Tags: My Best Friend Essay In FrenchMaster Thesis International MarketingBest Essay Writing BooksCover Letter For Nursing Assistant With No ExperienceShurley English 3 Paragraph EssayChristmas Essays ForIntertextuality ThesisProcrastinating HomeworkSat Essay Prompts ListEssays Written By F. Scott Fitzgerald
In contrast to movements that privileged psychological realism, such as the method acting championed by Konstantin Stanislavski, epic theater sought to have a point of view, and privileged "function" over "form." The aim of epic theater was to incite an introspective experience in the viewer such that they had to orient themselves in relation to the play, to consider its message in relation to their own beliefs.
but i much perfer brecht, he wants to effect change, make things happen, teach you. Physical theatre performances like DV8, productions like the masque of the red death by punchdrunk, and the Argentinian Fuerzabruta are pretty much my favourite productions ever because well... I do like naturalism too, and Stans methods can produce some pretty awe inspiring performances.
stan the man wants you to feel, have a nice jolly time at the theatre, watch a nice play that hes made you reahearse for 2years. im only in year 12 but we got the oppurtunity to watch a brecht play, man equals man, with the upper sixth and i preffered it generally to the stan techniques, it had so much more energy to it it gave me such a buzz i cant wait until next year.
If this meant making the theatre freezing cold, and dropping drips of water onto his audience; so be it.
That is very much external from the actors role, the technical or other sensual aids are just that, aids; they help to emphasise the emotions on stage.
' This is what Bertolt Brecht wanted his audience to do when they went to see his shows.
He wasn't there to provide an emotional ride for his audience, but to provide a thought provoking experience that would make them question the morals of the characters actions, and ultimately the viewer's own morals and actions.though stan does have its good points, it is pretty much fool proof Thread Starter, I think you've got a bit of the wrong end of the stick with Brechts theory.I don't do Theatre Studies etc but I have an avid love for theatre which is why I've read a lot of Brechts, Stanislavskis, Artauds, Appias, Brooks, and more work.He once said, "The theater-goer in conventional dramatic theater says: Yes, I've felt that way, too. so, debaters, which [reactictioner camp are you in? imo, brecht insulted his bourgeoisie audience by thikning that they had to be told constantly that they were watching aplay and didnt want them to be under any illusions.If I wanted to see boring naturalistic real life I'd watch a film or the telly, but theatre is a different medium and we should celebrate that.Brechtian theatre just sucks all the fun out of it for me - all theatre is inherently political but if it's not entertaining then what's the point.I've said a lot about emotion, Artaud aimed to transfer emotion, his actors were completely in character, and really feeling the emotions.If the actor is feeling their character, and their character's emotions the audience will begin to feel these emotions.The actor almost exaggerates to transfer the vital emotions and feelings appropriately.Artaud's Theatre of Cruelty is the complete opposite of Brecht's Epic Theatre.