Framing Dialogues – Towards an Understanding of the Parergon in Theatre
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Framing Dialogues – Towards an Understanding of the Parergon in Theatre Suzanne Little BA (Hons.) Drama Submitted for the Doctorate in Philosophy at the Queensland University of Technology, CIRAC. Page 1 of 453 Key words analysis, audience, conceptual framework, différance, director, frame, framing, interpretation, parergon, performance, practitioner, reception, space, supplément, theatre, trace, undecidability, virtuality Page 2 of 453 Abstract This project argues for an elevation and a greater understanding of the importance of framing in theatre. In this respect, the study follows on from Derrida’s famous deconstruction of Kant’s parergon (frame) in his Critique of Judgement. Derrida’s work exposes what he sees as a complicit desire to ‘limit’ the frame to the role of ‘decorative adjunct’. Finding the frame to be ‘undecidable’, Derrida asserts that the frame actively affects the work inside and the space outside while answering a ‘lack’ within the work. Utilising Derrida’s work on the parergon as a starting point, this study represents an attempt to formulate a theory of the frame for theatre asserting that the frame provides a prospective key towards understanding persistent ‘problems’ within theatre studies. These include the complicated onstage/offstage and spectator/actor dialectics as well as the point where ‘reality’ ends and theatre begins and also issues of agreed interpretation. Ultimately the thesis posits that theatre is in itself a parergon which virtualises the space in which it installs itself – a finding that goes some way to explaining and/or accommodating these ‘problems’. The research methodology involves a detailed study of literature encompassing framing and related theories drawn from a diverse array of paradigms. A working theory of the theatre frame, along with a series of analogous approaches is developed and further examined through Page 3 of 453 application to a variety of theatre performances. This thesis offers a theory of the theatre frame and a variety of framing research approaches that function to bridge the gap between the traditionally partitioned areas of performance analysis and reception studies. It also adds to our understanding of the frame and the theatre art form itself. Page 4 of 453 Table of Contents Key words __________________________________________________________ 2 Abstract____________________________________________________________ 3 Table of Contents ____________________________________________________ 5 Table of Figures _____________________________________________________ 8 Chapter 1: The Introduction __________________________________________ 11 1.1: Why Framing and Theatre? _________________________________________ 11 1.2: Framing Parameters _______________________________________________ 16 1.3: Key Terms________________________________________________________ 21 1.4: Methodology ______________________________________________________ 24 1.5: Research Methods _________________________________________________ 28 1.51: Introduction ___________________________________________________________ 28 1.5.2: Review of Literature____________________________________________________ 29 1.5.3: Framing Analysis in Performances (through the application of a conceptual model) __ 34 1.5.4: Audience Reception Studies ______________________________________________ 37 1.6: Chapter Summaries ________________________________________________ 37 Chapter 2: Theoretical Underpinnings - The Frame and Related Theories _____ 41 Introduction __________________________________________________________ 41 2.1: Kant, Derrida and the Parergon______________________________________ 41 2.2: Visual Art Theorists________________________________________________ 50 2.2.1: Meyer Schapiro________________________________________________________ 50 2.2.2: Paul Duro and other Visual Art theorists ____________________________________ 55 2.3: A Sociological Perspective - Erving Goffman ___________________________ 61 2.4: Theatre Theories of the Frame and Space ______________________________ 66 2.4.1: Alison Richards on Goffman and Performance Studies _________________________ 67 2.4.2: Patrice Pavis on Vectors _________________________________________________ 68 2.4.3: Josette Féral – “The Theatrical Event as Space…” ____________________________ 70 2.4.4: Hannah Scolnicov and Sacred Space _______________________________________ 74 2.4.5: Michael Issacharoff – Space and Drama ____________________________________ 76 2.4.6: Gay McAuley and Theatre Space __________________________________________ 79 2.4.7: Sylvia Vickers – The Impact of Space on Performance _________________________ 84 2.4.8: Peter Brook and The Empty Space_________________________________________ 86 2.4.9: Michel Foucault – Theatre as Heterotopia ___________________________________ 88 2.4.10: D.W. Winnicott - Transitional Space ______________________________________ 92 2.5: Interpretation and Visuality in Theatre________________________________ 95 2.5.1: Derrida on “free play of meaning” within the arts _____________________________ 95 2.5.2: Theatre and the Spectator/Manipulator______________________________________ 97 2.5.3: Umberto Eco’s “floating text” ____________________________________________ 98 2.5.4: The Visual Text ______________________________________________________ 100 Conclusion __________________________________________________________ 108 Chapter 3: Developing a Theory of the Frame ___________________________ 110 Introduction _________________________________________________________ 110 3.1: Theatre, Theatricality and the Frame ______________________________ 111 3.1.1: Josette Féral _________________________________________________________ 116 Page 5 of 453 3.1.2: Jacques Derrida_______________________________________________________ 123 3.1.3: Samuel Weber and Antonin Artaud _______________________________________ 131 3.4: The Virtuality of Theatre __________________________________________ 135 Conclusion __________________________________________________________ 145 Chapter 4: Performance Analysis: Framing in Action 1 ___________________ 149 Introduction _________________________________________________________ 149 4.1: Framing the Analysis ______________________________________________ 150 4.1.1: Practitioner Created Frames _____________________________________________ 153 4.1.2: The Conceptual Frame _________________________________________________ 153 4.1.3: The Theatre Art Form as Frame __________________________________________ 158 4.2: About the Production: _____________________________________________ 161 4.2.1: The Written Text Timeframe ____________________________________________ 162 4.2.2: Synopsis of the Written Play Text ________________________________________ 162 4.3: A Summary of the Director’s Performance Text _______________________ 165 4.4: An account of the opening minutes of the production ___________________ 167 4.5: The Director’s Interpretation _______________________________________ 178 4.6: Introduction to the analysis _______________________________________________ 182 4.7: Framing Analysis of Fountains Beyond – the opening minutes____________ 184 4.7.1: Style as Frame _______________________________________________________ 201 4.8: A Summary of the Audience Reception Study Results ___________________ 204 Conclusion – discussion and overall findings ______________________________ 211 Chapter 5: Framing in Action 2 ______________________________________ 223 Introduction _________________________________________________________ 223 5.1: A Note on Reception Studies ________________________________________ 226 5.2: A Note on the Written Play Text_____________________________________ 228 5.2.1: The Tempest and Arturo Ui - Directorial Choices ____________________________ 235 5.2.2: Allegory and The Frame or The Allegorical Frame ___________________________ 242 5.3: About the Production - The Tempest by William Shakespeare directed by Simon Phillips _____________________________________________________________ 250 5.3.1: Pre-Performance Framing -The Venue_____________________________________ 250 5.3.2: Pre-Performance Framing - The Program and Advertising _____________________ 253 5.4: The Performance – The Tempest ____________________________________ 264 5.4.1:Entering The Auditorium________________________________________________ 264 5.4.2: Framing Characters, Costumes and Colonialists _____________________________ 283 5.4.3: Inadvertently Reinscribing Hierarchies ____________________________________ 292 5.4.4: The Character/Actor as Frame ___________________________________________ 299 5.5: The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui by Bertolt Brecht Directed by Simon Phillips - Melbourne, July 1999 _________________________________________________ 307 5.5.1: Framing the Space ____________________________________________________ 309 5.5.2: Creating Undecidable Characters _________________________________________ 314 5.5.3: Macro Framing through the use of Scale ___________________________________ 317 5.6: Conclusion_______________________________________________________ 328 Chapter 6: Future Research Directions ________________________________ 334 6.1: Introduction _____________________________________________________ 334 6.2: Non-Linear Performance Framing – “Soar”___________________________ 335 6.2.1: The Ground Makes My Feet Sad choreographed by Rosetta Cook _______________ 336 Page 6 of 453 6.2.2: Gravitational Pull choreographed by Anna Smith in collaboration with the dancers _ 352 6.2.3: PIXilatedSEA choreographed