Going to see theatre
Mon, 27 Aug 2001, 09:37 amAmanda21 posts in thread
Going to see theatre
Mon, 27 Aug 2001, 09:37 amjust somethings i thought of last night:
personally - i do not go to the theatre often. i can't drive myself around and i don't have any money. :-o
is it as important that actors go to see theatre as well as act in theatre(or whatever they want to act in)?
what are everyone elses views on this matter?
i act, sing, dance, play 2 instuments and am involved with a couple of theatre companys as well as help run one.
as a part of learning about the performing arts - should young actors go to theatre to help them learn? does attending theatre make a better actor?
i would love to hear other thoughts!
xxAmanda
personally - i do not go to the theatre often. i can't drive myself around and i don't have any money. :-o
is it as important that actors go to see theatre as well as act in theatre(or whatever they want to act in)?
what are everyone elses views on this matter?
i act, sing, dance, play 2 instuments and am involved with a couple of theatre companys as well as help run one.
as a part of learning about the performing arts - should young actors go to theatre to help them learn? does attending theatre make a better actor?
i would love to hear other thoughts!
xxAmanda
RE: Going to see theatre
Tue, 28 Aug 2001, 06:36 amWalter Plinge
"art does not exist in a vacuum."
I think the point being made was that purely theatrical observation IS a form of vacuum.
"It is surely up to the perception of teh individual performer/artist to judge where the line between inspiration and plagiarism is drawn."
But wouldn't you agree that "perception" could be clouded and narrowed if "observed theatre" is not balanced by NON-theatrical observations?
"Noone involved in theatre would BE involved in theatre without being exposed to SOME aspect of theatre"
With due respect, this is not quite true. Theatre is often simply a working ground for performers and not necessarily the inspiration. Many artists come to live theatre simply because they have the urge to perform. This urge does not have to be a product of previously observed theatre of any sort.
Think of the "schoolyard clown" of your childhood. Was he/she behaving that way because of a play they had seen, or simply because that's the way they are?
Later on in life, that "clown" may discover the concept of theatre and realise "Hey, I can behave this way legitimately through live theatre!"
I was a schoolyard clown. Now I'm legitimate!
I think the point being made was that purely theatrical observation IS a form of vacuum.
"It is surely up to the perception of teh individual performer/artist to judge where the line between inspiration and plagiarism is drawn."
But wouldn't you agree that "perception" could be clouded and narrowed if "observed theatre" is not balanced by NON-theatrical observations?
"Noone involved in theatre would BE involved in theatre without being exposed to SOME aspect of theatre"
With due respect, this is not quite true. Theatre is often simply a working ground for performers and not necessarily the inspiration. Many artists come to live theatre simply because they have the urge to perform. This urge does not have to be a product of previously observed theatre of any sort.
Think of the "schoolyard clown" of your childhood. Was he/she behaving that way because of a play they had seen, or simply because that's the way they are?
Later on in life, that "clown" may discover the concept of theatre and realise "Hey, I can behave this way legitimately through live theatre!"
I was a schoolyard clown. Now I'm legitimate!
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···