S.M Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 This is a topic I am studying to produce a seminar on. Is theatre outdated by Television as phoneboxes have been by mobile phones or books by the internet with only a few people using their predecessors? Will theatre ever evolve to be 'of the people' being as popular as television or the british pop charts? Is theatre too formal? are there too many rules about theatre? If shakesphere could have staged his plays on television would he have, was he writing for the most popular format of the time? Was theatre outdated years ago by television and cinema or was it never really that popular at all for its art and only its suitability as a meeting place? Just look at the design of many theatres, they are designed so that people can see each other. So..... what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddie Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I don't think theatre will be replaced by TV. yet...It can't be denied that Television is more popular at present, however it just doesn't have the same atmosphere as "going out to the theatre", other than sightseeing, what do most visitors to London/NY do? See a west-end/Broadway show. Top of the pops hasn't replaced rock concerts has it? Sorry if that wasn't much help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeR Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Thoughts only - Art form & pastime (your topic) are different things. Phone boxes have not been replaced by mobiles nor have books been replaced by the internet . The secret perhaps is to look at the modulation of form against function. Shakespeare may well have written for the populist media though theres no saying that he would be writing for tv today. Examine the point of the art - is it entertainment or education - to suggest that the point of all art is entertainment is wrong not that this is what you are doing. Coronation street on the stage no ta , Lear on Tv, yes please. Did the artform expand its boundaries because of new media available or did it become elitist and marginalised because of the requirement to fill airtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.M Posted November 8, 2004 Author Share Posted November 8, 2004 But isn't going to the theatre in the west end more of a spectacle? isn't it a luxury where most people dress up? Adding to that, isn't a west end show more of a class orientated event? Funny you should mention Lear on TV! I read this article on the guardian site....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeR Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 There are some deeply flawed arguments (to my mind in that article) Given the provenance of the piece though I find it hard to believe that the writer intends it to be taken at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirdtap Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Will theatre ever evolve to be 'of the people' being as popular as television or the british pop charts? Isn't it already? How many Amateur theatre companies are there and how many children are involved with performing onstage? Most I would say with school, dance schools or youth projects. Most people including Blue room members have been onstage acting or dancing at sometime. Sorry maybe a typo but I think it will make a great band name 'shakesphere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
la grande homme Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 wrote about this some years ago... my main thrust was that tv is the child of theatre, not the rival and that theatre still provides the training ground in which TV and film stars of tomorrow are grounded (certainly in the UK) until there are a lot more specifically film schools for actors then theatre will continue to be the driving force that it (despite the apparent slant of your take non this subject) still is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
la grande homme Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 oh and books have most certainly NOT been outdated by the internet... its a fiction people who write in the Daily Mail would love you to believe as that fills their 'Britain going to the dogs' outlook quite nicely thankyou... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Bloke Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 "Is theatre outdated by Television as phoneboxes have been by mobile phones or books by the internet with only a few people using their predecessors?" As has been said, lots of phoneboxes still exist, and if they weren't being used they wouldn't be there. Books are by no means being outdated by the internet. What is one of the most popular sites in the UK and, indeed, the world?: Amazon - which sells BOOKS! "Will theatre ever evolve to be 'of the people' being as popular as television or the british pop charts?" It depends how you measure popularity. I often watch the TV when I've nothing better do do and fancy a little relaxation, but I wouldn't rate it very highly on marks out of ten most of the time. By comparison I don't go to the theatre as often as I watch TV, even though I go far more often than 'the man in the street', but when I do go, I'd rarely give it less than 5 out of ten and often give it 10. On the whole TV sucks and theatre is fab. Our theatre has a huge mailing list of people who've been in the last three years. Does that mean we're popular or does the fact that the average number of attendances per person per year is between 1 and 2 mean we're unpopular? "Is theatre too formal? are there too many rules about theatre?" Surely the whole point of the twentieth century was to point out that there need be no rules? Whoever wrote that question needs to open their eyes. "If shakesphere could have staged his plays on television would he have, was he writing for the most popular format of the time?" Most succesful writers nowadays write both for theatre and TV. The Bard would probably have done the same. Which of his plays would have lasted longest and been most studied in universities? Propbably the ones written for theatre where he didn't have to follow the "rules" of TV writing. "Was theatre outdated years ago by television and cinema or was it never really that popular at all for its art and only its suitability as a meeting place? Just look at the design of many theatres, they are designed so that people can see each other." Have you seen any modern theatres at all? They are designed so everyone can see the stage. Then all the lights go down so you can ONLY see the stage. Then we all go home. Stop talking tosh and join the twenty-first century! Theatre is alive and well and living all around us - in traditional theatres, modern theatres, schools, churches, arts centres, etc. etc. etc. and you'd be surprised how many people attend performances. Get those who do to rate the average TV show, then get them to rate the average theatre show and you'll soon see which is prefered. Some institutions ask the stupidest questions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_s Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 wrote about this some years ago... my main thrust was that tv is the child of theatre, not the rival and that theatre still provides the training ground in which TV and film stars of tomorrow are grounded (certainly in the UK) until there are a lot more specifically film schools for actors then theatre will continue to be the driving force that it (despite the apparent slant of your take non this subject) still is.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I kind of go along with this, as training for actors is still very much based in the live arena, but I think this changes as soon as the student graduates - the first pressure on a new actor is to get an agent, and the next pressure is to support that agent as well as themselves, by undertaking the most lucrative work - i.e. most money for shortest commitment. Unfortunately, live theatre conforms to the absolute opposite of this - i.e. least money for longest commitment.Not sure these comments are entirely relevant to the question of theatre's dieing popularity - I find in the field I work in, we are presenting stuff all the time to people who have never been to a theatre, and the response is generally pretty good. we do allsorts of theatre forms - opera, music theatre, dance, storytelling...whetther this translates to our audience then choosing to go and see more of the same is more difficult to analyse. Perhaps Mr Cartwright might add something about theatre for children and young people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagardner1984 Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 There is nothing, absolutely nothing, which comes close to the atmosphere of live theatre. No dolby surround, plasma screens or whatever else can come close to the wonderful thing that happens when a performer who loves what they are doing comes onto a stage where 20, 100, 2000 whatever people watching him/her, waiting in anticipation of that performance. In Glasgow at the moment is the tour of Miss Saigon. I own the cast recording of that and listen to it from time to time. Despite the fact that the performers on the recording are undoubtedly of a higher standard than those on the tour, there is no substitute for watching that on stage. Something do with the emotion and passion of the situation of performer and audience, regardless of what is on the stage James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryson Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 Well, I work for a company who are purely interested in the bottom line - if they thought that the customers didn't want live entertainment, they sure as hell wouldn't provide it. But they do, and they spend lavish quantities of money to provide it. You may rest assured that they believe that they're getting their value back on that money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techno_Monkey Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 "Is theatre outdated by Television as phoneboxes have been by mobile phones or books by the internet with only a few people using their predecessors?" To look at it from a slightly different angle.... Back in the summer there was a production of Little Shop of Horrors at the in Jersey, this was a production with some popular stars in the cast. Shortly before this production, Simply The Best was filmed 400 metres down the road. Before every recording of STB, there would be hundreds/thousands queuing up to get into the arena, the ques would stretch quite a long way down the road even after the filming had started (sometimes for up to 4 hours into the filming) to try to get in and see the show. For the rest of the summer, the production of Little Shop oF Horrors struggled to get a 50% attendance rate. This production was IMO, of MUCH higher standard to STB. Not only that, the audience could sit in a warm auditorium for just over 2 hours, there was a bar near by to have a drink in the interval etc instead of sitting in the rain for 5-6 hours, without an interval and generally sitting through lots of faffing around and a generally boring night. Slightly but makes you think..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy! Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 I dont think theatre will ever be overidden by TV. Theatre always has that slight touch of enjoyment. Were as if you were at home watching it, it wouldnt be the same. I think that theatre will keep improving and become more and more popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Bloke Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 Theatre always has that slight touch of enjoyment. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Coupled with sheer unadulterated misery, are you suggesting?!! I find theatre has a lot more than a slight touch of enjoyment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.