING TO THE REAL AUDIENCE AND TO THE MASSES PARTICIPATE IN THE WHOLESOME . BUT A MEANINGFUL TEXT AND POWERFUL PLAY WILL ALWAYS BE ABLE TO LET AUDIENCE PARTICIPATE IN THE PLAY, THEIR CLAPS AND THEIR FLOWING EMOTIONS ALWAYS PROVES THIS NO MATTER WHERE WE ARE PERFORMING THIS. WITH DUE RESPECT I AM NOT CONTRADICTING YOU BUT TRYING TO SAY WHAT I FELT RECENTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THIS... RECENTLY WE WENT TO JHARKHAND FOR A THEATER FESTIVAL WHERE WE DRAMATIZED "SADH TEEN AANE" OF MANTO AND PERFORMED IN AUDI THOUGH IT WAS IN FAVOUR OF TRUTH OF THE ROOT CAUSE OF NAXALISM THEY CAME TO US AND TALKED TO US INVITED US TO SHOW OUR PERFORMANCE IN MORE AREAS LIKE THIS AND ON THE CONTRARY THEY DIDNOT LIKE THE TEXT HENCE THEY SILENTLY PROTESTED IT AND MANGED NO LET PRINT MEDIA NOT TO TALK BOUT OUR PLAY AND HENCE EVERY PLAY WAS EXPOSED EXCEPT OURS AND SUDDENLY THEIR BEHAVIOR CHANGED WITH US.... SO THEIR WAS PARTICIPATION FROM BOTH SIDE....TO FINISH I WOULD LIKE TO ADD "S-SHAKT PRASTUTI KISI KO BHI JAGA SAKTI HAI CHAHE MANCHAN KAHE BHI" AUR YE PURNTHA MERI APNI RAI HAI AUR YE ALAG ALAG LOGE KE UPAR NIRBHAR KARTE HAI KI WO KYA SOCHTE HAI...........REGARDS.. MANISH RAJ{EK RANG-KARMI}
DEAR SIR I READ YOUR ARTICLE , I HAVE BEEN SUPPORTER OF THEATER TO COME OUT OF SO CALLED ELIDE AUDIENCE AND BE THE PART OF REAL WORLD AS IT IS THE MOST POWERFUL MEDIUM OF CHANGEOVER HOWEVER I AM EXTREMELY SORRY THAT MY REASON OF IT IS BEING DIFFERENT I Want IT TO COME OUT AND THROUGH ITSELF TO MASSES WHICH WILL GIVE IT SELF SUFFICIENCY NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF MONETARY BENEFIT BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF REACHING TO THE REAL AUDIENCE AND TO THE MASSES PARTICIPATE IN THE WHOLESOME . BUT A MEANINGFUL TEXT AND POWERFUL PLAY WILL ALWAYS BE ABLE TO LET AUDIENCE PARTICIPATE IN THE PLAY, THEIR CLAPS AND THEIR FLOWING EMOTIONS ALWAYS PROVES THIS NO MATTER WHERE WE ARE PERFORMING THIS. WITH DUE RESPECT I AM NOT CONTRADICTING YOU BUT TRYING TO SAY WHAT I FELT RECENTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THIS... RECENTLY WE WENT TO JHARKHAND FOR A THEATER FESTIVAL WHERE WE DRAMATIZED "SADH TEEN AANE" OF MANTO AND PERFORMED IN AUDI THOUGH IT WAS IN FAVOUR OF TRUTH OF THE ROOT CAUSE OF NAXALISM THEY CAME TO US AND TALKED TO US INVITED US TO SHOW OUR PERFORMANCE IN MORE AREAS LIKE THIS AND ON THE CONTRARY THEY DIDNOT LIKE THE TEXT HENCE THEY SILENTLY PROTESTED IT AND MANGED NO LET PRINT MEDIA NOT TO TALK BOUT OUR PLAY AND HENCE EVERY PLAY WAS EXPOSED EXCEPT OURS AND SUDDENLY THEIR BEHAVIOR CHANGED WITH US.... SO THEIR WAS PARTICIPATION FROM BOTH SIDE....TO FINISH I WOULD LIKE TO ADD "S-SHAKT PRASTUTI KISI KO BHI JAGA SAKTI HAI CHAHE MANCHAN KAHE BHI" AUR YE PURNTHA MERI APNI RAI HAI AUR YE ALAG ALAG LOGE KE UPAR NIRBHAR KARTE HAI KI WO KYA SOCHTE HAI...........REGARDS.. MANISH RAJ{EK RANG-KARMI}
DEAR SIR I READ YOUR ARTICLE , I HAVE BEEN SUPPORTER OF THEATER TO COME OUT OF SO CALLED ELIDE AUDIENCE AND BE THE PART OF REAL WORLD AS IT IS THE MOST POWERFUL MEDIUM OF CHANGEOVER HOWEVER I AM EXTREMELY SORRY THAT MY REASON OF IT IS BEING DIFFERENT I Want IT TO COME OUT AND THROUGH ITSELF TO MASSES WHICH WILL GIVE IT SELF SUFFICIENCY NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF MONETARY BENEFIT BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF REACHING TO THE REAL AUDIENCE AND TO THE MASSES PARTICIPATE IN THE WHOLESOME . BUT A MEANINGFUL TEXT AND POWERFUL PLAY WILL ALWAYS BE ABLE TO LET AUDIENCE PARTICIPATE IN THE PLAY, THEIR CLAPS AND THEIR FLOWING EMOTIONS ALWAYS PROVES THIS NO MATTER WHERE WE ARE PERFORMING THIS. WITH DUE RESPECT I AM NOT CONTRADICTING YOU BUT TRYING TO SAY WHAT I FELT RECENTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THIS... RECENTLY WE WENT TO JHARKHAND FOR A THEATER FESTIVAL WHERE WE DRAMATIZED "SADH TEEN AANE" OF MANTO AND PERFORMED IN AUDI THOUGH IT WAS IN FAVOUR OF TRUTH OF THE ROOT CAUSE OF NAXALISM THEY CAME TO US AND TALKED TO US INVITED US TO SHOW OUR PERFORMANCE IN MORE AREAS LIKE THIS AND ON THE CONTRARY THEY DIDNOT LIKE THE TEXT HENCE THEY SILENTLY PROTESTED IT AND MANGED NO LET PRINT MEDIA NOT TO TALK BOUT OUR PLAY AND HENCE EVERY PLAY WAS EXPOSED EXCEPT OURS AND SUDDENLY THEIR BEHAVIOR CHANGED WITH US.... SO THEIR WAS PARTICIPATION FROM BOTH SIDE....TO FINISH I WOULD LIKE TO ADD "S-SHAKT PRASTUTI KISI KO BHI JAGA SAKTI HAI CHAHE MANCHAN KAHE BHI" AUR YE PURNTHA MERI APNI RAI HAI AUR YE ALAG ALAG LOGE KE UPAR NIRBHAR KARTE HAI KI WO KYA SOCHTE HAI...........REGARDS.. MANISH RAJ{EK RANG-KARMI}
Dear Manish Ji! Thank you for your valueble comment. I completely agree with your perception that "Audience participation always depends on the play". Play should be strong enough to raise the voice irrespective of the space, where it is performed. But my article is bit different. It is an excerpt from my underwritten book on THEATRE SPACE and PERFORMANCES. I was only talking about the limitation of a proscenium Theatre and also in its previous chapter I have discussed on the possibilities of Proscenium. This is for the basic understanding of exploring spaces.
For your information let me make it very clear that no one of us follow the presentation styles of a proscenium theatre even when we present our play inside that black box. It was primarily built in Europe to present Opera and then realistic plays only. It only crept into India with the British but we Indiand had nothing to do with Realism as it was not our mindset. We always believe on SAMUHIK MANCHAN (patticipation) and presented our kind of theatre in a proscenium. Because our presentation from beginning care for the audience and it is still continuing irrespective of space. Exam: Parsi Theatre, Company theatre, Though these performances were held inside the proscenium, they are too much participatory by nature. The trend is continuing till today.
Thank you for your comment which forced me to rectify and clarify my thoughts.
Regards
Satya
Post a Comment