MODERNIST FORM IN EARLY 20th CENTURY THEATRES IN AUSTRALIA Ross Thorne Introduction A brief discussion of the influence of modernism on the design of a particular building type necessitates two explanations: first, there is an assumption of the parameters of modernism in architectural design and second, there is the explanation of what modernism might represent to the function or use of the particular building type - in this case, theatre. The former is relatively easy to do, but the latter presents some difficulties which will be outlined in due course. It is assumed that visually, architectural modernism generally conforms to the International Style as described by Hitchcock and Johnson;l it is related to function and visual composition as described by Colquhoun2 and it is devoid of eclectic historical and other superficial surface decoration, as manifested by Gropius3 and Le Corbusie~.~Even with this almost puritan European (perhaps also Scandanavian) picture, the importance of the fringe dwellers of the Modem Movement cannot be forgotten - the Expressionists (particularly Erich Mendelsohn) for their influence on the visual attributes of Australian theatre design. In this paper 'theatre' will include buildings that were originally built (or altered) for an audience to watch a theatrical performance, whether functioning 'live', cinematic or a mixture of the two (as occurred with a number of buildings constructed in the 1920s and 1930s). Such a catholic interpretation of 'theatre' conforms to the use of the term in USA5 and permits scrutiny of the development of the theatrical designs of one or two architects who specialised in designing theatres for both types of function. As well as affecting architecture the Modern Movement, or modernism, affected other disciplines and intellectual pursuits. The one with which this paper is concerned is what is generally called 'theatre', representing theatre studies and theatre practice. The former comprises an extensive literature, not of analysing performances so much as discussing the dramatic literature and philosophies of writers of drama. This emanates largely from academics in Departments of FABRICATIONS 5, September 1994 Pages 87-113 ROSSTHORNE 87 FABRICATIONS English, French and other languages who analyse the dramatic language of the writers in those languages. Occasionally, the physical relationship of the actor and audience is mentioned but only where it is impossible to ignore it as, for instance, with the products of Grotowski in P~land,~where the action is threaded between and through the audience. In complaining about this type of theatre (studies) Carlson raises the spectre of Joel Springam, one time Professor of English at Columbia University. Springam attempted to 'analyse the written text without the "distractions" of cultural or historical context', claiming that 'the study of the history of theatrical spaces . had no more to do with the understanding of the drama than the study of the history of printing had to do with the understanding of p~etry.~ This an early and extreme case, and Carlson admits that today few university departments of English do not consider how a dramatic piece might have been perf~rmed.~But his whole thesis of dicussing the semiotics or meaning of theatre architecture is to go beyond the discussion of the use of the performance space (i.e. the stage) by actors performing a play, to how the audience, in every way, perceives the play, both as an intellectual experience and one of the setting and how the (architectural and stage) setting design may enhance or detract from appreciation of the performance and literature being presented.8 The next section provides an overview of how the Modem Movements of architecture and theatre (studies and practice) dealt with theatre design in terms of an early twentieth century avant garde approach to the actor-audience relationship through the design of the physical space that the two sets of participants shared. It will also view what little architectonic expression arises from the modernist architects for theatre design. Australian theatre design will then be discussed in terms of both these fundamentals, that is, how theatre design in Australia was influenced by architectural and theatre (studieslpractice) modernists. Taking these two strands of modernism the paper will conclude that live' theatre design in Australia, while little influenced by modernist architects, was, rather belatedly, more influenced by theatre practitioners, and that mostly movie theatre design was influenced by modernist architects, mostly through the visual elements they had developed - that is, in a stylistic way. I I ROSS THORNE 88 FABRICATIONS Fig 1 Australian Art Deco at the Orpheum Theatre, Cremorne, NSW Fig 2 Expressionist exterior: Ozone Theatre, Mildura, by Taylor, Soilleux & Overend, architects ROSS THORNE 89 FABRICATIONS The Modern Movement and theatre: the 'Influencers' The contribution of architects The principal architectural players or 'influencers' in the modem movement are generally assumed to be those architects who had what what were considered avant garde ideas (personal philosophies or theories) for the time, and seemed able to articulate them. Accordingly, Le Corbusier and the architects and designers from the Bauhaus are dominant for Europe, and Frank Lloyd Wright is dominant for USA. The dispersal of the personnel from the Bauhaus in the early 1930s, first to Britain and then to the USA, possibly had a type of 'missionary effect' of 'spreading the word' - literally. The writings of Le Corbusier and, in particular, the main architectural force at the Bauhaus, Walter Gropius, tend to have a socio-political message. The former suggests how people should live in cities - in large high-rise blocks of flats 'organised in an orderly way'g with lots of open space betwen the blocks. He was concerned with how people lived,ll trying to solve the housing problem with mass produced housing, particularly for 'artisans', and producing a 'free plan' and 'free facade' as a revolution against the 'paralyzed plan' of houses.12 The only reference to theatre-type spaces in the four works of Le Corbusier cited, is one to the Palace of the League of Nations Assembly Hall (1928) that he designed, showing acoustic and air movement considerations in a fairly conventional but simple auditorium sectional shape.13 Gropius also was also concerned with housing and urban planning, coming to similar conclusions to those of Le Corbusier - high rise with space between for light, air and ground to use by the inhabitants.14 It was his way of attempting to overcome the 'burning and baffling problem' of town planning.15 Although the two works cited detail housing, illustrate workers' housing, schools and factories, there is no reference to theatre except for an illustration of a 'reconstruction' of the conventional Jena Municipal Theatre (1922). The exterior illustration - the only information provided - shows a composition of simple forms and voids minus any decoration.16 Hitchcock and Johnson, in their 1932 originated work on the modem movement in architecture, also illustrate houses, workers' housing, elderly persons' housing, schools, factories and other work environments, some recreational facilities, but only one movie theatre in Stockholm (1929) in which 'acoustical considerations determine the ROSS THORNE 90 FABRICATIONS shape of the interior.'17 Resorting, generally, to documentation on the Bauhaus and particularly theatre, as it existed at the Bauhaus, the picture is fleshed out somewhat but it is limited in its scope. Both Schle~uner~~and Moholy-Nagy19 produced a distinctive form of a designers' dance theatre that seemed to relegate the body of the performer to being the motor for a type of kinetic art. Molnar produced a diagrammatic scheme for a U-shaped theatre (1924) which attempted to combine the 'traditional' scenic stage, an apron, and an area, further in front, that could be used as a thrust stage.20 The audience, on a steep rake, surrounded this thrust on three sides. Quite high, above the rear rows of this audience were three narrow tiers of boxes, possibly derived from the traditional European opera-house format. Weininger produced a spherical theatre (1927) - illustrated only as an auditorium with what seem to be narrow rows of boxes rising up the internal wall of the sphere. They surrounded a central circular stage where the sphere 'sits' on the ground.21 How such a theatre would work is very vague. The final Bauhaus design for a theatre was for a client. Designed by Gropius, it is titled Total Theatre' and, although more completely documented than the other two, there is still an element of vagueness on how it would really work as a theatre. It attempted to be adaptable from theatre-in-the-round, to a type of Greek theatre format, and to a type of scenic stage format, being designed in either 1926 or 1927.22 A designer, Norman Be1 Geddes, at about the same time as the Bauhaus, produced as many if not more theatre designsz3 than the members of that institution. In 1922 he designed a theatre-in-the-round with a high domical roof that would have had exraordinady poor acoustic^.^^ In 1929 he designed a pair of comer stage (diagonal axis) theatres titled 'Repertory Theater', again each with a domed ceiling encompassing stage and auditorium. The splayed auditoria walls were at a %-degree angle to each other. This design was a response to what Geddes considered was a wasteful use of space in the design of traditional (longitudinal axis) proscenium theatres.25 He describes how this was a development of his Theatre Number 6, designed in 1914.26 Being consistent with his concept of domical roofs, and %-degree fan auditoria, Geddes designed a 'Divine Comedy Theater' for the Chicago World's Fair in 1929.27 More conventional, but still with a wide, over 90-degree fan auditorium, he produced for the competition, by ROSS THORNE 91 FABRICATIONS invitation, a design for the Ukranian State Theatre, Karkov (1931).28 At last, the section appears acoustically realistic; and the folded ceiling shows Expressionist influences in its indirect lighting.