Course Reader Reading #2 What is Theater .docx

Course Reader: Reading #2
What is Theater?
Excerpts from:
Antonin Artaud, Philip Auslander, Jerzy Grotowski,
Peter Brook, and Augusto Boal
Intro to Theater: What is Theater? Page #1
The
Twentieth-Century
Performance
Reader
2nd edition

Edited by
Michael Huxley
and
Noel Witts
I~ ~~~!~;2~~~p
LONDON AND NEW YORK
First published 1996
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon,
Oxon OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA
and Canada by Routledge
270 Madison Ave, 7'lew York,
NY 10016
Reprinted 1997, 1999,2000,2001
This second edition first published 2002
Reprinted 2003 (twice), 2005
RoutJedae is an imprint if the Taylor &..Frands Group

© 1996, 2002 Michael Huxley and Noel Witts
Typeset in Bell Gothic and Perpetua by
Graphicraft Umited, Hong Kong
Printed and bound in Great Britain bv
St Edmundsbury Press Ltd, Bury St Edmunds,
Suffolk
All rights reserved. No part of this book may
be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any
form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other
means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the
publishers.
To our stude!
British Library Cata/oauina in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available
from the British Ubrary
Library if Canaress Cawloaina in Publication Data
A catalog record for this book has been
requested
ISBN 0-415-25286-5 (Hbk)
ISBN 0-415-25287-3 (Pbk)

png
Iniversity Press.
p Englewood Cliffsj
n University Press.
!!II manuscript Appia
lIStitute in Lausannej
ICe was entitled "the
1IiJa!, lightj paintingll
his death/
I a reconstruction of
~
hapter 4
Antonin Artaud
THEATRE AND CRUELTY
W E HAVE LOST THE IDEA of theatre. And in as much as
theatre restricts itself to probing the intimacy of a few
puppets, thereby transforming the audience into Peeping Toms,
one understands why the elite have turned away from it or why
the
masses go to the cinema, music-hall and circus to find violent to
gratification whose intention does not disappoint them.
Our sensibility has reached the point where we surely need
theatre that wakes us up heart and nerves.

The damage ""Tought by psychological theatre, derived from
Racine, has rendered us unaccustomed to the direct, violent
action
theatre must have. Cinema in its turn, murders us with reflected,
filtered and projected images that no longer connect with our
sens-
ibility, and for ten years has maintained us and all our faculties
in
an intellectual stupor.
In the anguished, catastrophic times we live in, we feel an
urgent need for theatre that is not overshadowed by events, but
arouses deep echoes within us and predOminates over our
unsettled
period.
Our longstanding habit of seelcing diversions has made us
forget the slightest idea of serious theatre which upsets all our
pre-
conceptions, inspiring us with fiery, magnetic imagery and
finally
reacting on us after the manner of unforgettable soul therapy.
Everything that acts is cruelty. Theatre must rebuild itself on
a concept of this drastic action pushed to the limit.
Infused with the idea that the masses think with their senses
first and foremost and that it is ridiculous to appeal primarily to
33

THEATRE AND CRUELTY
our understanding as we do in everyday psychological theatre,
the Theatre of
Cruelty proposes to resort to mass theatre, thereby
rediscovering a little of the
poetry in the ferment of great, agitated crowds hurled against
one another,
sensations only too rare nowadays, when masses of holiday
crowds throng the
streets.
If theatre wants to find itself needed once more, it must present
everything
in love, crime, war and madness.
Everyday love, personal ambition and daily worries are
worthless except in
relation to the kind of awful lyricism that exists in those Myths
to which the great
mass of men have consented.
This is why we will try to centre our show around famous
personalities,
horrible crimes and superhuman self-sacrifices, demonstrating
that it can draw out
the powers struggling within them, vvithout resorting to the
dead imagery of
ancient Myths.
In a word, we believe there are living powers in what is called
poetry, and
that the picture of a crime presented in the right stage
conditions is something
infinitely more dangerous to the mind than if the same crime

were committed in
life.
We want to make theatre a believable reality inflicting this kind
of tangible
laceration, contained in all true feeling, on the heart and senses.
In the same way
as our dreams react on us and reality reacts on our dreams, so
we believe
ourselves able to associate mental pictures with dreams,
effective in so far as they
are projected with the reqUired violence. And the audience will
believe in the
illusion of theatre on condition they really take it for a dream,
nor for a servile
imitation of reality. On condition it releases the magic freedom
of daydreams,
only recognisable when imprinted with terror and cruelty.
Hence this full scale invocation of cruelty and terror, its scope
testing our
entire vitality, confronting us with all our potential.
And in order to affect every facet of the spectator's sensibility,
we advocate
a revolving show, which instead of making stage and auditorium
into two closed
worlds without any possible communication between them, will
extend its visual
and oral outbursts over the whole mass of spectators.
Furthermore, leaving the field of analysible emotional feelings
aside, we
intend using the actor's lyricism to reveal external powers, and
by this means to
bring the whole of nature into the kind of theatre we would like

to evoke.
However extensive a programme of this kind may be, it does not
over-reach
theatre itself, which all in all seems to us to be associated with
ancient magic
powers.
Practically speaking, we want to bring back the idea of total
theatre, where
theatre will recapture from cinema, music-hall, the circus and
life itself, those
things that always belonged to it. This division between
analytical theatre and a
world of movement seems stupid to us. One cannot separate
body and mind, nor
the senses from the intellect, particularly in a field where the
unendingly repeated
jading of our organs calls for sudden shocks to revive our
understanding.
Thus on tl
the whole anato
and signs used ii
drastic curtailm{
necessitates tant
objects speak ou
thundering ima!
arranging a suff
stillness.
We expecl
active means are
limits of our nen
whose nature an

Moreover,
Hieronymus Bos,
things in outside'
Theatre mt
'vhere life stands
Besides we
methods discover
familiar to all.
And we insi
concerns, more t
We must fu
wise, can be four
(which must rem
blood is needed r
Source
Artaud, A. (1938,
trans. V. Cor
lished in 193
Antonin Arta
from which tE
Antonin Artaud (
French actor and w
on notions of theat
34

• • •
lire, the Theatre of
ft'ring a little of the
g;nnst one another,
r crowds throng the
it present everything
: worthless except in
las to which the great
amous personalities,
~ that it can draw out
the dead imagery of
is called poetry, and
tditions is something
e were committed in
, this kind of tangible
1SeS. In the same way
mIlS, so we believe
ctive in so far as they
e -ill believe in the
MIl, nor for a servile
edam of daydreams,
its scope testing our
lSibility, we advocate
rium into two closed

"ill extend its visual
al feelings aside, we
and by this means to
ld like to evoke.
t does not over-reach
I with ancient magic
f total theatre, where
and life itself, those
lalytiCal theatre and a
e body and mind, nor
~ unendingly repeated
understanding.
ANTONIN ARTAUD
Thus on the one hand we have the magnitude and scale of a,
show aimed at
the whole anatomy, and on the other an intensive mustering of
objects, gestures
and signs used in a new spirit. The reduced role given to
understanding leads to
drastic curtailment of the script, while the active role given to
dark poetic feeling
necessitates tangible signs. Words mean little to the mind;
expanded areas and
objects speak out. New imagery speaks, even if composed in
words. But spatial,
thundering images replete with sound also speak, if we become
versed in
arranging a sufficient interjection of spatial areas furnished
with silence and
stillness.

We expect to stage a show based on these principles, where
these direct
active means are wholly used. Therefore such a show, unafraid
of exploring the
limits of our nervous sensibility, uses rhythm, sound, words,
resounding 'with song,
whose nature and startling combinations are part of an
unrevealed technique.
Moreover, to speak clearly, the imagery in some paintings by
Grunewald or
Hieronymus Bosch gives us a good enough idea of what a show
can be, where
things in outside nature appear as temptations just as they
would in a Saint's mind.
Theatre must rediscover its true meaning in this spectacle of a
temptation,
where life stands to lose everything and the mind to gain
everything.
Besides we have put forward a programme which permits pure
production,
methods discovered on the spot to be organised around historic
or cosmic themes
familiar to all.
And we insist that the first Theatre of Cruelty show will hinge
on these mass
concerns, more urgent and disturbing than any personal ones.
We must find out whether sufficient production means, financial
or other-
wise, can be found in Paris, before the cataclysm occurs, to
allow such theatre
(which must remain because it is the future) to come to life. Or

whether real
blood is needed right now to reveal this cruelty.
Source
Artaud, A. (1938, 1964, 1970) 'Theatre and Cruelty', The
Theatre and its Double,
trans. V. Corti, London: Calder & Boyars: 64-67. Written in
1933, first pub-
lished in 1938 in Le Theatre et son double by Editions
Gallimard and then in
Antonin Artaud: (Euvres Completes, Tome IV by Editions
Gallimard (1964),
from which text this 1970 English translation was made.1
Antonin Artaud (1896-1948)
French actor and writer who, through his life experience, has
had a profound influence
on notions of theatre in our time. While not himself producing a
tangible system he
35
THEATRE AND CRUELTY
nevertheless, through the publication of the English translations
of his collection of
essays, The Theatre and Its Double (1958 and 1970), acted as a
catalyst for generations

of theatre makers by opening up new modes of perception.
Artaud promoted a way of
thinking which rejected logic and reason as 'the chains that bind
us', and wanted the
theatre, through its immediacy, to embrace the non-verbal
elements of consciousness,
and to arouse powerful therapeutic emotions in the audience. He
wanted the theatre,
through its power, to create a complete physical, mental and
moral upheaval in the
population, which would lead to enlarged and revolutionary
perceptions, from which
one can understand his attraction for the generation of the 1960s
in Europe and the
USA.
In this essay Artaud attacks psychological theatre, advocating
instead a form of
total theatre that will engage the spectator in creating his own
power to change, not
only himself, but also society as whole. He thus, like many of
the artists in this book,
was constantly in conflict with established theatre forms,
advocating instead the
search for man's instinctive impulsive life. Much influenced by
Freud's Interpretation
of Dreams, Artaud's life became an emblem of man's search for
consciousness, pro-
posing in the process that the theatre abandon naturalistic space
and language to
create a new order.
Compare this article with writings of the following authors in
this reader
Beck later, messianic claims for the purpose of theatre

Brook - who acknowledges him as an early influence
Grotowski for a similar, contemporary, messianic role for
theatre
H ijikata for later Japanese celebrations of the irrational
Jarry and Richter who wished theatre would stir audiences from
their apathy
Marinetti - who wished to sweep away logic and embrace
physicality and sensuality
Soyinka - a West African perspective on ritual
Stanislavski a contemporary, contrasting view of theatre
Wigman a contemporary, modern dance viewpoint
Further reading
Artaud, A. (1971) Artaud on Theatre, ed. C. Schumacher,
London: Methuen.
Esslin, M. (1976) Artaud, London: Fontana/Collins.
Innes, C. (1993) Avant Garde Theatre 1892-1992, London:
Routledge.
Note
1 1938 edition published in Collection Metamorphoses no.
IV. See also M.C.
Richard's first English translation (1958), New York: Grove.
36
Chapter 5
Sal
po:

W HEN YVO in the earl
were doing at Ju
primarily chronol
after modern dar:
applied to nearly
or popular enter1
refined its styles a
dance genre. It
legible structures
feeling tones and!
by expressive ele
lighting and cOStl
academic from th,
ermst. Gravity, di
were means to d{
graphers kept one
ritual dances of no:
conscious of their
post-modern chon
~ historical crisis in (
they were both
One was the uniql
dance; the other w
strict canons of bE
regal verticality 01
1
The Theater

" "
and Its Double
"~ By Antonin Artaud
~
Translated from the French-"
by Mary Caroline Richards
'.
~
GROVE PRESS
NEW YORK
CONTENT!
I
l
Copyright © 1958 by Grove Press, Inc. I
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in
any t
form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in
I

writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who may
quote tbrief passages in a review. Any members of educational
institutions
wishing to photocopy part or all of the work for classroom use,
or
publishers who would like to obtain permission to include the
work
in an anthology, should send their inquiries to Grove/Atlantic,
Inc.,
841 Broadway, New York, NY 10003.
Published simultaneously in Canada
Printed in the United States ofAmerica
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 58-9910
ISBN 0-8021-5030-6
Grove Press
841 Broadway
New York, NY 10003
01 02 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38
A Note on the Translation
PREFACE: The Theater and Cu!tl
I. The Theater and the Plague
II. Metaphysics and the Mise en
III. The Alchemical Theater
IV. On the Balinese Theater
V. Oriental and Occidental Theal

VI. No More Masterpieces
VII. The Theater and Cruelty
VIII. The Theater of Cruelty (First
IX. Letters on Cruelty
X. Letters on Language
XI. The Theater of Cruelty (Secor.
XII. An Affective Athleticism
XIII. Two Notes
MAURICE SAILLET: In Memoriam A
5
ON THE TRANSLATION
tJ::mgW)ll equivalent,
.
com-
in most cases been

"mise en scene" has
of it unplies all
the text.of the LeTheiitre
in Collection Meta-
6
~
~
~~.
PREFACE: The Theater and Culture
•
~.
Never before, when it is life~ itself that is in question, has
there been so much talk of civilization and culture. And there
is a curious parallel between this· generalized collapse of life
at the root of our present demoralization and our concern
for a culture which- has never been coincident with life, which
in fact has been devised to tyrannize ()ver life .
Before speaking further aooutcultirre, I must remark that
the world is hungry and not concerned with culture,and that
the attempt to orient toward culture thoughts turned only
toward hunger is a purely artificial expedient.
What is most important~it seems tOlIle, is not so much to .
defend a culturewhose-existehce hasriever kept a man from )
going hungry, as to extract, from what is called culture, ideas /

whose compelling force is identical with that of hunger.,,/
~~~ tSL!!~st of~1!~~!2.lJelievejll Vhl:lt.)l,!,!~.esu&.
liY~_,~nd .th~~ome!~~~~~~£!~!-!~Jiye,-_to
b~]~T!Uh.aJ:__~~~!-
ever isprodticed from the ~'ysteri~~~~aurselve~need
ii.Otforever -haun~. us .as ~~ve!YA!Ke~~.bl.~_(;g_P.'£~E1. ..
I mean that ifitis important for us to eat first of all, it is
even more important for us not to wastem the sole concern
for eatingpilr simplepo::M:I;. of .~ing J:l1,mp;~
If confusion is the sign of the times, I see at the root of
this confusion a rupture between things and words, between
things and the ideas and signs· that are their representation .
. Not, of . course, for lack of philosophical systems; their
hUmber and contradictions characterize our old French and
7
http:b~]~T!Uh.aJ
8 The Theater and Its Double
European culture: but where can it be shown that life, our
life, has ever been affected by these systems? I will not say
that philosophical systems must be applied directly and
immediately: but of the following alternatives, one must be
true:

Either these systems are within us and permeate our being
to the point of supporting life itself (and if this is the case,
what use are books?), or they do not permeate us and there-
fore do not have the capacity to support life (and in this case
what does their disappearance matter?).
W~.!~:~~~L~~i~J:l.£~.!l". the !~d~f c~~ure:-in~act!?nl of cul-
t!:lE~~~wi~.within us li~ -i' ne~organ. a sort of" second
breath; and on civilization as an applied culture controlling
even-~ur subtlest actions, a presence of mind; the distinction
between culture and civilization is an artificial one, providing
two words to signify an identical function.
A civilized man judges and is judged according to his be-
havior, but even the term "civilized" leads to confusion: a
cultivated "civilized" man is regarded as a person instructed
in systems, a person who thinks in forms, signs, representa-
tions-a monster whose faculty of deriving thoughts from
acts, instead of identifying acts with thoughts, is developed
to an absurdity.
/"'""If our life lacks brimstone, i.e., a constant magic, it is be-
.' "cause we choose to observe our acts and lose ourselves in
". considerations of their imagined form instead of being im~
pelled by their force.
And this faculty is an exclusively human one. I would even
say that it is this infection-of the human which contaminates
ideas that should have remained divine; for far from believing
that man invented the supernatural and the divine, I think it
is man's age-old intervention which has ultimately corrupted
the divine within him.
All our ideas about life must be revised in a period when
nothing any longer adheres to life; it is this painful cleavage

Preface
which is responsible for the reveng
which is no longer within us and whit
in finding in things suddenly appeal
consider the unprecedented number 0
gratuitousness is explained only by 01
complete possession of life.
H the theater has been created as I
sions, the agonized poetry expressed i
of the facts of life demonstrates tha
intact and asks only to be better dire
:aut no matter how loudly we dame
we '7tre reafiy afraid ofpiirsuing an I
TtSInfiu~~~]~giC··-·-···"·····~·"·-·~··--
Hence our confirmed lack of cultu
tain grandiose anomalies; for exampll
any contact with modern civilization,
ship carrying only healthy passengers I
outbreak of diseases unknown on that
nations like our own: shingles, influen
sinusitis, polyneuritis, etc.
Similarly, if we think Negroes sme:
of the fact that anywhere but in Eurc
"smell bad." And I 'would even say tb
as white as the gathering of pus in a
As iron can be heated until it turns
that everything excessive is white; f2£.
~ the mark of extreme decom~
This said, we can begin to form an j

which is first of all a protest..
A protest against the senseless COl
the idea of culture by reducing it to ~
Pantheon, producing an idolatry no diJ
worship of those religions which releg
theons.
The Theater and Its Double
l where can it be shown that life, our
ix.:II:d by these systems? I will not say
stems must be applied directly and
he foDowing alternatives, one must be
I ale within us and permeate our being
itself (and if this is the case,
permeate us and there-
life (and in this case
Ifi'icW one, providing
according to his be-
leads to confusion: a

pnJed as a person instructed
in forms, signs, representa-
of deriving thoughts from
IJia.g acts with thoughts, is developed
IIIStone, i.e., a constant magic, it is be-
Ibserve our acts and lose ourselves in
r imagined form instead of being im-
m exclusively human one. I would even
:tion-of the human which contaminates
remained divine; for far from believing
supernatural and the divine, I think it
Ifention which has ultimately corrupted
life must be revised in a period when
.heres to life; it is this painful cleavage
Preface
which is responsible for the revenge of things; the poetry
which is no longer within us and which we no longer succeed
in finding in things suddenly appears on their wrong side:
consider the unprecedented number of crimes whose perverse
gratuitousness is explained only by our powerlessness to take
complete possession of life.
If the theater has been created as an outlet for our repres-
sions, the agonized poetry expressed in its bizarre corruptions
of the facts of life demonstrates that life's intensity is still
intact and asks only to be better directed.
aut no matter how loudly we. clamor for magic in ot!r Jiyesl
we ~C'reafiy~afiild ~of 'pursuing an existence entiI~ly under

"'--:-nfl"~~"~'~''''-~~'~''d''.~ ...~ .. ,,, .....-~-~..................~.-
~......--- ..-...-~~--
Its 1 uence an SIOn.
~- ~~......"....,"',.......,.-----~-"""- ..-..,,-~~><.;-"'"
Hence our confirmed lack of culture is astonished by cer-
tain grandiose anomalies; for example, on an island without
any conta-ct with modem civilization, the mere passage of a
ship carrying only healthy passengers may provoke the sudden
outbreak of diseases unknown on that island but a specialty of
nations likeour own: shingles, influenza, grippe, rheumatism,
sinusitis, polyneuritis, etc.
,
Similarly, if we think Negroes smell bad, we are ignorant
of the fact that anywhere but in Europe it is we whites who
"smell bad." And I 'would even say that we give off an odor
as white as the gathering of pus in an infected wound.
As iron can be heated until it turns white, so it can be said
that everything excessive is white; fQ!". ~~atjC& W!.ilitJ!!~.~
~m.$..the mark of extreme decomEositi~n.
This said, we can begin to form an idea of culture, an idea
which is first'oran a protest.. -
A protest against the senseless constraint imposed upon
the idea of culture by reducing it to a sort of inconceivable
Pantheon, producing an idolatry no different· from the
image-..~ worship of those religions which relegate their gods
to Pan-
, theons.

I
" ,I
9
• The Theater and ItsD6ubie ...-- Preface
Apro~t agaiDStthe~ao.f ctiltureas distinctirom lif~
as if there were culture o.n Olle side and life on the other, as
if true. culture· ·were.nota· refined means .ofunderstanding
,'-.-----.,-~':'-'.•."- ., '~~_=;,..~C)'-.. '--,,~-_~'>_..,.."'-"'_;;,.;."-
,,~-<>t"'_'..._:_~...._"_'~"""-~,.r~~~""'.
anc!~.x~r~!~!!glife. ... .. . .)".. .
The library at Alexandria can be ·burI1tq0'wn:Thete are
forces above and beyond papyrus;. we 1l1ayctempo~ariiy.be
deprived of our ability to discover these forces,bllftheir
energy· will not be . suppressed .. It is goOd that our excessiVe
.
facilities are no longer available, that fonns fall intoobIivioIl:
a culture without space· ortirile, restrained only . by the capac-
ity of our own nerves; WiUreappear with alltnecmoreenergy.
It is right that fromtinre to timecatac1ysms'OccUl" whk:lu.irun~
""~ -_.-:''""----:-.--.-''~~~~--,~-"-.-... -'-:'-." - - ~-"...",~....~
. Pel usto returnt~ature,i.e"J1o"red1~~rlife:Theold
to1einrsrii-~a1s, stones, objects capable of· 4ischarging
thunderbolts, coslumesimpregnated with· bestial essences-

everything, inibort, thatIIlight det.ertnirie, disClose,arid direct
the secret forces of the universe-is for uS a dead thing, from
which we derive nothingbl.lt .. statlE.an.d aeStlietic.profit, the
profit of an audience, not or anactof.
Yettotemism is an actor, for it moves, and hasbeencre-
atciri;;'b~hili6factbrs;all truecultw:~ relies upon the bar-
baric and primitive means oftotemism Whose savage, Le.,
entirely spontaneous, life I wish to worship. ....... .
What has lo.st us cUltmcisourOccidentalidea()f art clUld
the profits we seek to derive from it. Art and culturecanpot
be considered together, contrary to the.treatment universally
accorded them!
True culture operates by exaltation and force, while the
European· ideal of art attempts to cast the mind into an atti-(:
tude distinct from force but addicted to.exaltatic:>n.It is a lazy,
'-unserviceable notion which .. engenders an· imminent death. If
the Serpent QuetzalcoatI's multiple twists and turns are har-
monious, it is because they express the equilibrium and fluc-
tuations of a sleeping force; the intensity of the forms.is there
only to seduce and direct a force
prOduce an insupportable range of ~
The gods that sleep in museums:
incense burner that resembles an IJ
one of the manifold Gods oUhe Wa
granite; the Mother Goddess of Wa1
of Flowers; the immutable expressio

many layers of water, of the Goddes.!
enraptured, blissful expression, featur
where atoms of sunlight circ1e,.--;-theC(
Goddess of Flowers; this world of
which a stone comes alive when it h
the world of organically civilized me
awaken from their slum~r, this hUII
participating in the dance of the goe
or looking back, on pain of becoming,
pillars of salt.
In Mexico, since we are talking al
art: things are made for use. And t
exaltation.
To our disinterested and inert i(
culture opposes a violently egoistic an
idea. For the Mexicans seek contact
latent in every form, unreleased by co
for themselves, but springing to life
with these forms. And the old Totem
communication.
How hard it is, when everything
though we may look about us with '
to wake and yet look about us as in
no longer know their function and "i
ward.
This is how our strange idea of d
nated, though it is action nonetheless,
for skirting the temptationQ[ repose

http:forms.is
http:to.exaltatic:>n.It
http:nothingbl.lt
http:1l1ayctempo~ariiy.be
Ie idea of culture as distinct from life-,-
c on one side and life on the other, as
!lOt. a refined means .. of understanding
~"_""d'.""",,_<-",~,,,_~,,_~,_~c, __ ~'_~_ ""'""f~_-=_","___
~~h"--" ~_"" .. "",_","-~~'~
amdria can be burnt down. There·· are
ODd papyrus:. we may temporarily be
ly to discover these forces, but their
~t fornis fall into oblivion:
reStrained only by the capac-
with all the more energy.
;apaulI; of. d;ischarging
bestial··essences-
disclose,and direct
us a dead thing, from
and aesthetic profit, the
actor. . ....... ... .
. it moves, and has )een ere-

culture relies upon the bar-
pjlriesa;:d. It is good that our excessive
means of totemism whose savage, i.e.,
life I wish to worship,
IIture is our Occidental idea of art and
derive from it. Art and culture cannot
r, contrary to the treatment universally
res by exaltation and force, while the
attempts to cast the mind into an atti-
e but addicted to exaltation. It is a lazy,
~hich engenders an imminent. death . .If
,atl's multiple twists and turns are. har-
, they express the equilibrium and fluc-
force; the intensity of the forms is there
Preface 11
only to seduce and direct a force which, in music, would
produce an insupportable range of sound.
The gods that sleep in Dluseums:the god of fire with his
incense burner that resembles an Inquisition tripod; Tlaloc,
one of the manifold Gods of the Waters, on his wall of green.
granite~ the Mother·Goddess of Waters, the ·Mother Goddess
of Flowers; the immutable expression, echoing from beneath
many layers of water, of the Goddess robedingree~ jade; the
enraptured,blissfulexpresslon, features crackling with incense,
where. atoms of sunlight circ1e-. -.. thecountenance of the
Mother
Goddess of Flowers; this world of obligatory servitude in
whichas.tone comes alive when it has been properly carved,
the world oforganically civilized men whose vital organs too
awaken.from their slum~r, this . human world enters into us,

participating. in the dance. of the gods· without· turning round
or looking back, on pain of becoming, like ourselves, crumbled
pillars of salt.
In MeXico, since weare talking about Mexico, there is no
art: things are made for use. And theworld is in perpetual
exaltation;
To our· disinterested and inert idea of art an authentic
culture.opposesaviolently egoistic and magical, i.e., interested
idea. For the MeXican.s seek contact with the Manas, forces
latent in every form, uilreleased.by.contemplation of the forms
for themselves, but . springing to life by magic identification
with these forms. And the old Totems are there to hasten the
communication.
"" - ..
·wlifd.<
~ JIowhard it is, when everything encourages us to sleep,
though we may look about us with conscious, clinging eyes,
to wake arid yetloo.kaooutus asin a dream, with eyes that
nolol},ger.know their function and whose gaze is turned in-
This ishow.our strange.ideaofdisinterestedaction origi-
nated, though it is action nonetheless, and all the more violent
for skirting the temptation of repose.
The Theater and Its Double 12

Every real effigy has a shadow which is its double; and art
must falter and fail from the moment the sculptor believes
he has liberated the kind of shadow whose very existence will
destroy his repose.
Like all magic cultures expressed by appropriate hiero-
glyphs, the true theater has its shadows too, and, of all lan-
guages and all' arts, the theater is the only one left whose
shadows have shattered their limitations. From the beginning,
one might say its shadows did not tolerate limitations.
Our petri!ied idea of the theater is connected with our
petrified idea of a culture without shadows, where, no matter
which way it turns, our mind (esprit) encounters only empti-
ness, though space is fulL
/"-But the true theater, because it moves and makes use of
/ living instruments, continues to stir up shadows where life
(,f has never ceased to grope its way. The actor does not make
, the same gestures twice, but he makes gestures, he moves;
, and although he brutalizes forms, nevertheless behind them
and through their destruction he rejoins that which. outlives
,,forms and produces theIr continuation .
.... The theater, which is in no thing, but makes use of every-
thing-gestures, sounds, words, screams, light, darkness-
rediscovers itself at precisely the point where the mind requires
a language to express its manifestations.
And the fixation of the theater in one language-written
words, music, lights, noises-betokens its imminent ruin, the
choice of anyone language betraying a taste for the special
effects of that language; and the dessication of the language
accompanies its limitation.

/~' For the theater as for culture, it remains a question of
/ naming and directing sl1a,c1g~s: and the theater, not confined
---t--1e-a:--fixed lang'uageand form, not only destroys false
shadows
but prepares the way for a new generation of shadows, around
", which assembles the true spectacle of life.
Preface
To break through language in orj
create or recreate the theater; the ~
believe that this act must remain sac]
essential thing is to believe that not ju
and that there must be a preparation.
This leads to the rejection of the u
and man's powers, and infinitely exten
is called reality.
Y~ must~Ueve,~Uiliu
a sense oflife.,iI1 which manfearlesslJ
~rwhat'-does'~ot~ yetexist,~' and brlli
everythlng'iIiai'has' notbeen'oorncan
if we are not satisfied to remain mer
Furthermore, when we speak the -.;
unrlerstOodwearenor-ieteTrrng to li1
its surfa~~~'of'facf,'Diit toinaTfragHe,f
forms n~~-;;r--reach. And -irihere l~--;t~....
cursed thing in our time, it is our artis:
instead of being like victims burnt •
through the flames.

s a shadow which is its double; and art
rom the moment the sculptor believes
nd of shadow whose very existence will
ltures expressed by appropriate hiero-
2' has its shadows too, and, of all lan-
11M: theater is the only one left whose
Ili6Mr limitations. From the beginning,
not tolerate limitations.
is connected with our
does not make
gestures, he moves;
ie¥ertheless behind them
but makes use of every-
screams, light, darkness-
a.:ty the point where the mind requires
its manifestations.
[ the theater in one language-written
IOises-betokens its imminent ruin, the
guage betraying a taste for the special
:e; and the dessication of the language
ion.
for culture, it remains a question of
shadows: and the theater, not confined

d form, not only destroys false shadows
[)r a new generation of shadows, around
rue spectacle of life.
Preface 13
To break through language in order to touch life is to
create or recreate the theater; the essential thing is not to
believe that this act must remain sacred, i.e., set apart-the
essential thing is to believe that not just anyone can create it,
and that there must be a preparation.
This leads to the rejection of the usual limitations of man
and man's powers, and infinitely extends the frontiers of what
is called reality.
~¥!t.1~s~liey.ejn a sense oL~bx..JlL~,Jh~W',
a sense of life in which man fearlessly makes himself master
""'-,;.;_ -.0.',,, _",. __ ~~_,._;-;;''''-''n'':''_. =_",--,_,-:-""",~.,."",-
.,.' - '_."0". ;-- .,_,____ , ••~..," "'_ ed_""'~"-_~ "'",. _____ ,._-
~-,~~--~~.,, __ "'~ ..._~,,_c_...,.,""-~___ -_~ ~'"'~_.,- .,,-
_.,,'___...,.:;;.
<:!Lw!:~L.9:~~~~!lo~,lTete~ist, and ,brings it iqtob.~,iUg. And
eveiYthing that has not beeid)orn can still be brought to life
if we are not satisfied to remain mere recording organisms.
Furthermore, when we speak the word "life,"" it mus~
undeistood~we:'are~~orn!£eriingtoTi~wek~{;;~ it -f~om
~!s,~~!fi£~~_~Dac~, 'but to
~thar!i~g}~:Ji'~~t~~t[~i:~~n:t~!_wllkh
!2fmS never r~~c.§,. AncCHthere is still one hellish, truly ac-
cursed thing in our time, it is our artistic dallying with forms, '
instead of being like victims burnt at the stake, signaling )
through the flames. /

,~
~~------~~--~~-
LIVENESS
Performance in a mediatized culture
Philip Auslander
I~
London and New York
'.
First published 1999
by Routledge
11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001
© 1999 Philip Auslander
The right of Philip Auslander to be identified as the Author of
this Work
has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright,
Designs and
Patents Act 1988
Typeset in Goudy by Routledge
Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays PLC
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any

information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
British Ubrary Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British
Library
Ubrary ofCongress Cataloging in Publication Data
Liveness: performance in a mediatized culture/Philip Auslander.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Performing arts Social aspects.
2. Rock music Performance.
3. Trials. I. Title.
PN1590. S6A88 1999
791 '.0973'0904-dc21
98-43440
CIP
ISBN 0-415-19689-2 (hbk)
ISBN 0-415-19690--6 (pbk)
FOR DEANNA SIRLIN, MY S
INSPIRATION

~
,.~
INTRODUCTION:
"An Orchid in the Land of Technology"!
2
3
The prospectus for a conference entitled "Why Theatre: Choices
for
the New Century"z posed a question that goes straight to the
heart of
the matter that concerns me here: "Theatre and the media: rivals
or
partners?" My own answer to this question is unequivocal: at
the level
of cultural economy,3 theatre (and live performance generally)
and the
mass media are rivals, not partners. Neither are they equal
rivals: it is
absolutely clear that our current cultural formation is saturated
with,
and dominated by, mass media representations in general, and
televi-
sion in particular.
In an essay on theatre and cinema, Herbert Blau (1982: 121)
quotes
Marx's Grundrisse:
In all forms of society, there is one specific kind of production
which predominates over the rest, whose relations thus assign

rank and influence to the others. It is a general illumination
which bathes all the other colours and modifies their particu-
larity. It is a particular ether which determines the specific
gravity of every being which has materialized within it.
Although Marx is describing industrial production under
bourgeois
capitalism, for Blau, "he might as well be describing the
cinema." I
would argue, pace Marx and Blau, that Marx might as well be
describing
The title of this chapter is taken from Walter Benjamin's
celebrated essay "The work
of art in the age of mechanical reproduction" (1986 [1936]: 40).
The conference, which took place in the fall of 1995 in Toronto,
was sponsored by
the University of Toronto and Humboldt University in Berlin.
I use the phrase "cultural economy" to describe a realm of
inquiry that includes both
the real economic relations among cultural forms, and· the
relative degrees of
.cultural prestige and power enjoyed by different forms.
x_I
INTRODUCTION
television: Marx's allusions to a general illumination and an
ether (a

word frequently used in early discussions of broadcasting to
describe
the medium through which electronic waves pass) are even more
appropriate to that medium than to the cinema.
As for the cultural dominance of television and its productions,
Cecilia TIchi (l991: 3-8) has suggested that television can no
longer.
be seen just as an element in our cultural environment, one
discourse
among many, but must be seen as an environment in itself.
Television
has transcended its identity as a particular medium and is
suffused
through the culture as "the televisual."
What the televisual names ... is the end of the medium, in a
context, and the arrival of television as the context. What is
clear is that television has to be recognised as an organic part
of the social fabric; which means that its transmissionS are no
longer managed by the flick of a switch.
(Fry 1993: 13)
In other words, if television once could be seen as ranking
among a
number of vehicles for conveying expression or information
from
which we could choose, we no longer have that choice: the
televisual
has become an intrinsic and determining element of our cultural
formation. As Tony Fry indicates, it is indeed no longer a
question of
thinking about television in various cultural contexts but of
seeing it as
the cultural context. Clearly, this issue and the related question

of the
nature of television culture could be (and have been) the
subjects of
books in themselves. The project of describing the position of
other
cultural discourses within our mediatized environment is as
pressing as
the project of describing that environment itself. Because live
perfor-
mance is the category of cultural production most directly
affected by
the dominance of media, it is particularly urgent to address the
situa-
tion of live performance in our mediatized culture.
Investigating live performance's cultural valence for the present
volume, I quickly became impatient with what I consider to be
tradi-
tional, unteflective assumptions that fail to get much further in
their
attempts to explicate the value of "liveness" than invoking
cliches and
mystifications like "the magic of live theatre," the "energy" that
supposedly exists between performers and spectators in a live
event,
and the "community" that live performance is often said to
create
among performers and spectators. In time, I came to see that
concepts
such as these do have value for performers and partisans of live
perfor-
mance. Indeed, it may even be necessary for performers,
especially, to
2

INTRODUCTION
in them. But where these concepts are lJ
Ri=!ltl()nslhlP between live performance and its pr~
IIJ[nD(~nt, they yield a reductive binary opposition
_:d~ltized. Steve Wurtzler summarizes this traditio
As socially and historically produced, the a:
live and the recorded are defined in a mutuaU,
tionship, in that the notion of the live is p
absence of recording and the defining fact of
the absence of the live.
(Will
In this tradition, "the live comes to stand for a j
outside representation" (WuTtzler 1992: 88). Ir
common assumption is that the live event is "real"
events are secondary and somehow artificial repro
In Chapter 2, I will argue that this kind of thinlcinl
the culture at large but even in contemporary PI
The arguments of that chapter are intended bod
challenge the traditional way of thinking abo
cultural position by employing its terms (that is
opposition for granted), then opening those t1
critique. Chapters 3 and 4 depart from a different
ness must be examined not as a global, undiffeJ:al
but within specific cultural and social contexts.
Perhaps because of my impatience with the 00
I have sometimes been mistaken for someone wi:
who is even antagonistic toward - live perfOm
far from being the case: my interest in the cui
... Wurtzler (1992: 89-90) challenges this binary opposit:io
socially constructed categories live and recorded cannot 31

tional practices." He offers a chart in which various kind!;
according to spatial and temporal vectors. Two categories c
neither purely live nor purely recorded emerge: those in
audience are spatially separate but temporally co-presenl
radio) and those in which performance and audience an
elements of the performance are pre-recorded (e.g., Iip-s
replays on stadium video displays).
5 I have found that scholars working in mass media studies
ested in television or popular music, have dealt more direc
question of Iiveness than most scholars in theatre or perfon
3
INTRODUCTION
aIIusi«ms to a general illumination and an ether (a
_ in .eady discussions of broadcasting to describe
..,. which electronic waves pass) are even more'
Ihan to the cinema.
a..;na.ve of television and its productions,
has suggested that television can no longer
our Cultural environment, one discourse
seen as an environment in itself. Television
as a particular medium and is suffused
tdevisual. "

(Fry 1993: 13)
could be seen as ranking among a
expression or information from
bIger have that choice: the televisual
detennining element of our cultural
it is indeed no longer a question of
l...-.s cultural contexts but of seeing it as
issue and the related question of the
ttl" ··tmuJd be (and have been) the subjects of
Fpqect of describing the position of other
,wililiY-c.K mediarized environment is as pressing as
_ that environment itself. Because live perf or-
.....ofndnual production most directly affected by
..... it is particularly urgent to address the situa-
...-:e illour mediatized . culture.
_p::a6...tanee'S cultural valence for the present
...... impatient with what I consider to be tradi-
e ~ that fail to get much further in their
-= die value of "liveness" than invoking cliches and
=."JIE magic of live theatre," the "energy" that
.......... perfonners and spectators in a live event,
fiiirthat live performance is often said to create
..... spectators. In time, I came to see that concepts
~ v3lue for performers and partisans of live perf or-
BlY even be necessary for performers, especially, to
2

INTRODUCTION
in them. But where these concepts are used to describe the
ftdationship'between live performance and its present
mediatized envi-
rionment, they yield a reductive binary opposition of the live
and the
ilnediatized. Steve Wurtzler summarizes this traditional view
well:
As socially and historically produced, the categories of the
live and the recorded are defined in a mutually exclusive rela-
tionship, in that the notion of the live is premised on the
absence of recording and the defining fact of the recorded is
the absence of the live.
(Wurtzler 1992: 89)4
In this tradition, "the live comes to stand for a category
completely
outside representation" (Wurtzler 1992: 88). In other words, the
common assumption is that the live event is "real" and that
mediatized
events are secondary and somehow artificial reproductions of
the real.
In Chapter 2, I will argue that this kind of thinking persists not
only in
the culture at large but even in contemporary performance
studies.5
The arguments of that chapter are intended both to exploit and
to
challenge the traditional way of thinking about liveness and its
cultural position by employing its terms (that is, taking the
binary
apposition for granted), then opening those terms themselves to

critique. Chapters 3 and 4 depart from a different premise - that
live-
ness must be examined not as a global, undifferentiated
phenomenon
hIt within specific cultural and social contexts.
Perhaps because .of my impatience with the conventional
Wisdom,
I have sometimes been mistaken for someone who does not
value -
is even antagonistic toward - live performance. This is very
fur from being the case: my interest in the cultural status of live
Wurtzler (1992: 89-90) challenges this binary opposition by
asserting that "the
socially constructed categories live and recorded cannot account
for all representa-
tional practices." He offers a chan in which various kinds of
events are positioned
acCording to spatial and temporal vectors. Two categories of
representations that are
neither purely live nor purely recorded emerge: those in which
performance and
audience are spatially separate but temporally co-present (e.g.,
live television or
radio) and those in which performance and audience are
spatially co-present but
elements of the performance are pre-recorded (e.g., lip-synched
concerts, instant
replays on stadium video displays) .
5 I have found that scholars working in mass media studies,
particularly those inter-
ested in television or popular mUsic, have dealt more directly
and fruitfully with the

question of liveness than most scholars in theatre or
performance studies.
3
INTRODUCTION
performance derives directly from my sense of living in a
culture in
which something I continue to value seems to have less and less
pres-
ence and importance. Despite my own commitmentto the theatre
and
other forms of live performance, I have tried here to take a
fairly hard-
headed, unsentimental approach. The resulting assessment of
the
situation of live performance in a culture dominated by mass
media has
not made me optimistic about its cUtren! and future cultural
prestige,
as understood in traditional terms~ It has. also enabled me to
see,
however, that those terms may no longer be the most useful
ones.
Performance artist Eric Bogosian, for example, describes live
theatre
as:

medicine for a toxic environment of electronic media mind-
pollution....Theater clears my head because it takes the
subtextual brainwashing ·ofthe media madness and SHOUTS
thatsubtext out 10ud....Theater is ritual. It is something we
make together every time it happens. Theater is holy. Instead
of being bombarded by a cathode ray tube we are speaking to
ourselves. Human language, not electronic noise.
(Bogosian 1994: xii)
Bogosian's perception of the value of live performance dearly
derives
from its existence only in the moment ("every time it happens"),
and
its putative ability to create community (if not communion)
among its
participants, including performers and spectators. These are
both issues
I address in the chapters to follow. Most important for the
present
discussion, he sets live performance in a relationship of
antagonistic
opposition to mediatization and imputes to live performance the
social,
perhaps even political, function of opposing the oppressive
regime of
"electronic noise" imposed upon us by the mass media. This
opposi-
tion, and live performance's ostensible curative powers,
presumably
derive from significant ontological distinctions between live
and medi-
atized cultural forms. This perception of an oppositional
relationship
between the live and the mediatized animates my own

discussion, for I
wish both to exploit and to deconstruct that opposition in my
discus-
sion of the ontology ot live performance in Chapter 2.
Several important premises are implied by my use of the word
"mediatized," which I have borrowed from Jean Baudrillard. Its
emphasis on a conventional concept of mass media marks a
limit of my
inquiry. Although I discuss the impact of digital information
technolo-
gies on the issues at hand, especially in Chapter 3, my primary
concern
here is with the relationship between live performance and what
may
4
INTRODUCTION
be called "old media" (e.g., television, film,
have already begun the project of theorizing I
lI¥1irollm,ent of advanced information technologies
I do here (see Case 1996, Causey [forthcomrng
1997).
I often employ the term "mediatized," admittedly
indicate that a particular cultural object is a pn
or of media technology. "Mediatized performanl
is circulated on television, as audio or video I
forms based in technologies of reproduction .
...."UU.jlVll is more expansive: "What is mediatized il

the daily press, out of the tube, or on the radio: it
by the sign form, articulated into models, ani
code" (l9~1: 175-6). For Baudrillaqi. mediati2a1i
_ ...... ,u term describing products of the media. Ra
as instrumental in a larger, socio-political proc
.tiscourses under the dominance of a single code. I-
lteudrillard's admonishment that the word "mem
ddlne modes of cultural production, I hope I have n
of the term Baudrillard's characterization of the m
mltural dominant of contemporary, westem/ized SO(
my description here can be generalized to this exrent,
is admittedly on the United States.) I intend to d
performance's cultural-economic competition with
the position of live performance in a culture for whid
a vehicle of the general code in a way that live perfuI
is no longer). Although this hook is not genaaI
Baudrillardian politics, 1 do follow Baudrillard's line ill
rock music in Chapter 3, both to extend his analysis i
realm and to critique that analysis.
In the sense that I am treating live and mediatim
parallel forms that participate in the same cultural eo
of "mediatization" follows Fredric Jameson's definitiOl
"the process whereby the traditional fine arts ...come
of themselves as various media within a mediatic 51
1991: 162). Susan Sontag (1966: 25), in her essavon
contrasts the two forms by saying that: "theatre is neve:
the sense that "one can make a movie 'of'a play but
movie." Part of my argument in Chapter 2 is intended
wrong: there have long been plays "of" movies and tek
and live performance can even function as a kind (
Whereas the traditional view represented by Sontag
5

OITR.ODUCTlON
.air fiom my sense of living in a culture in
___ to wlue seems to have less and less pres~
~my own commitment to the theatre and
•••re. I have tried here to take a fairly hard
l.,......-lt The resulting assessment of the
llilililtl:leiD a culture dominated by mass media has
ti~ its current and future cultural prestige,
..... lamS. It has also enabled me to see,
......DO longer be the most useful ones.
.,....;~liiI. for example, describes live theatre
ie4C111'1riromnent of electronic media mind~
!£1.deaIs my head because it takes the
~u the media madness and SHOUTS
.....;.Theater is ritual. It is something we
,,1ime it happens. Theater is holy. Instead
,.,a cathode ray tube we are speaking to
.; II "we. not electronic noise.
(Bogosian 1994: xii)
i1he wlue of live performance clearly derives
• the moment ("every time it happens"), and
lIf!lIII£alIJIJ1lunity (if not communion) among its ,_'WIIkfi
and spectators. These are both issues
_ to fOllow. Most important for the present
pa6....ance in a relationship of antagonistic

bon and imputes to live performance the social, _tiou of
opposing the oppressive regime of
.... upon us by the mass media. This opposi~
~s ostensible curative powers, presumably
,.....J.,gicaJ distinctions between live and medi-
..~ of an oppositional relationship
Ie- ·"';181 animates my own discussion, for I
dec:onstruct that opposition in my discus-
.~."l8nce in Chapter 2.
implied by my use of the word
from Jean Baudrillard. Its
media marks a limit of my
information technolo~
INTRODUCTION
now be called "old media" (e.g., television, film, sound
recording).
Others have already begun the project of theorizing performance
in the
environment of advanced information technologies more
specifically
than I do here (see Case 1996, Causey [forthcoming], McKenzie
1997,
Saltz 1997).
I often employ the term "mediatized," admittedly somewhat
loosely,
to indicate that a particular cultural object is a product of the
mass
media or of media technology. "Mediatized performance" is
performance

that is circulated on television, as audio or video recordings,
and in .
other forms based in technologies of reproduction. Baudrillard's
own
definition is more expansive: "What is mediatized is not what
comes
off the daily press, out of the tube, or on the radio: it is what is
reinter-
preted by the sign form, articulated into models, and
administered by
the code" (19~n: 175--6). For Baudrillard, mediatization is not
simply a
neutral term describing products of the media. Rather, he sees
the
media as instrumental in a larger, socio-political process of
bringing all
discourses under the dominance of a single code. Although I
ignore
Baudrillard's admonishment that the word "mediatized" does not
define modes of cultural production, I hope I have retained in
my use
of the term Baudrillard's characterization of the mass media as
the
cultural dominant of contemporary, western/ized societies. (I
believe
my description here can be generalized to this extent, though
my focus
is admittedly on the United States.) I intend to describe both
live
performance's cultural-economic competition with other forms
and
the position of live performance in a culture for which
mediatization is
a vehicle of the general code in a way that live performance is
not (or
is no longer). Although this book is not generally in service to

Baudrillardian politics, I do follow Baudrillard's line in my
discussion of
rock music in Chapter 3, both to extend his analysis into that
cultural
realm and to critique that analysis .
In the sense that I am treating live and mediatized performance
as
parallel forms that participate in the same cultural economy, my
usage
of "mediatization" follows Fredric Jameson's definition of the
term as:
"the process whereby the traditional fine arts...come to
consciousness
of themselves as· various media within a mediatic system"
(Jameson
1991: 162). Susan Sontag (1966: 25), in her essay on theatre
and film,
contrasts the two forms by saying that: "theatre is never a
'medium'" in
the sense that "one can make a movie 'of' a play but not a play
'of' a
movie." Part of my argument in Chapter 2 is intended to prove
Sontag
wrong: there have long been plays "of" movies and television
programs,
and live performance can even function as a kind of mass
medium.
Whereas the traditional view represented by Sontag's comment
sees
5

INTRODUCTION
theatre and the live performance arts generally as belonging to a
cultural system separate from that of the mass media, live forms
have
become mediatized in Jameson's sense: they have been forced
by
economic reality to acknowledge their status as media within a
medi-
atic system that includes the mass media and information
technologies.
Implicitly acknowledging this situation, a number. of theatres
have
displayed signs similar to the banner that flew outside the
Alliance
Theater in Atlanta declaring that its offerings are "Not
Available on
Video," demonstrating that the only way of imputing specificity
to the
experience of live performance in the current cultural climate is
by
reference LO the dominant experience of mediatization.
There is no question that live performance and mediatized forms
compete for audiences in the cultural marketplace, and that
mediatized
forms have gained the advantage in that competition. Broadway
producer Margo Lion's observation. about the position of theatre
within
this competitive cultural economy can be applied to live
performance
generally: "we have realized that we are all competing for the

same
entertainment dollars in a climate where theater isn't always
first on
the list" (quoted in Rick Lyman, "On stage and off," New York
Times,
December 19 1997: B2). Blau elaborates:
[The theater's] status has been continually threatened by what
Adorno named the culture industry and...the escalating
dominance of the media. "Do you go to the theater often?"
That many have never gone, and that those who have, even
in countries with established theater traditions, are going else-
where or, with cable and VCRs, staying home, is also a
theatrical fact, a datum of practice.
(Blau 1992: 76)
As Blau recognizes, theatre and other forms of live performance
compete directly with mediatized forms that are much more
advanta-
geously positioned in the marketplace. Blau's calling the
pressure of
live performance's competition with the mediatized "a datum of
prac-
tice" suggests that performance practice inevitably reflects this
pressure
in the material conditions under which performance takes place,
in the
composition of the audience and the formation of its
expectations, and
in the forms and contents of performance itself.
An important consequence of thinking about live and mediatized
performance as belonging to the same mediatic system is the
inscrip-
tion of live performance within the historical logic of media

identified
by Marshall McLuhan (1964: 158): "A new medium is never an
addi-
6
INTRODUCTION
to an old one, nor does it leave the old one
. ceases to oppress the older media until it finds ne
.lions for them." Jay Bolter and Richard Grusin
,""',"",Pr1 this analysis with their concept of "remed
sentation of one medium in another." AccordiIl!
-new technologies of representation proceed by rei
ating earlier ones" (ibid.: 352).6 My discussion in
relationship between theatre and early television a
displacement of live performance by television
describe how this historical logic plays out in that
bluntly, the general response of live performance to
economic superiority of mediatized forms has been t
like them as possible. From ball games that incorpo
screens, to rock concerts that recreate the images ,
live stage versions of television shows and movies, 1£
mance art's incorporation of video, evidence of
mediatization into the live event is available across tl
of performance genres.
This situation has created an understandable anx
value live performance, and this anxiety may be ai
need to say that live performance has a worth that Ix
resists market value. In this view, the value of live p
in its very resistance to the market and the mal
culture they represent, and the regime of cultural
supports them. This is the position Peggy Phelan has
influential Unmarked: The Politics of Performance (PI
many reasons (which will be elaborated in the tOIk

find this view untenable. The progressive diminI
distinctions between the live and the mediatized. in'
are becoming more and more like mediatized ones,
question of whether there really are clear-cut ontok
between live forms and mediatized ones. Although
ments may seem to rest on the assumption that thm
find that not to be the case. If live performance canIl4
economically independent of, immune from contar
ontologically different from mediatized forms, in wru
ness function as a site of cultural and ideologic
Bogosian, Phelan, and others claim?
6 Noel Carrol 'ith spI
ways in wh: ted int
techno!ogie,
INTRODUCTION
e pabmance arts generally as belonging to a
~'Imm that of the mass media, live forms have
iB· .Jameoson's sense: they have been forced by
~ their status as media within a medi-
"memass media and information technologies.
..... this situation, a number of theatres have
II-to me banner that flew outside the Alliance
.wing that its offerings are "Not Available on
~me only way of imputing specificity to the
,,*"...ace in the current cultural climate is by
..-experience of mediatization.
.'" ,that live performance and mediatized forms

~..adnual marketplace, and that mediatized
:ft8llvamage in that competition. Broadway
.... 'w.tion about the position of theatre within
1a:~laD1lOlllY can be applied to live performance ii. tcwl that
we are all competing for the same_._dimare where theater isn't
always first on
1il:i:I,.man. "On stage and off," New York Times,
...BIau elaborates:
-.-has been continually threatened by what
1,;:_a.Ittare industry and... the escalating
a....-. "n> you go to the theater often?'
1r)'JIIII'IU ~ and that those who have, even
haal....m theater traditions, are going else-
"lillie and VCRs, staying home, is also a
......ofpractice.
(Blau 1992: 76)
.. theatre and other forms of live performance
Ih..d;arized forms that are much more advanta-
_ the marketplace. Blau's calling the pressure of
IOII!JIleIition with the mediatized "a datum of prac-
edxmance practice inevitably reflects this pressure
Iirioos under which performance takes place, in the
mdience and the formation of its expectations, and
IIaltS ofperformance itself.
msequence of thinking about live and mediatized
mging to the same mediatic system is the inscrip-
mce within the historical logic ofmedia identified
an (1964: 158): "A new medium is never an addi-
6
INTRODUCTION

tion to an old one, nor does it leave the old one in peace. It
never
ceases to oppress the older media until it finds new shapes and
posi-
tions for them." Jay Bolter and Richard Grusin (1996: 339) have
refined this analysis with their concept of "remediation," "the
repre-
sentation of one medium in another." According to their
analysis,
"new technologies of representation proceed by reforming or
remedi-
ating earlier ones" (ibid.: 352).6 My discussion in Chapter 2 of
the
relationship between theatre and early television and the
consequent
displacement of live performance by television is an attempt to
describe how this historical logic plays out in that instance. To
put it
bluntly, the general response of live performance to the
oppression and
economic superiority of mediatized forms has been to become
as much
like them as possible. From ball games that incorporate instant
replay
screens, . to rock concerts that recreate the images of music
video, to
live stage versions of television shows and movies, to dance and
perfor-
mance art's incorporation of video, evidence of the incursion of
mediatization into the live event is available across the entire
spectrum
ofperformance genres,
This situation has created an understandable anxiety for those
who
value live performance, and this anxiety may beat the root of

their
needto say that live performance has a worth that both
transcends and
resists market value. In this view, the value of live performance
resides
in its very resistance to the market and the media, the dominant
;culture they represent, and the regime of cultural production
that
IllPports them. This is the position Peggy Phelan has elucidated
in her
kdIuential Unmarked: The Politics of Pe'1ormance(Phelan
1993a). For
reasons (which will be elaborated in the following chapters), I
this view untenable. The progressive diminution of previous
istinctions between the live and the mediatized, in which live
events
becoming more and more like mediatized ones, raises for me the
tuestion of whether there really are clear-cut ontological
distinctions
IJetween live forms and mediatized ones. Although my initial
argu-
may seem to rest on the assumption that there are, ultimately I
that not to be the case. If live performance cannot be shown to
be
independent of, immune from contamination by, and
I/altologically different from mediatized forms, in what sense
can live-
function as a site of cultural and ideological resistance, as
Bogosian, Phelan, and others claim?

process, with specific reference to the
incorporated into art forms based in
'-....'-"
Towards a Poor
Theatre
Jerzy Grotowski
Edited by Eugenio Barba
Preface by Peter Brook
Routledge
ATheatre Arts Book
New York

Information ...................................
Preface .................................-
by Peter Brook
Towards a Poor Theatre .....••• _
by Jerzy Grotowskl
The Theatre's New Testameat •.
an interview with Jerzy Grotowski by EiII
Theatre Is an Encounter ........•.
an Interview with Jerzy Grotowski by"
Akropolis: Treatment of the T_
by ludwlk Flaszen
Dr Faustus: Textual Moritage ._.
by Eugenio Barba
'rhe Constant Prince ..............
by Ludwlk Flaszen
He Wasn't Entirely Himself .....•
by Jerzy Grotowskl
Methodical Exploration ...........
by Jerzy Grotowskl
Actor's Training (1959-1982) ...

recorded by Eugenio Barba
Actor's Training (1968) ..........
recorded by Franz Marl]nen
The Actor's Technique ...........
an Interview wlthJerzy Grotowakl by D
Skara Speech .................... .
by Jerzy Grotowskl
American Encounter ............ ..
an Interview with Jerzy Grotowskl by R
Theodore Hoffman
Statement of Principles .........
by Jerzy Grotowskl
A Theatre Arts Book, published by
Routledge
29 West 35th Street
New York, NY 10001
www.routledge-ny.com
First Routledge edition, 2002
By arrangement with Odin Teatret Forlag, Denmark
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group.
Copyright © 1968 Jerzy Grotowski and Odin Teatret Forlag
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or
utilized (except for brief quotations in reviews) without
permission
in writing from the publisher.
Cataloging-in-Publication data is available from the Library of

Congress.
ISBN 0-87830-155-0
http:www.routledge-ny.com
M*
'9~
Towards aPoor Theatre
This artlers by Jerzy GrotowIIkl hu besn published In: Odra
(Wroolaw. 9/1965); Kunga D,..
metIaka Teatema Program (Stockholm. 111115); Scene (Novt
Sad. 15/1965). CUlera Renaud·I_1t
(paris. 55/1968). Tulane Drama Revlaw (New Orl8EIIIs. T35,
1967). Translation: T. K. Wlawlorowakl.
I am a bit impatient when asked, "What Is the origin of your ex-
perimental theatre productions?" The assumption seems to be
that "experimental" work is tangential (toying with some "new"
technique each time) and tributary. The result Is supposed to be
a contribution to modem staging - scenography using current
sculptural or electronic Ideas, contemporary music. actors In-
dependently projecting clownish or cabaret stereotypes. I know
that scene: I used to be part of it. Our Theatre Laboratory
produc-
tions are going In another direction. In the first place. we are
trying
to avoid eclecticism. trying to resist thinking of theatre as a

composite of disciplines. We are seeking to define what is
distinctively theatre, what separates this activity from other
categories of performance and spectacle. Secondly •. our pro
ductions are detailed investigations of the actor-audience re-
lationship. That is. we consider the personal and scenic
technique
of the actor as the core of theatre art.
It Is difficult to locate the exact sources of this approach. but I
can speak of Its tradition. I was brought up on Stanlslavskl; his
15
TOWARDS A POOR THEATRE
persistent study, his systematic renewal of the methods of
observation, and his dialectical relationship to his own earlier
work make him my personal Ideal. Stanislavski asked the key
methodological questions. Our solutions, however, differ widely
from his - sometimes we reach opposite conclusions.
I have studied all the major actor-training methods of Europe
and
beyond. Most important for my purposes are: Dullin's rhythm
exercises, Delsarte's Investigations of extroversive and intro-
versive reactions, Stanislawski's work on "physical actions",
Meyerhold's bio-mechanical training, Vakhtanghov's synthesis.
Also particularly stimulating to me are the training techniques
of oriental theatre - specifically the Peking Opera, Indian
Kathakall, and Japanese No theatre. I could cite other theatrical

systems, but the method which we are developing is not a
combination of techniques borrowed from these sources
(although
we sometimes adapt elements for our use). We do not want
to teach the actor a predetermined set of skills or give him
a "bag of tricks." Ours is not a deductive method of collecting
skills. Here everything is concentrated on the .. ripening" of the
actor which is expressed by a tension towards the extreme, by a
complete stripping down, by the laying bear of one's own
intimity
- all this without the least trace of egotism or self-enjoyment.
The actor makes a total gift of himself. This is a technique of
the
"trance" and of the integration of all the actor's psychic and
bodily powers which emerge from the most intimate layers of
his
being and his instinct, springing forth in a sort of "trans-
lumination...
The education of an actor in our theatre is not a matter of
teaching
him something; we attempt to eliminate his organism's
resistance
to this psychic process. The result is freedom from the time-
lapse
between inner Impulse and outer reaction in such a way that the
impulse is already an outer reaction. Impulse and action are
concurrent: the body vanishes, burns. and the spectator sees
only a series of visible Impulses.
18
Ours then is a via negativa - nul
eradication of blocks.
Years of work and of specially co

means of physical. plastiC and voca
actor towards the right kind of cor:
the discovery of the beginning of It
carefully cultivate what has been ~
though to some extent dependent UI
exposure, and almost disappeara",
voluntary. The requisite state of m
realize an active role. a state in wh
that" but rather "resigns from not d
Most of the actors at the Theatre ls
work toward the possibility of maki
their daily work they do not concen1
but on the composition of the role. (J
the expression of signs - i.e.• on art
between Inner technique and artifi
signs). We bel.ieve that a personal p
and expressed by a formal artlculatl
of the role Is not a release and will t
We find that artificial composition
spiritual but actually leads to it. (The
inner process and the form strengt
baited trap, to which the spiritual
ously and against which it strugg
.. natural" behaVior obscure the tru
system of signs which demonstrate
common vision: the dialectics of hi
of psychic shock, a moment of
tremendous joy. a man does not bel
elevated spiritual state uses rhythmi

matic renewal of the methods of
tical relationship to his own earlier
II ideal. Stanislavski asked the key
... solutions, however, differ widely
dl opposite conclusions.
lCIDr-training methods of Europe and
. .., purposes are: Dullin's rhythm
I!Ig!I1ioAs of extroversive and intro-
iiIId"8 work on .. physical actions",
InIining, Vakhtanghov's synthesis.
: to me are the training techniques
:IicaI1y the Peking Opera, Indian
theabe. I could cite other theatrical
Ihich we are developing is not a
nuwed from these sources (although
IIIB for our use). We do not want
lennined set of skills or give him
tit a deductive method of collecting
fICeIltrated on the .. ripening" of the
a tension towards the extreme, by a
!he laying bear of one's own intimity
race of egotism or self-enjoyment.
If himself. This is a technique of the
jon of all the actor's psychic and
from the most intimate layers of his
inging forth in a sort of "trans-
LJr theatre is not a matter of teaching
eliminate his organism's resistance
9sult is freedom from the time-lapse
Jter reaction in such a way that the

reaction. Impulse and action are
9S, burns, and the spectator sees
es.
Ours then is a via negativa - not a collection of skills but an
eradication of blocks.
Years of work and of specially composed exercises (which, by
means of physical, plastic and vocal training, attempt to guide
the
actor towards the right kind of concentration) sometimes permit
the discovery of the beginning of this road. Then it is possible
to
carefully cultivate what has been awakened. The process itself,
though to some extent dependent upon concentration,
confidence,
exposure, and almost disappearance into the acting craft, is not
voluntary. The requisite state of mind is a passive readiness to
realize an active role, a state in which one does not "want to do
that" but rather "resigns from not doing it."
Most of the actors at the Theatre Laboratory are just beginning
to
work toward the possibility of making such a process visible. In
their daily work they do not concentrate on the spiritual
technique
but on the composition of the role, on the construction of form,
on
the expression of signs - Le., on artifice. There is no
contradiction
between inner technique and artifice (articulation of a role by
signs). We bel.ieve that a personal process which is not
supported

and expressed by a formal articulation and disciplined
structuring
of the role is not a release and will collapse in shapelessness.
We find that artificial composition not only does not limit the
spiritual but actually leads to it. (The tropistic tension between
the
inner process and the form strengthens both. The form is like a
baited trap, to which the spiritual process responds spontane-
ously and against which it struggles.) The forms of common
"natural" behavior obscure the truth; we compose a role as a
system of signs which demonstrate what is behind the mask of
common vision: the dialectics of human behavior. At a moment
of psychic shock, a moment of terror, of mortal danger or
tremendous joy, a man does not behave "naturally." A man in an
elevated spiritual state uses rhythmically articulated signs,
begins
17
TOWARDS A POOR THEAmE
to dance. to sing. A sign, not a common gesture. Is the
elementary
integer of expression for us.
In terms of formal technique. we do not work by proliferation of
signs, or by accumulation of signs (as in the formal repetitions
of
oriental theatre). Rather, we subtract, seeking distillation of

signs
by eliminating those elements of "natural" behavior which
obscure pure impulse. Another technique which illuminates the
hidden structure of signs is contradiction (between gesture and
voice, voice and word, word and thought, will and action. etc.) -
here, too, we take the via negativa.
It is difficult to say precisely what elements in our productions
result from a consciously formulated program and what derive
from the structure of our imagination. I am frequently asked
whether certain "medieval" effects indicate an intentional return
to "ritual roots." There is no single answer. At our present point
of artistic awareness, the problem of mythic roots," of theU
elementary human situation, has definite meaning. However.
this
is not a product of a "philosophy of art" but comes from the
prac-
tical discovery and use of the rules of theatre. That is, the pro-
ductions do not spring from a priori aesthetiC postulates; rather,
as Sartre has said: "Each technique leads to metaphYSiCS."
For several years, I vacillated between practice-born impulses
and the application of a priori principles, Without seeing the
contradiction. My friend and colleague Ludwik Flaszen was the
first to pOint out this confusion in my work: the material and
tech-
niques which came spontaneously in preparing the production,
from the very nature of the work, were revealing and promising:
but what I had taken to be applications of theoretical
assumptions
were actually more functions of my personality than of my in-
tellect. I realized that the production led to awareness rather
than
being the product of awareness. Since 1960, my emphasis has
been on methodology. Through practical experimentation I
sought

to answer the questions with which I had begun: What is the
18
theatre? What is unique about it'l
television cannot? Two concrete
poor theatre. and performance as
By gradually eliminating whatever
that theatre can exist without make
and scenography. without a sepa
without'lighting and sound effects,
actor-spectator relationship of p
munion. This Is an ancient theorel
rigorously tested in practice it unw
about theatre. It challenges the nl
of disparate creative disciplines -
architecture, lighting, acting (unde
scene). This .. synthetic theatre"
which we readily call the "Rich Th
The Rich Theatre depends on arti
other disciplines. constructing hyl
without backbone or integrity, ye
work. By multiplying aSSimilated e
to escape the impasse presented I
film and TV excel in the area of Ii
instantaneous change of place. et!
with a blatantly compensatory cal
gratlon of borrowed mechanisms (
ample) means a sophisticated te
mobility and dynamism. And if the
mobile. constantly changing persp
is all nonsense.
No matter how much theatre expal

resources, it will remain technolo~
vision. Consequently. I propose
resigned from the stage-and-au(
ductlon. a new space is designed
t a common gesture. is the elementary
B. we do not work by proliferation of
Fsigns (as in the formal repetitions of
. subtract. seeking distillation of signs
EIlts of "natural" behavior which
Ihar technique which illuminates the
'CGl'dr'adiction (between gesture and
I ald thought. will and action, etc.) _
I8IIIIva-
I.r what elements In our productions
lXmulated program and what derive
llnaglnation. I am frequently asked
effects indicate an intentional return
t single answer. At our present pOint
problem of mythic U roots," of the
has definite meaning. However, this
.,hy of art" but comes from the prac-
be rules of theatre. That is, the pro-
a priori aesthetic postulates; rather,
chnique leads to metaphysics."
:ed between practice-born impulses

riori principles, without seeing the
I colleague Ludwik Flaszen was the
m in my work: the material and tech-
eously in preparing the production,
rtfork, were revealing and promising;
plications of theoretical assumptions
s of my personality than of my in-
duction led to awareness rather than
less. Since 1960. my emphasis has
,h practical experimentation I sought
h which I had begun: What is the
theatre? What is unique about it? What can it do that film and
television cannot? Two concrete conceptions crystallized: the
poor theatre, and performance as an act of transgression.
By gradually eliminating whatever proved superfluous, we
found
that theatre can exist without make-up, without autonomic
costume
and scenography. Without a separate performance area (stage).
withoul·lighting and sound effects, etc. It cannot exist without
the
actor-spectator relationship of perceptual. direct, "live" com-
munion. This is an ancient theoretical truth. of course. but when
rigorously tested in practice it undermines most of our usual
Ideas
about theatre. It challenges the notion of theatre as a synthesis
of disparate creative disciplines - literature, sculpture. painting.
architecture, lighting. acting (under the direction of a metteur-
en-
scene). This "synthetic theatre" is the contemporary theatre.
which we readily call the "Rich Theatre" - rich in flaws.

The Rich Theatre depends on artistic kleptomania, drawing from
other disciplines. constructing hybrid-spectacles. conglomerates
without backbone or integrity. yet presented as an organic art-
work. By multiplying assimilated elements, the Rich Theatre
tries
to escape the impasse presented by movies and television. Since
film and TV excel in the area of mechanical functions (montage.
instantaneous change of place. etc.), the Rich Theatre countered
with a blatantly compensatory call for "total theatre." The inte-
gration of borrowed mechanisms (movie screens onstage, for
ex-
ample) means a sophisticated technical plant. permitting great
mobility and dynamism. And if the stage and/or auditorium
were
mobile, constantly changing perspective would be possible. This
is all nonsense.
No matter how much theatre expands and exploits its
mechanical
resources. it will remain technologically Inferior to film and
tele-
visJon. Consequently, I propose poverty in theatre. We have
resigned from the stage-and-auditorium plant: for each pro-
duction, a new space is designed for the actors and spectators.
19
Thus. infinite variation of performer·audience relationships is

possible. The actors can play among the spectators, directly
contacting the audience and giving it a passive role in the drama
(e.g. our productions of Byron's Cain and Kalidasa's
Shakuntala).
Or the actors may build structures among the spectators and
thus
include them in the architecture of action. subjecting them to a
sens~ of the pressure and congestion and limitation of space
(Wyspianski's Akropolis). Or the actors may play among the
spectators and ignore them. looking through them. The
spectators
may be separated from the actors - for example, by a high fence,
over which only their heads protrude (The Constant Prince,
from
Calderon); from this radically slanted perspective, they look
down on the actors as if watching animals in a ring. or like
medical students watching an operation (also. this detached,
downward viewing gives the action a sense of moral trans·
gression). Or the entire hall is used as a concrete place: Faustus'
U last supper" in a monastery refectory, where Faustus
entertains
the spectators, who are guests at a baroque feast served on huge
tables, offering episodes from his life. The elimination of stage-
auditorium dichotomy is not the important thing - that simply
creates a bare laboratory situation, an appropriate area for
investigation. The essential concern is finding the proper spec-
tator-actor relationship for each type of performance and
embody-
ing the decision in physical arrangements.
We forsook lighting effects. and this revealed a Wide range of
possibilities for the actor's use of stationary light-sources by
deliberate work with shadows. bright spots, etc. It is
particularly
significant that once a spectator is placed In an illuminated
zone,

or in other words becomes visible, he too begins to playa part in
the performance. It also became eVident that the actors, like
figures in EI Greco's paintings, can "illuminate" through
personal
technique, becoming a source of Uspiritual light."
We abandoned make-up, fake noses, pillow-stuffed bellies -
everything that the actor puts on in the dressing room before
performance. We found that it was consummately theatrical for
20
the actor to transform from type to
silhouette to silhouette - while the •
manner, using only his own body al
fixed faCial expression by using t
inner impulses achieves the effe
transubstantiation, while the mask
is only a trick.
Similarly, a costume with no auton
connection with a particular charae
transformed before the audience,
functions, etc. Elimination of plastll
of their own (i.e., represent somethi
activities) led to the creation by the
and obviOUS objects. By his contro
transforms the floor into a sea, a tat
of Iron Into an animate partner, etc
recorded) not produced by the act
itself to become music through thE
clashing objects. We know that the
It becomes theatre only through th~
say, thanks to Intonations, to the I
musicality of the language.

The acceptance of poverty in thea1
essential to It, revealed to us no
medium, but also the deep riches y
the art-form.
Why are
our limltl
conditior
comes tl
effort to
perceptl'
performer-audience relationships is
play among the spectators, directly
I giving it a passive role in the drama
on's Cain and Kalidasa's Shakuntala).
ctures among the spectators and thus
::lure of action, subjecting them to a
congestion and limitation of space
)r the actors may play among the
looking through them. The spectators
Idors - for example, by a high fence,
protrude (The Constant Prince, from
ally slanted perspective, they look
Mltching animals in a ring, or like
an operation (also, this detached,
'18 action a sense of moral trans-
Is used as a concrete place: Faustus'

, refectory, where Faustus entertains
Is at a baroque feast served on huge
m his life. The elimination of stage-
t the important thing - that simply
situation, an appropriate area for
concern is finding the proper spec-
ch type of performance and embody-
lfT8ngements.
and this revealed a Wide range of
use of stationary light-sources by
s, bright spots, etc. It is particularly
Itor is placed in an illuminated zone,
sible, he too begins to playa part in
came eVident that the actors, like
s, can uilluminate" through personal
! of spiritual light." U
ke noses, pillow-stuffed bellies _
ts on in the dressing room before
it was consummately theatrical for
the actor to transform from type to type, character to character,
silhouette to silhouette - while the audience watched - in a poor
manner, using only his own body and craft. The composition of
a
fixed facial expression by using the actor's own muscles and
inner impulses achieves the effect of a strikingly theatrical
transubstantiation, while the mask prepared by a make-up artist
Is only a trick.
Similarly, a costume with no autonomous value, existing only in
connection with a particular character and his activities, can be
transformed before the audience, contrasted with the actor's
functions, etc. Elimination of plastic elements which have a life

of their own (i.e., represent something independent of the
actor's
activities) led to the creation by the actor of the most
elementary
and obvious objects. By his controlled use of gesture the actor
transforms the floor into a sea, a table into a confeSSional, a
piece
of iron into an animate partner, etc. Elimination of music (live
or
recorded) not produced by the actors enables the performance
itself to become music through the orchestration of voices and
clashing objects. We know that the text per se is not theatre,
that
it becomes theatre only through the actors' use of it - that Is to
say, thanks to intonations, to the association of sounds, to the
musicality of the language.
The acceptance of poverty in theatre, stripped of all that is not
essential to it, revealed to us not only the backbone of the
medium, but also the deep riches which lie in the very nature of
the art-form.
I .~
Whyarel·· ·oss our frontiers, exceed
our Iimit1 . ..il ourselves. This is not a
: is dark In us slowly be-conditiOj .
comes L ,> rith one's own truth, this
effort to aatre , with its full-fleshed
percepti _. .e a place of provocation.
I
21

Larry
Line
Larry
Line
PETER BROOK
1
The Empty Space
.
A TOUCHSTONE BOOK
Published by Simon & Schuster
TOUCHSTONE
Rockefeller Center
1230 Avenue of the Americas
NewYork,NY 10020

Copyright © 1968 by Peter Brook
All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction in whole
or in part in anyfonn.
First Touchstone Edition 1996
TOUCHSIDNE and colophon are registered
trademarks of Simon & Schuster Inc.
Portions of this book were previously published in
The Atlantic MDnthly
Manufactured in the United States of America
31 33 35 37 39 30 38 36 34 32
Library of Congress catalog card number 68-12531
ISBN 0-684-82957--6
FOR MY FATHER

IIII!
~
,~
1
The Deadly Theatre
I CAN take any empty space and call it a bare stage. A man
walks across this empty space whilst someone else is watch-
ing him, and this is all that is needed for an act of theatre to
be engaged. Yet when we talk about theatre this is not quite
what we mean. Red curtains, spotlights, blank verse, laugh-
ter, darkness, these are all confusedly superimposed in a
messy image covered by one all-purpose word. We talk
of the cinema killing the theatre, and in that phrase we refer
to the theatre as it was when the cinema was born, a theatre
of box office, foyer, tip-up seats, footlights, scene changes,
intervals, music, as though the theatre was by very definition
these and little more.
I will try to split the word four ways and distinguish four
different meanings - and so will talk about a Deadly Theatre,
a Holy Theatre, a Rough Theatre and an Immediate Theatre.

Sometimes these four theatres really exist, standing side by
side, in the West End of London, or in New York off Times
Square. Sometimes they are hundreds of miles apart, the
Holy in Warsaw and the Rough in Prague, and sometimes
they are metaphoric: two ofthem mixing together within one
evening, within one act. Sometimes within on single moment,
the four of them, Holy, Rough, Immediate and Deadly inter-
twine.
The Deadly Theatre can at first sight be taken for granted,
because it means bad theatre. As this is the form of theatre
we see most often, and as it is most closely linked to the
despised, much-attacked commercial theatre it might seem a
waste of time to criticize it further. But it is only if we see
that deadliness is deceptive and can appear anywhere, that
we will become aware ofthe size ofthe problem.
9
10 THE EMPTY SPACE
. !he condition of the Deadly Theatre at least is fairly
~bVIOUS. All through the world theatre audiences are dwind-
hng. There are occasional new movements, good new writers
an~ so on, b~t as a whole, the theatre not only fails to elevate
or mstruct, It hardly even entertains. The theatre has often
~een c~ned a whore, meaning its art is impure, but today this
IS true m another sense - whores take the money and then go
short on the pleasure. The Broadway crisis the Paris crisis
the West End crisis are the same: we do n~t need the ticke~

agents to tell us that the theatre has become a deadly business
and the public is smelling it out. In fact, were the public ever
really to demand the true entertainment it talks about so
o~ten, we would almost all be hard put to know where to be-
gI.n.. A true theatre ofjoy is non..,.existent and it is not just the
trIVIal ,comedy and the bad musical that fail to give us .our
money s worth - the Deadly Theatre finds its deadly way into
grand opera and tragedy, into the plays of Moliere and the
plays o~Brecht. Of course nowhere does the Deadly Theatre
Install Itself so securely, so comfortably and so slyly as in
the.works ofWilliam Shakespeare. The Deadly Theatre takes
~aslly to Shakes~eare. We see his plays done by good actors
In what seems ~Ike th~ proper way- they look lively and
colourful, there IS muslc~d everyone is all dressed· up, just
as they are supposed to be m the best ofclassical theatres. Yet
secre~ly we find it excruciatingly boring and in our hearts
we eIther blame Shakespeare, or theatre as such, or even
ourselves. To make matters worse there is always a deadly
spectator, who for special reasons enjoys a lack of intensity
and even a lack of entertainment, such as the scholar who
emerges fro~ routine performances of the classics smiling
because. noth~ng has dIstracted him from trying over and
confi~mg. hIS pet theories to himself, whilst reciting his
faVOUrIte hnes under his breath. In his heart he sincerely
wants a. theatre that is nobler-than-life and he confuses a
sor~ of mtellectual satisfaction with the true experience for
whIch .he craves. Unfortunately, he lends the weight of his
~uthorlty to dullness and so the Deadly Theatre goes on
Its way.
THE DEADLY THEATRE
Anyone who watches the real successes as the~
year, will see a very curious phen?menon. W
so-called hit to be livelier, faster, brIghter than 1
this is not always the case. Almost every se~

theatre-loving towns, there is one great succe:
these rules; one play that succeeds not desp.ite 1:
dullness. Mter all, one associates culture WIth a
of duty, historical costumes and long .speeches.
sation of being bored: so, conversely, Just the rl
boringness is a reassuring guarantee. o~ a. wort
Ofcourse the dosage is so subde that It IS ImpoS
Ush the e~act formula too. much and the audil
out of their seats, too little and it may find the 1
agreeably intense. However, mediocr~ authorl
their way unerringly to the perfect mIxture -
petuate the Deadly Theatre with du~ su~SS(
praised. Audiences crave for. somethmg I? th
they can term 'better' than hfe and for thIS re
to confuse culture, or the trappings ofculture, VI
they do not know, but sense obscurely could ex
cally, in elevating something bad into a succes:
cheating themselves.
Ifwe talk of deadly, let us note that the diffE:
life and death, so crystal clear in man, is somE:
other fields. A doctor can tell at once between·
and the useless bag of bones that life has left;
practised in observing how an i~ea, an at~itu~1
pass from the lively to the mOrIbund. It .IS dr
but a child can smell it out. Let me gIve a
France there are two deadly ways ofplaying cl
One is traditional, and this involves using a
special manner, a noble look and an elevat
livery. The other way is no more than a half-
of the same thing. Imperial gestures and roya
disappearing from everyday life, so. each newl
the grand manner more and more hollow, J
meaningless. This leads the young actor t(
impatient search for what he calls truth. He VI

I
THE EMPTY SPACE
:lition of the Deadly Theatre at least is fairly
I through the world theatre audiences are dwind-
are occasional new movements, good new writers
ut as a whole, the theatre not only fails to elevate
it hardly even entertains. The theatre has often
1 whore, meaning its art is impure, but today this
lther sense - whores take the money and then go
pleasure. The Broadway crisis, the Paris crisis,
Id crisis are the same: we do not need the ticket
! us that the theatre has become a deadly business
lC is smelling it out. In fact, were the public ever
nand the true entertainment it talks about so
uld almost all be hard put to know where to be-
leatre ofjoy is non-,.existent and it is not just the
Iy and the bad musical that fail to give us our
:h - the Deadly Theatre finds its deadly way into
iIlld tragedy, into the plays of Moliere and the
It. OfCOurse nowhere does the Deadly Theatre
10 securely, so comfortably and so slyly as in
iVilliam Shakespeare. The Deadly Theatre takes
espeare. We see his plays done by good actors
s like the proper way- they look lively and
'e is music and everyone is all dressed 'up, just
.posed to be in the best ofclassical theatres. Yet
ld it excruciatingly boring - and in our hearts

ne Shakespeare, or theatre· as such, or even
make matters worse there is always a deadly
for special reasons enjoys a lack of intensity
:k of entertainment, such as the scholar who
routine performances of the classics smiling
g has distracted him from trying over and
pet theories to himself, whilst reciting his
under his breath . .In his heart he Sincerely
~ that is nobler-than-life and he confuses a
:ual satisfaction with the true experience for
s. Unfortunately, he lends the weight of his
Illness and so the Deadly Theatre goes on
THE DEADLY THEATRE 11
Anyone who watches the real successes as they appear each
year, will see a very curious phenomenon. We expect the
so-called hit to be livelier, faster, brighter than the flop - but
this is not always the case. Almost every season in most
theatre-loving towns, there is one great success that defies
these rules; one play that succeeds not despite but because of
dullness. After all, one associates culture with a certain sense
of duty, historical costumes and long speeches with the sen-
sation of being bored: so, conversely, just the right degree of
boringness is a reassuring guarantee of a worthwhile event.
Ofcourse, the dosage is so subtle that it is impossible toestab-
lish the exact formula - too much and the audience is driven
out of their seats, too little and it may find the theme too dis-
agreeably intense. However, mediocre authors seem to feel
their way unerringly to the perfect mixture - and they per-
petuate the Deadly Theatre with dull successes, universally
praised. Audiences crave for something in the theatre that
they can term 'better' than life and for this reason are open
to confuse culture, or the trappings ofculture, with something
they do not know, but sense obscurely could exist - so, tragi-

cally, in elevating something bad into a success they are only
cheating themselves.
If we talk of deadly, let us note that the difference between
life and death, so crystal clear in man, is somewhat veiled in
other fields. A doctor can tell at once between the trace of life
and the useless bag of bones that life has left; but we are less
practised in observing how an idea, an attitude or a form can
pass from the lively to the moribund. It is difficult to define
but a child can smell it out. Let me give an example. In
France there are two deadly ways ofplaying classical tragedy.
One is traditional, and this involves using a special voice, a
special manner, a noble look and an elevated musical de-
livery. The other way is no more than a half-hearted version
of the same thing. Imperial gestures and royal values are fast
disappearing from everyday life, so each new generation finds
the grand manner more and more hollow, more and more
meaningless. This leads the young actor to an angry and
impatient search for what he calls truth. He wants to play his
12 THE EMPTY SPACE
. verse more realistically, to get it to sound like honest-to-God
r~a~ speec~, but ,he finds that the formality of the writing is so
ngld that, It resIs~ th~s treatment. He is forced to an uneasy
comproffils~ t~at ~s n~Ither refreshing, like ordinary talk, nor
defiantly hIStriOnIC, like .what we c.all. ham. So his acting is
weak and because ham IS strong, It IS remembered with a
certain nostalgi~, Inevitably, someone calls for tragedy to be
played once agam <the way.it is written'. This is fair enough,

bu~ unfortunately all the prmted word can tell us is what was
wntten on paper, not how it was once brought to life. There
are no records, no tapes - only experts, but not one of them,
of course, has firsth~d !m0~ledge. The real antiques have
all gon~ ~- only some Iffiltation~ have survived, in the shape
of tradItional actors, who continue to play in a traditional
way, drawing their inspiration not from real sources but
from imaginary ones, such as the memory of theso~d an
older actor once made - a sound that in turn was a memory of
a predecessor's way.
I once saw a rehearsal at the Comedie Frant;aise - a very
y~ung actor stood .in fr?nt?f a very old one and spoke and
mImed the role WIth hIm hke a reflection in a glass. This
must not be confused with the great tradition say of the
Noh ~to:s passing knowledge orally from f;ther'to son.
There It IS meaning that is communicated - and meaning
never belongs to the past. It can be checked in each man's
own present experience, But to imitate the externals ofacting
only perpetuates manner - a manner hard to relate to any-
thing at all.
Again with Shakespeare we hear or read the same advice -
<Play what "is written'. But what is written? Certain ciphers
on paper. Shakespeare's words are records of the words that
he wanted to be spoken, words issuing as sounds from
people's mouths, with pitch, pause, rhythm and gesture as
part of their meaning. A word does not start as a word - it is
an .end product w?ich be~s ~s an impulse, stimulated by
attt.tude and behaVIOur whIch dIctate the need for expression.
ThIS process occurs inside the -dramatist; it is repeated inside
the actor. Both may only be conscious of the words,but both
THE DEADLY THEATRE
for the author and then for the actor the we:

visible· portion of a gigan~ic unse~n forma~on.
attempt to nail down theIr meanmg and mteIl
directions and explanations, yet we cannot hel:
by the fact that the best dramati~ts ~xp:ain t
least. They recognize that further mdlcatIons v
ably be useless. They recognize that the onl
the true path to the speaking of a word is ~
that parallels the original creative one. This
by-passed nor simplified. Unfortunately.' the D
speaks, or a kin~, utters,. we. r~sh to ,gIVe thE
lover is <romantic, the kmg IS noble - and. b
it we are speaking of romantic lov~ and kin:
princeliness as though they are things we c
hand and expect the actors to observe. But thE
stances and they do not exist. Ifwe search fO.l
we can do is to make guesswork reconstrUcttl
and paintings. If you ask an actor t? ~lay
style' he will valiantly have a go, thinking
you mean. What actually can. he draw o~? E
tion and a scrapbook of theatrIcal memorIes?;
give him a vague 'romanticness' that he will
disguised imitation of whatever old.er actor
admire. Ifhe digs into his own expenences tb
marry with the text; if he just plays ~hat 1
text, it will be imitative and co?venttonal.
result is a compromise: at most tImes uncom
It is vain to pretend that the words we a:
plays like <musical', <poetic', 'larger ~
<heroic', <romantic', have any absolute m~anll
reflections of a critical attitude of a partlcula
attempt to build a performance today to 0
canons is the most certain road to deadly ~
theatre of a respectability that makes i! pas:
Once, when giving a lecture on thIS thl

to put it to a practical tes~. By luck, thel
in the audience who had neIther read nor Sl
gave her Goneril's first speech and askedh
THE EMPTY SPACE
meally, to get it to sound like honest-to-God
e finds that the formality of the writing is so
ts this treatment. He is forced to an uneasy
THE DEADLY THEATRE 18
for the author and then for the actor the word is a small
visible portion ofa gigantic unseen forma.tion. Some writers
attempt to nail down their meaning and intentions in stage
is neither refreshing, like ordinary talk, nor
ic.. like what we call ham. So his acting is
~ ham is strong, it is remembered with a
Inevitably, someone calls for tragedy to be
l"the way it is written'. This is fair enough,
all the printed word can tell us is what was
DOt how it was once brought to life. There
tapes - only experts, but not one of them,
IIIrmd knowledge. The real antiques have
iDlPiration not from real sources, but
_JecJge orally from father to
is communicated

imitations have survived, in the shape
who continue to play in a traditional
as the memory of the sound an
.8DUD.d that in tum was a memory of
Comedie Fran~aise - a very
a very old one and spoke and
a refiection in a glass. This
die great tradition, say, of the
son.
- and meaning
pst. It can be checked in each man's
IIieIKe. But to imitate the externals ofacting
..aw - a manner hard to relate to any-
IIIespeare we hear or read the same advice -
iuen·. But what is written? Certain ciphers
peare's words are records of the words that
e spoken, words issuing as sounds from
with pitch, pause, rhythm and gesture as
Bag. A word does not start as a word - it is
IIIida begins as an impulse, stimulated by
-Which dictate the need for expression.
the-dramatist; it is repeated inside
lie conscious of the words, but both
directions and explanations, yet we cannot help being struck
by the fact that the best dramatists explain themselves the

least.: They recognize that further indications will most prob-
ably be useless. They recognize that the only way to find
the true path to the speaking of a word is through a process
that parallels the original creative one. This can neither be
by-passed nor simplified. Unfortunately, the moment a lover
speaks, or a king utters, we rush to give them a label: the
lover is 'romantic', the king is 'noble' - and before we know
it we are speaking of romantic love and kingly nobility or
princeliness as though they are things we can hold in our
hand and expect the actors to observe. But these are not sub-
stances and they do not exist. Ifwe search for them, the best
we can do is to make guesswork reconstructions from books
and paintings. If you ask a:n actor to play in a 'romantic
style' he will valiantly have a go, thinking he knows what
you mean. What actually can he draw on? Hunch, imagina-
tion and a scrapbook oftheatrical memories, all of which will
give him a vague 'romanticness' that he will mix up with a
disguised imitation of whatever older actor he happens to
admire. If he digs into his own experiences the result may not
marry with the text; if he just plays what he thinks is the
text, it will be imitative and conventional. Either way the
result is a compromise: at most times unconvincing.
It is vain to pretend that the words we apply to classical
plays like 'musical', 'poetic', 'larger than life', 'noble',
'heroic', 'romantic', have any absolute meaning. They are the
reflections of a critical attitude of a particular period, and to
attempt to build a performance today to conform to these
canons is the most certain road to deadly theatre - deadly
theatre of a respectability that makes it pass as living truth.
Once, when giving a lecture on this theme, I was able
to put it to a practical test .. By luck, there was a woman
in the audience who had neither read nor seen King Lear. I
gave her Goneril's first speech and asked her to recite it as

----
14 THE EMPTY SPACE
. best she could for whatever values shefoWld init~She read it
very simply - and the speech itself emerged full of eloquence
and charm. I then explained that it was supposed to be the
speech of a wicked woman and suggested her reading every
word for hypocrisy. She tried to do so, and the audience saw
what a hard Wlllatural wrestling with the simple music of
the words was involved when she sought to act to a definition:
Sir, I love you more than words can wield the matter;
Dearer than eyesight, space, and liberty;
Beyond that can be valued, rich or rare;
No less than life, with grace, health, beauty, honour;
As much as child e'er loved, or father fOWld;
A love that makes breath poor, and speech unable;
Beyond all manner of $0 much I love you.
Anyone can try this for himself. Taste it on the tongue.
The words are those of a lady of style and breeding accus-
tomed to expressing herself in public, someone with ease and

social. aplomb. As for clues to her character, only the fa~ade is
presented and this, we see, is elegant and attractive. Yet if
one thinks of the performances where Goneril speaks these
first lines as a macabre villainess, and looks at the speech
again, one is at a loss to know whatsuggests this - other than
preconceptions of Shakespeare's moral attitudes. In fact, if
Goneril in her first appearance does not playa 'monster'. but
merely what her given words suggest, then all the balance of
the play changes - and in the subsequent scenes her villainy
and Lear's martyrdom are neither as crude nor as simplified
as they might appear. Of course, by the end of the play we
learn that Goneril's actions make her what we call a monster
- but a real monster, both complex and compelling.
In a living theatre, we would each day approach the re-
hearsal putting yesterday's discoveries to the test, ready to
believe that the true play has once again escaped us. But the
Deadly Theatre approaches the classics from the viewpoint
that somewhere, someone has fOWld out and defined how the
play should be done.
This] ~ rre loosely call style.
I
THE DEADLY THEATRE
Every work has its own style: it could no
every period has its style. The moment we
this style we are lost. I remember vividly.w~
the Pekin Opera had come to London a rIva;
Company followed, from Formosa~ ~e P?kl
still in touch with its sources and creatmg Its
afresh each night: the Formosan company,
items, was imitating its memories of them,
details, exaggerating the showy passa~es,

meaning - nothing was reborn. Even m ~
style the difference between life and death w
The real Pekin Opera was an example oj
where the outer forms do not change fro]
generation and only a few years ago it seer
were so perfectly frozen that it could carry
day, even this superb relic has go~e. ~ts fo~
enabled it to survive way beyond Its tIme, hI
but the day came when the gap between it a
society aroWld it became too great. The RE
a different China. Few of the attitudes and
traditional Pekin Opera relate to the new str
in which this people now lives. Today in Pe
and princesses have been replaced by landle
and the same incredible acrobatic skills are
very different themes. To the Weste~er thi
shame and it is easy for us to shed cultIvated
it is tragic that this miraculous heritage has
and yet I feel that the ruthless Chinese a
their proudest possessions goes to the heal
ofliving theatre - theatre is always a self-dt
it is always written on the wind. A pr<
assembles different people every night anI
through the language of behaviour. A pen
and usually has to be repeated - and repl
accurately as possible but from the day i1
invisible is beginning to die. .
In the Moscow Art Theatre, in Tel Avb
productions have been kept going for fort

Larry
Line
Larry
Line
.. ..
...~.~....•
Chapter 12
Augusto Boal
THE THEATRE AS DISCOURSE
G EORGE IKISHAWA used to say that the bourgeois theater is
the finished theater. The bourgeoisie already knows what the
world is like, their world,
and is able to present images of this complete, finished world.
The bourgeoisie
presents the spectacle. On the other hand, the proletariat and the
oppressed
classes do not know yet what their world will be like;
consequently their theater
will be the rehearsal, not the finished spectacle. This is quite
true, though it is
equally true that the theater can present images of transition.
I have been able to observe the truth of this view during all my
activities in
the people's theater of so many and such different countries of
Latin America.

Popular audiences are interested in experimenting, in
rehearsing, and they abhor
the 'closed' spectacles. In those cases they try to enter into a
dialogue with the
actors, to interrupt the action, to ask for explanations without
waiting politely for
the end of the play. Contrary to the bourgeois code of manners,
the people's code
allows and encourages the spectator to ask questions, to
dialogue, to participate.
All the methods that I have discussed are forms of a rehearsal-
theater, and
not a spectacle-theater. One knows how these experiments will
begin but not
how they will end, because the spectator is freed from his
chains, finally acts, and
becomes a protagonist. Because they respond to the real needs
of a popular
audience they are practiced with success and joy.
But nothing in this prohibits a popular audience from practicing
also more
'finished' forms of theater. In Peru many forms preViously
developed in other
countries, especially Brazil and Argentina, were also utilized
and with great
success. Some of these forms were:
i Newspaper theater: It was initially developed by the Nucleus
Group of the
Arena Theater of Sao Paulo, of which I was the artistic director
until forced to
80

leave Brazil. I It c(
forming daily news
theatrical performaJ
(a) Simple readin.
context of th(
false or tendel
(b) Crossed readi]
nating) form,
giving it a nev
(c) Complementar
by the newsp.
news.
(d) Rhythmical reo
read to the rb
etc., so that tt
news, revealin
newspaper.
(e) Parallel action:
news is read,
event really oce
else that compl
(f) Improvisation:
its variants and
(g) Historical: data
historical mom
systems, are ad,
(h) Reinforcement:
accompaniment

(i) Concretion of tl
its purely abstra.
torture, hunger,
using graphicirr
(j) Text out of cont
in which it was
speech about aus
Economics whil,
truth behind the
wants austerity f
2 invisible theater: It ,
environment other thi
spectators. The place
a train, a line of peop
is the finished
e, their world,
le bourgeoisie
the oppressed
v their theater
~, though it is
ny activities in
.atin America.
end they abhor
ogue with the
ng politely for

people's code
to participate.
d-theater, and
begin but not
nally acts, and
of a popular
:ing also more
oped in other
ld with great
Group of the
Illtil forced to
leave Brazil. I It consists of several simple teclmiques for trans-
forming daily news items, or any other non-dramatic material,
into
theatrical performances.
(a) Simple reading: the news item is read detaching it from
the
context of the newspaper, from the format which makes it
false or tendentious.
(b) Crossed reading: two news items are read in crossed
(alter-
nating) form, one throwing light on the other, explaining it,
giving it a new dimension.
(c) Complementary reading: data and information generally
omitted
by the newspapers of the ruling classes are added to the
news.
(d) Rhythmical reading: as a musical commentary, the news is
read to the rhythm of the samba, tango, Gregorian chant,

etc., so that the rhythm functions as a critical 'filter' of the
news, revealing its true content which is obscured in the
newspaper.
(e) Parallel action: the actors mime parallel actions while the
news is read, showing the context in which the reported
event really occurred; one hears the news and sees something
else that complements it visually.
(f) Improvisation: the news is improvised on to exploit all
its variants and possibilities.
(g) Historical: data or scenes showing the same event in other
historical moments, in other countries, or in other social
systems, are added to the news.
(h) Reinforcement: the news is read or sung with the aid or
accompaniment of slides, jingles, songs, or publiCity materials.
(i) ConcTetion of the abstract: that which the news often
hides in
its purely abstract information is made concrete on the stage:
torture, hunger, unemployment, etc., are shown concretely,
using graphic images, real or symbolic.
(j) Text out of context: the news is presented out of the
context
in which it was published; for example, an actor gives the
speech about austerity pre"iously delivered by the Minister of
Economics while he devours an enormous dimler: the real
truth behind the minister's words becomes demystifiecl - he
wants austerity for the people but not for himself.
2 Invisible theater: It consists of the presentation of a scene in
an
environment other than the theater, before people who are not

spectators. The place can be a restaurant, a sidewalk, a market,
a train, a line of people, etc. The people who witness the scene
81
are those who are there by chance. During the spectacle, these
people must
not have the slightest idea that it is a 'spectacle,' for this would
make them
'spectators. '
The invisible theater calls for the detailed preparation of a skit
with a
complete text or a simple script; but it is necessary to rehearse
the scene
sufficiently so that the actors are able to incorporate into their
acting and their
actions the intervention of the spectators. During the rehearsal
it is also necessary
to include every imaginable intervention from the spectators;
these possibilities
will form a kind of optional text.
The invisible theater erupts in a location chosen as a place
where the public
congregates. All the people who are near become involved in
the eruption and the
effects of it last long after the skit is ended.

A small example shows how the invisible theater works. In the
enormous
restaurant of a hotel in Chiclayo, where the literacy agents of
ALFIN were
staying, together with 400 other people, the 'actors' sit at
separate tables. The
waiters start to serve. The 'protagoniSt' in a more or less loud
voice (to attract
the attention of other diners, but not in a too obvious way)
informs the waiter
that he cannot go on eating the food served in that hotel,
because in his opinion
it is too bad. The waiter does not like the remark but tells the
customer that he
can choose something a 1a carte, which he may like better. The
actor chooses
a dish called 'Barbecue a la pauper.' The waiter points out that it
will cost him
70 soles, to which the actor answers, always in a reasonably
loud voice, that there
is no problem. Minutes later the waiter brings him the barbecue,
the protagonist
eats it rapidly and gets ready to get up and leave the restaurant,
when the waiter
brings the bill. The actor shows a worried expression and tells
the people at the
next table that his barbecue was much better than the food they
are eating, but
the pity is that one has pay for it....
'I'm going to pay for it; don't have any doubts. I ate the
"barbecue a la
pauper" and I'm going to pay for it. But there is a problem: I'm
broke.'

'And how are you going to pay?' asks the indignant waiter. 'You
knew the
price before ordering the barbecue. And now, how are you going
to pay for it?'
The diners nearby are, of course, closely following the dialogue
- much
more attentively than they would if they were witnessing the
scene on a stage.
The actor continues:
'Don't worry, because I am going to pay you. But since I'm
broke I will pay
you with labor-power.'
'With what?' asks the waiter, astonished. 'What kind of power?'
'Vith labor-power, just as I said. I am broke but I can rent you
my labor-
power. So I'll work doing something for as long as it's necessary
to pay for my
"barbecue a la pauper," which, to tell the truth, was really
delicious much
better than the food you serve to those poor souls.... '
By this time some of the c'Ustomers intervene and make
remarks among
themselves at their tables, about the price of food, the quality of
the service in
the hotel, etc. The waiter calls the headwaiter to decide the
matter. The
actor explains
adds:
'And besi,

truth is that I de
me a very simI
'What's the sala
The head1
a second actor
garbage man ha
seven soles per t
exclaims:
'How is tl
to pay for this b
increase the sala
I can do somet
gardens, which
talented person
hotel make? I'li
necessary to pa
A third at
who is an immi
the gardener m,
'How is tl
who spends his
work seven Ion
this be, Mr. H(
The head,
to the waiters
alternately laug
a public forum.
the barbecue a
Another actor,
that nobody in
can eat the 'bar

telling the trutl
Finally, tc
proposition:
'Friends, .
does not make ~
to blame for th(
table are going
soles, whatever
barbecue. And
waiter, who is
82
lese people must
'ould make them
of a skit with a
hearse the scene
r acting and their
t is also necessarv
J
these possibilities
where the public
! eruption and the

In the enormous
of ALFIN were
)arate tables. The
I voice (to attract
lforms the waiter
use in his opinion
customer that he
"he actor chooses
tt it will cost him
I voice, that there
e, the protagonist
• when the waiter
the people at the
ey are eating, but
he "barbecue a la
'm broke.'
T. 'You knew the
ing to pay for it?'
dialogue much
scene on a stage.
III broke I will pay
power?'
::Ilt you my labor-
ary to pay for my
delicious - much
e remarks among
r of the service in
the matter. The

AUGUSTO BOAL
actor explains again to the latter the business of renting his
labor-power and
adds:
'And besides, there is another problem: I'll rent my labor-power
but the
truth is that I don't know how to do anything, or very little. You
will have to give
me a very simple job to do. For example, I can take out the
hotel's garbage.
What's the salary of the garbage man who works for you?'
The headwaiter does not want to give any information about
salaries, but
a second actor at another table is already prepared and explains
that he and the
garbage man have gotten to be friends and that the latter has
told him his salary:
seven sales per hour. The two actors make some calculations
and the 'protagonist'
exclaims:
'How is this possible! If! work as a garbage man I'll have to
work ten hours
to pay for this barbecue that it took me ten minutes to eat? It
can't bel Either you
increase the salary of the garbage man or reduce the price of the
barbecue! ... But
I can do something more specialized; for example, I can take
care of the hotel
gardens, which are so beautiful, so well cared for. One can see
that a very
talented person is in charge of the gardens. How much does the
gardener of this

hotel make? I'll work as a gardener! How many hours work in
the garden are
necessary to pay for the "barbecue a la pauper"?'
A third actor, at another table, explains his friendship with the
gardener
who is an immigrant from the same village as he; for this reason
he knows that
the gardener makes ten sales per hour. Again the 'protagonist'
becomes indignant:
'How is this possible? So the man who takes care of these
beautiful gardens,
who spends his days out there exposed to the wind, the rain, and
the sun, has to
work seven long hours to be able to eat the barbecue in ten
minutes? How can
this be, Mr. Headwaiter? Explain it to me!'
The headwaiter is already in despair; he dashes back and forth,
gives orders
to the waiters in a loud voice to divert the attention of the other
customers,
alternately laughs and becomes serious, while the restaurant is
transformed into
a public forum. The 'protagonist' asks the waiter how much he is
paid to serve
the barbecue and offers to replace him for the necessary number
of hours.
Another actor, originally from a small village in the interior,
gets up and declares
that nobody in his village makes 70 soles per day; therefore
nobody in his village
can eat the 'barbecue a la pauper.' (The sincerity of this actor,
who was, besides,
telling the truth, moved those who were near his table.)

Finally, to conclude the scene, another actor intervenes with the
following
proposition:
'Friends, it looks as if we are against the waiter and the
headwaiter and this
does not make sense. They are our brothers. They work like us,
and they are not
to blame for the prices charged here. I suggest we take up a
collection. We at this
table are going to ask you to contribute whatever you can; one
sol, two sales, five
soles, whatever you can afford. And with that money we are
going to pay for the
barbecue. And be generous, because what is left over will go as
a tip for the
waiter, who is our brother and a working man.'
83
Immediately those who are with him at the table start collecting
money to
pay the bilL Some customers willingly give one or two soles.
Others furiously
comment:
'He says that the food we're eating is junk, and now he wants us

to pay for
his barbecue! ... And am I going to eat this junk? Hell no! I
wouldn't give him
a peanut, so he'll learn a lesson! Let him wash dishes .... '
The collection reached 100 soles and the discussion went on
through the
night. It is always very important that the actors do not reveal
themselves to be
actors! On this rests the invisible nature of this form of theater.
And it is precisely
this invisible quality that will make the spectator act freely and
fully, as ifhe were
living a real situation and, after all, it is a real situation!
It is necessary to emphasize that the invisible theater is not the
same thing
as a 'happening,' or the so-called 'guerrilla theater.' In the latter
we are clearly
talking about 'theater,' and therefore the wall that separates
actors from spectators
immediately arises, reducing the spectator to impotence: a
spectator is always
less than a man! In the invisible theater the theatrical rituals are
abolished; only
the theater exists, without its old, worn-out patterns. The
theatrical energy is
completely liberated, and the impact produced by this free
theater is much more
powerful and longer lasting.
Several presentations of invisible theater were made in different
locations in
Peru. Particularly interesting is what happened at the Carmen
Market, in the
barrio of Comas, some 14 kilometers away from downtown

Lima. Two actresses
were protagonists in a scene enacted at a vegetable stand. One
of them, who was
pretending to be illiterate, insisted that the vendor was cheating
her, taking
advantage of the fact that she did not know how to read; the
other actress checked
the figures, finding them to be correct, and advised the
'illiterate' one to register
in one of ALFIN's literacy courses. After some discussion about
the best age to
start one's studies, about what to study and with whom, the first
actress kept on
insisting that she was too old for those things. It was then that a
little old woman,
leaning on her cane, very indignantly shouted:
'My dears, that's not true? For learning and making love one is
never too
old!'
Everyone witnessing the scene broke into laughter at .the old
woman's
amorous outburst, and the actresses were unable to continue the
scene.
3 Photo-romar--- -;, . J .--~~..~-~~ies ~ere is a genui~e
epidemic
of photo-roma!. . ..~ .< ~magmable level, whIch further-
more always s( ilasses' ideology. The technique
here consists in1lerallines in the plot of a photo-
romance witho plot. The participants are asked
to act out the s Is compared to the story as it is
told in the pho te discussed.
For exam from Corin Tellado, the worst

I
author of this b '0 I::> _... ~, ~w:U Leu llKe tnIS:
84
A worna!
is helping her
The par1
expecting her
her is a neighl:
home tired aft
In Corin Tell<
gown, with pe
who says no m,
ma'am'; 'Here
palace; the htl:
had an argumel
are all living tl
vein.
This part
magnificent ex
a letter from a
a former mistr
her because he
well~dressed w
'Yes,hel
has always beeIl
climb very hig!
That is to
highest degree

a factory ownel
the way up are
And the ,
have to remain
in love with ht
ending rotten b
and acted out 1:
end of the perf(
just acted out, t
read Corin Tell
if they first of "
read Corin Te[
attitude, but in
house, and con
compare them 1
to detect the pI
and other form!
I was ove]
back in Lima, I
Larry
Line
Larry
Linefile 1.pdffile 2

Course Reader Reading #2 What is Theater .docx

Course Reader Reading #2 What is Theater .docx

More Related Content

Similar to Course Reader Reading #2 What is Theater .docx (20)

More from marilucorr (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Course Reader Reading #2 What is Theater .docx