My main question in pursuing studies in theatre is on the messages it conveys as a medium. What are the characteristics theatre shares, in terms of space-time-or communicative methods? What does history tell us about the discussions and problems of theatre medium? What kinds of relationships have theatre created with other kinds of medium, and how have them shifted our understanding of theatre?
In order to approache these questions, I like to move between concepts that combine the ideal of theatre with its power to change - in other words, concepts trying to keep the idea of theatre alive on stage to experiment with its potential.
Often considered to be one of the precursors of performance art today as opposed to theatre subordinated to literature, I found it is often neglected how Artaud called for a 'true illusion' that theatre can accomplish more effectively than other media. To understand this, I question the understanding and phenomena of representation in theatre, focusing on how theatrical representation can turn out to be a representation of contradictions. I also wish to tackle the meaning of his 'cruelty(cruauté )' and relate this with the power of violence on stage without being limited to the matter of content and ethics.
As I like to research the unique message within the theatre medium without distancing from actual practices and works, it was important for me to find theatrical incarnations materializing this message. Some of those approaches involve forms known as metatheatre and farce. What is especially interesting for me regarding these concepts is how they serve as grounds for inappropriateness and non-realistic, non-credible actions on stage.
"The idea of the actor’s art, based on the worship of the mask, gesture, and movement is inseparably linked with the idea of farce." - V. Meyerhold
Can theatre realize something out of reach? How can we understand the madness of belief and play?