First of all, I thought one of the main points of this project, or rather, this class, is to blur the distinction between visual art and live performance, and to experiment with creating spectacle to see how it will engage an audience.
Secondly, I don't think one can rightly say that art is necessarily separate from theater, or that this shadow puppet show was strictly art and not theater. What does that even mean? Theater is a form of art, is it not? But I would even go further and say that this project came a lot closer to what we would think of as theater. It was a live performance that filled a space full of people with visual, sound, and music.
And that being said, I think that a performance of this type should very much be created with the audience in mind - is that not in fact its highest purpose? That does not necessarily mean that we should play to elicit a comfortable, positive response from the audience and show them only what they want to see, but it does imply that we should be trying to engage them somehow, not simply create art that has no intention or care towards the viewers.
And why scorn the idea of art that entertains the viewers, anyway? To me, to entertain, or at least to involve the viewer in some emotional or intellectual way (which is to many of us entertaining) may in fact be the highest purpose of art. That's my perspective, and you can disagree.
All that being said, I think that Monday night's performance was a success, because it did just that. People reacted in all sorts of ways, and I think that's wonderful, AND relevant.
No comments:
Post a Comment