Peavey Windsor Half Stack For Sale

The audience this unknown

Elisa Ferrari

Throughout history the public was to be a metamorphic. In the past characterized some awareness both about the fact of having a role, and how this role was to be exercised. In ancient Greece it was the attitude of a political nature. In the Middle Ages resulted in a religious feeling. This participation from 800 'active' suffers a setback, the theater is transformed into pure entertainment, the whole self. The role of the public is not well identified, perhaps there is.
comes the 900.
In the definition of 'Theatre of Cruelty' Artaud rejects the idea of \u200b\u200bart as imitation of reality, arguing that art is life itself.
are so undermined the roles and obligations of the classic drama. The viewer does not
identifies more as a passive observer, the show is no longer subject to the same person look. The show is a vortex that swallows the viewer. Replaces the concept of party : theater people and communities become communities in a sort of rite of purification, or perhaps infection.
In the ritual of theater every individual participates empathically to the party, without distinction of roles.
If it is assumed that the drama explores the human condition, it is a glimpse, a window on the contemporary world that offers an overview and critique of the conditions of society, which has the world view of the audience today?
What is the role that now belongs to the public?
The public has a role?
After Artaud, after Piscator, after the avant-garde, one gets the impression that he has suffered a reversal of a couple of centuries.
Inside the box play the spectator is 'aseptic', automizzato. Watch (or perhaps see it). Cheers. Join? E 'emotionally involved?
Perhaps we have lost the freedom of opinion. The public suffers. We let 'torture' by events that offend the dignity of the observer. Do not take positions. You remain anonymous until dell'applauso at all costs when switching on lights. Why?
Perhaps for fear of no longer feel part of a group, that in any case did an important choice and that is to go to the theater?
The public is unaccustomed to what is happening.
The show sometimes is reduced to a mere exposure to a look not ready to admit.
If artists do not have anything to say, if the staging of the self becomes a mere display, if the public participates only physically at the event, if the body of the viewer left the chair becomes the target that does not respond to shots fired blanks as there are no real shots of the lack of message, after all the 'if' where's the drama? Where is the exchange? Where's the communication?
If the participants refuse their role, where the party?
Probably the sense of community and, consequently, the sense of theater is palpable in places that are not purely Members of the theater itself. As Artaud said, "art is life" and perhaps the theater has chosen to live on the streets of a city anonymous but alive.