MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2081321996 · doi:10.1353/mdr.2006.0044

Looking into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography (review)

2006· article· en· W2081321996 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christopher Baugh

Notice bibliographique

RevueModern Drama · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueTheatre and Performance Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésScenographyDramaturgyPerformance artArgument (complex analysis)NarrativeVisual artsPerformance studiesArtHistoryAestheticsArt historyLiteratureSociologyAnthropology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Looking into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography Christopher Baugh Arnold Aronson . Looking into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005. Pp. x + 236, illustrated. $65 (Hb); 424.95 (Pb). This collection of essays by Arnold Aronson is organized in two parts: a series of thematic essays on issues of contemporary scenographic interest, followed by a selection of case studies examining scenographic challenges, such as the scenography of Chekhov, the work and approach of companies such as the Wooster Group, and the work of individual artists such as Joseph Urban, Richard Foreman, David Rockwell, and George Tsypin. With the exception of a short introduction and conclusion, all of the essays have been delivered over the last fifteen years at international conferences that ranged from the challengingly scholarly to popular theatre festivals and to gatherings of scenographers and theatre technicians. On such occasions, Aronson is a fine speaker, who judiciously crafts an argument with great care and steady precision. The thematic essays confront the predictable issues of the space and place of performance and the quest for a contemporary architecture of theatre. He considers the effects of new technologies both upon scenographic [End Page 142] aesthetics and upon dramaturgy and also examines the interactions of mediatized ingredients within performance practice. The essays are thoughtful and judicious, although they (perhaps inevitably) raise more questions than they resolve. In many ways, this is both the strength and weakness of the book. As is the case with many conference presentations, these essays act as provocation and as spurs to discussion and thought. Rarely, for example, do they answer or debate their own questions: that, after all, is the function of the conference. The central and recurring theme that serves as the core of Aronson's argument concerns the nature and extent of cultural change represented by the impact of new technologies and globalization. I looked in vain for an essay that, as it were, sat back and rose to its own provocation. For example, the conclusion to his essay, "One Hundred Years of Stage Lighting," might well have served as the starting point for a detailed examination of contemporary performance lighting: "[t]he unmotivated, the inorganic, and the dis-unified that were unintentional hallmarks of nineteenth-century lighting are now the aesthetic realities of light in the contemporary world" (36). In one way or another, each of the essays faces up to a profound sense of difference between the audiences and cultures of the earlier twentieth century and the postmodern condition(s) of the last few decades. Aronson's clarion call to recognize the enormousness of this difference hangs in the air like the applause that invariably greets his conference contributions. In his essay on "(Sceno)Graphic Style," he raises the intriguing issue of the synergies between the graphic chic of international motorcar or fashion advertisements and contemporary performance aesthetics – for example, those of Richard Foreman or Robert Wilson. But it is a provocation thrown into a pond, without the detailed examination of the ripples that one knows (frustratingly) that Aronson is eminently suited to undertake. Time and again I felt that there was a book, or at least a much longer study, trying to get out of these tantalizing reformulations of the same basic questions. For example, he concludes the essay on "Technology and Dramaturgical Development" with the following: if all Western Drama of the last six hundred years or so has evolved out of or in response to neoclassical precepts, we might say that the neoclassic era lasted until only a few years ago. What we are entering into now might be termed "neomedievalism." But whereas the original was driven by theological ideas, this movement owes its genesis and form to technology that has refashioned the neoclassical worldview. (80) The intriguing conjunction of this sense of a "neomedievalism" alongside a refashioning and refunctioning of scenographic and performance aesthetics through technology might well have formed the substance rather than the conclusion to an essay. [End Page 143] Throughout the essays, therefore, there is a tendency to repeat the theme of traumatic cultural change. Aronson sees himself reflecting upon scenography (and performance) at, or close to, a focal...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,931
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,557

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,225
Écart entre enseignants0,210 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueModern DramaMême sujetTheatre and Performance StudiesTravaux en français237 207