You are on page 1of 19

Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics

The Analysis of Theatrical Performance: The State of the Art Author(s): Wilfried Passow and R. Strauss Source: Poetics Today, Vol. 2, No. 3, Drama, Theater, Performance: A Semiotic Perspective (Spring, 1981), pp. 237-254 Published by: Duke University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1772474 . Accessed: 27/01/2014 04:52
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Duke University Press and Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Poetics Today.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE


The Stateof theArt* WILFRIED PASSOW
Theater Munich Studies,

For several years now theaterstudies have been in a state of change. Its to explainin detail almostexclusively had previously endeavored representatives of theater.The structural and in generalthe origin,natureand development of a staging and the communicative construction ignored. processwere largely from theinsight Theaterstudies received a newimpetus thata performance must be considered as collaboration betweenactorsand audience. This had already been formulated the actorsand the by Goethe: "The stageand the auditorium, constitute the whole" (Regelnfiir Schauspieler[Rules for spectators together have theater on theoreticians concentrated however, actors]? 82). Onlyrecently, the function of theaudiencein thetheatrical event. of information as a pointof departure, thetwoPolishscholars Usingthetheory Edward Balcerzanand ZbigniewOsinski,forexample,distinguish between two in a theatrical ensembles the"A-ensemble" presentation: (agents)- the"creators - the audience. The of the performance" and the "P-ensemble" (percipients) staff(i.e., director, messagein the theateris not only what the theater stage to the spectators,but designer,actors and all stage hands, etc.) transmits "reactions of the P-ensemble such as cries, whistles,laughter,applause, demonstrations, etc., also belong to those elementswhich co-operatein the creationof the message"(1966: 68). Thus the messageis "theresultof the coof both ensembles" operation (1966: 73). The authors stilllimited to clarifying themselves theperceptible of participation the spectators in the formof external to the totalmessage.Later,the reactions of the expertswas focused almost entirely interest on co-authorship as the of work the Dietrich states that"theater does not Steinbeck imaginative spectator. existas a 'thing' witha fixedlocus,but rather as a progression withthecharacter
*Translated by R. Strauss.
? Poetics Today,Vol. 2:3 (1981),237-254.

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

238

WILFRIED PASSOW

of an event.Theateris dependent on the spectator and his presence and intentional collaboration"(1970: 1). For Arno Paul, "that which is specifically theatrical [...] is not to be found in drama. Neitherdoes it resultthrough with butonlywhenthis'staging' meets an audiencewhichis prepared to 'staging', itas such,forthatis whatreally consider counts.Howevermuchis 'played'on the one side of thestage,if,on theother side,no-onecorrespondingly 'joins in', then existed" The sucha thing as theater has never most extreme viewtaken (1972: 34). in for whom is thatof Manfred "the theater Wekewerth, player primary [. . .] is not theactorbut thespectator" (1972: 48). of theproductive made themutualdependence Klaus Lazarowiczhas recently in theater authors and involved as a "triadic collusion": forces "Actors, clear, very in on in own world the their the fictional all way creating playgoers participate of a which is a The drafts author signs, namely play, uniquesystem literary stage. under to readers, and actors.The actors,normally butto playgoers notaddressed of literary of a director, thissystem theguidanceand supervision signs transpose elements. verbaland non-verbal of theater-signs, whichcomprise into a system The playgoers' activityhowever, consists in their observingthe dramatic in an attitudeof 'externalconcentration' information (Moritz Geiger), of and finally it, in understanding, experiencing apperceivingand structuring makingit part of theirpersonal fund of aestheticknowledge.Such sensory, imaginativeand rational playgoingactivitiesare an essentialpart of what of 'workin manifestation as a specific theater. constitutes They are understood That is, a triadiccollusion"(1978: 58). progress'. have both also theroleof thespectator Of thistriad,dramaand morerecently been analyzed(even if not thoroughly). However,the analysisof the structural of and thesignsused, as opposedto theanalysis of theperformance construction the literary text,is still lacking.The reasons for this are obvious. A theater inconstruction. and is highly coversa longer complex periodof time performance of means of expression A greatvariety stage (such as speech,mime,gesture, sound, etc.) are combinedintoa message.These can complement, design,light, realization each other.Each individual or strengthen contradict (= performance) of the realizations and future theprevious in detail,from of a staging maydiffer The as a spectator. because man is actingand man is participating same staging, form same it in the to of theworkmakesit impossible examine character exactly itmoreaccurately. detailsto study as one likes,and to pickout particular as often but considerable does or changes qualitative this, Filming tape-recording permit mustbe accepted. of itsdutyto try research theater relieve do not,however, All thesedifficulties has case semiotics In this to conceivable approach analyze presentation. every for as a basis itself still and investigation. systematic presents presented as a system and conceived theater has beenexplained sincethethirties, Already of of signs(see Kowzan, 1975). Nevertheless questionsdealingwiththe theory the literary textalone is Frequently cognitionare usually in the foreground. conis alreadycompletely thatthe presentation it beingpresumed considered, whichin factconstitutes in drama.The meansof expression, tainedand specified

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

239

is thereby UmbertoEco's recent speaking, theater, mostly put aside. Generally of the literature characterization on the semiotics of theater is mostapt: "You of skillful be overwhelmed of remarks, bytheabundanceof witty analyses might lack essential definition" (1977: 108). Thereis avant-garde pieces,but you might no consensusas to the methodological approach, whichmost of the authors even and is neither nor agreement there as to the actual hardly explain, clarity of subject analysis. The following are notbased on anyparticular model.Some semiotic thoughts on of works the theater are considered because seem semiotics existing purely they usefulto theanalysisof presentation. It is hoped thatthedetailedexposition of willrender whicharise in thiscontext the dialogue between semiotics problems and theater morefactualand morefruitful. research The constitutive basis of theater is the "contrat theaitral" (Klaus Lazarowicz), the culturalagreement which is made tacitlyat some time, and repeatedly that in theater is represented or that only a play is actually confirmed, reality being shown - real eventsare not happening.Actors and audience are in thattheactingis make-believe agreement (als ob). In accordancewiththisagreement, almostall scholarswho argue about the of theater concentrate on thefunctional relationsof the phenomenon exclusively "make-believe world"on the stage and the relations between the stageand the auditorium. Thus normally, one differentiates at mostbetween threeaspectsof interaction in the theatrical event.They referto: "a) the (or communication) interaction between actorson stage(scenicinteraction), (or also communication) b) to the interactionbetween actor and audience - i.e., actor-audience interaction and c) to therelations of thespectators witheach another (spectator interaction)" (Kruseand Graumann,1977: 153). It is overlooked in thisand similar modelsthattheatrical events do, and indeed must,have a real basis. Doubtless,the purposeof thiseventis the interaction within thetheater between on theone hand thefictitious in their stagecharacters artificial world,and on theotherhand,theapperception, feeling, understanding and experiencing of this "make-believe world"by the spectator.Howeverthe actor on the stageis indeed,"at the same timea part of reality (a personwho treadsthe stage),and a representation of reality otherthan (thatis, something whathe is)" (Wekewerth, 1972: 36). That is to say,theactoris not onlywhathe thecharacter of theplay,buthe alwaysremains a creative presents, personwho is a thenature of hisworkrequires verbal undertaking professional job. Frequently and non-verbal communication withhiscolleagueson or offstage(e.g., withthe He is even able to argueabout private witha partner matters prompter). which bear no relationship to theplayor itscreation, as Denis Diderothas shownin his "Paradox surle Com6dien."This typeof interaction shouldbe strictly separated from theperformed in which the actor as a part-player, interaction, acts accordthe framework of the play. ingto the ruleswithin The spectator does not onlyinteract withthe characters and theworldof the invented does not, or not completely, plot. He normally thatan actoris forget himon thestage.Thus he is able to cheerenthusiastically facing theheroof a play

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

240

WILFRIED PASSOW

whenhe has defeated his foe. He will,however, alwaysapplaud theactor fora successful and show his displeasure at an inferior effort. personification in the theater Interaction musttherefore fromfiveaspects: of be considered constitutive fortheater is thetheatrical interaction whichdividesinto importance withinthe "make-believe world" (fictitious scenic inter(A) scenic interaction of the audiencewiththis"make-believe world" action) and (B) the interaction in the fieldof fiction). interaction Howeverthere existsfurther: (audience-stage of the members of the theater (C) the interaction companyamongsteach other on of theaudiencewith the interaction interaction theactors(real (real stage),(D) and within the interaction the audience. audience-stage interaction) (E) The divisionof the various levelsbased on the "contrat is shown th6a.tral" in of the on thestage the social behavior a doctor participants. Normally clearly in not studied the the and man a has medicine, injured (as role) play is not is Yet the able to dress the "wound" "doctor" bleeding. professionally (A = makein spiteof his professional believeworld). A traineddoctorin the auditorium, will not help the woundedman. He does not act, but dutyto offerassistance, theperformance, the with the rather fictitious during (B). If however, playsalong on stage) or a spectator in the theater falls actor is hurt(C = real interaction or E = interaction unconscious,he takes action (D = real audience-stage interaction). spectator withotherhumanbeings; do not solelycommunicate Actorsand spectators For and its influences. with their real environment in are contact also they it the on of and of a the and construction directly buildings stage example, type or hinderit (C). The climatic affectthe work of an actor and can facilitate themoods of thespectator influence and thedesignof theauditorium conditions in their real the objectson the stage(and the stageitself) (E), yethe recognizes world"(B). It to the"make-believe them character (D) and is capable of assigning the whichcan influence in detailall thephenomena would go too farto describe from of themessage,fornumerous and theperception components development framework thepre-theatrical and within play a partin this.However,theprobitselfmustbe further within the theater interaction lematicnatureof stratified and illustrated. clarified SIGNS ON STAGE interaction fortheir The signswhichtheactorsrequire (C) occupational necessary theaudience,evenifthisis notalwaysthecase. They hiddenfrom shouldremain Hence itseems of presentation. fortheanalysis of lesserimportance are therefore that with theater concerned all when almost at first presume semiologists justified, can and of the theatrical as to be the is of event message regarded part stage every a drunk, that is of the Eco For Umberto a as decoded be opinion example, sign. as a assumespurely on to thestagewiththeexternal signsof hisdepravity brought of 'real'body nature of a sign:"he has losthisoriginal of thisthecharacter result us back to the amongreal bodies. He is now a sign."The alcoholic"is referring he belongsto" (1977: He stands class of whichhe is a member. for thecategory 110; italicsin theoriginal).

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

241

Does everybody lose theirreal identity on the stage and become a sign? Manfred Wekwert believes he has provedthisin an experiment. In a dramaschool in concentration he let a pupil simplydo an exercise duringa lesson in which The classmates in theauditorium werenotaware etudeswerepractised. normally of this. The young actor stood "on the stage and did nothing;he made no said nothing and did notmove,certainly he had an empty expression, expression, rather such as one often sees in absent-minded yetnothing extraordinary, people. Thus one could not say he represented there was nothing there." 'nothing'; really The uninformed were asked what their classmate had spectators subsequently beenrepresenting. "The result was amazing," wrote Wekwerth. had seen an "They immense of spectators had seena greatvariety of amount:indeeda greatvariety Wekwerth from concludes this that the things" (1972: 46). experiment "primary thespectator" playerin thetheater (1972: 48). .., is not theactorbut rather Wekwerth's seemsto confirm Eco's ideas. The mereappearanceof experiment a personon thestage,in their to consider himas a opinion,leads thespectators of themare disturbed whichEco recognizes well sign.Neither by theambiguity, of thesupposedsigns.At first he qualifies hisstatement aboutthedrunk: enough, "he stands he belongsto," and declares:"apparently thisdrunk for thecategory standsfortheequivalent 'Thereis a drunken man'."However,he menexpression tionsnumerous further to findthemout "in one or another possiblemeanings; senseis a matter of convention." Finallyhe states:"at thepointwe are, our tipsy disturbed signis open to anyinterpretation" (1977: 110). Eco is notapparently by this ambiguity.He presumably of interpretation proceeds from conventions as symptoms accordingto which"naturalphenomenaare received by a human are usuallybased on theexact recipient" (1972: 30). However,theseconventions of therelationship between and cause. Thus certain knowledge symptom changes in his body would certainly be apparentto a layman.However,theydo not tell himwhether theseare thesymptoms of a disease,or benign or normal skin-spots to the convention of signs of old age. A doctor,on the otherhand, initiated 'reads'the symptoms as intentionally interpretation, producedsigns. Eco is aware of this,although he seemsto wishto grantevery individual total freedom of conventionalization in theater, without to anyparticular cause regard or to theintentions of a transmitter. Howeverit cannotreally be thepurposeof theater to put the spectator into the positionof a personpuzzlingover bodily without their Whatis fatalfora really symptoms, beingable to fathom meaning. sickperson- ifin facthe misjudges thesymptoms of hisillness and consequently - is also dangerous treats himself forthetheater. The decoding incorrectly puzzle leads to fatigueand impedescommunication betweenthe stage and the auditorium.A signwhichis too inaccurate willpromptly be givenup by the normal NeitherEco's drunk nor Wekwerth's theatergoer. "exercisein concentration" features forconstruction of signs.The spectator providesufficient may wait in confusion or boredomforfurther aids forinterpretation of theevents.For Eco admits: "a more sophisticatedtheatricalperformance would establish this convention media"(1977: 110). by meansof othersemiotic The theatergoer is accustomed to encountering on thestagewhich phenomena

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

242

WILFRIED PASSOW

do not (yet)belongto theplayor whichhe cannot(yet)easilyfitintothecontext of the play. He knows,forexample,thatactorscan be on thestagebeforethe actual playhas begun.He is also prepared to waituntil,withthehelpof further he can of whose he cannotfathom information, putparticles reality interpretation intoa clearrelationship of signs."Worldobjects"are alwayson thestage,so that each object at first can remaina "worldobject among worldobjects." As Eco it must not its"original lose nature of 'real'bodyamongrealbodies"(1977: states, but in is rather a different context of reality. 110), replaced in a on than Certainly, appearances stageseemmoreimportant stagesetting, normal. They are also more suitablefor semanticcharging and can be easily intosignrelations. introduced Max Frischnotesin hisdiaryin 1946:"Thereis an between thespace which immense difference lieswithin a framework,and space in does not imply"thateveryHowever,thisdifference generalwhichis infinite." becauseittakesplace within a framework, receives themeaning of a thing, simply whether it wishesso or not,a claimto suchmeaning" sign;but it receives, (1965: Bedeutungsraum 51). The stage is not fundamentally (a space for meaningPeter Handke), in whichall eventsbecome a sign or a play. The framework in what it encloses,focusesattention on detailswhichwould arouses interest otherwisenot be noticed in the complex environmental experience.The whichis thereby withmeaning. achievedshouldnot be confused importance of habit,thetheatergoer On thebasis of a convention thathe is maypresume is incorrect. The "contrat always seeingsigns in the theater.This assumption is the vitalpoint,and again and again it mustbe confirmed anew for th6a.tral" in thestage forall occurrences case. It is not valid on principle each individual of reality is made in themidst and themeansof expression area, forthiscontract is part of thisreality.It is liftedout of the real sphereinto the "make-believe thestageand the is required between world."For thisto happena new contract theestablishment of newsignconventions. auditorium again and again,or rather - to be understood as theconstant Thus theater is - amongother process things or of signs,whichmayapplyoftenfora mereinstant of theconventionalization of reality and play, and correspondence for a whole evening.The simultaneity and signmustbe morecloselyelucidated. material of inanimateobjects. What meaning First, we must considerthe function with no particular attributes whichcould does a chairon an empty stagehave, of "make-believe world"?Jan time the to and location a the lead as perhapsgive as signs, events Eco to all as does Umberto stage Kott, endeavoring explain a literal "A is chair theconceptof "literal invents Zeichen): signs"(buchstabliches Kowzan in a Tadeusz theatrical within normal proceedings" (1972: 56). sign talksof "objet-signes" similarcontext (1975: 75). It seemsto me thatthisis an a chair, inadmissable "sign."The chairon stageis, and remains, usage of theterm attention in theplot. It mayattract evenifit is used purely particular functionally itdoes not,however, a meaning. theframework; within convey emphasis through as a signfora class of objects - as does Such objects can onlybe interpreted neither UmbertoEco withthe exampleof a drunk - by applyinga subtlety demandedfromthenormaltheatergoer. to nor reasonably attributable

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

243

and factualaccuracyit is suggested For the purposesof terminological that witha specific intention be termed such objectsintroduced (Pra"presentations" units(in thecontext of communication), which sentate).These are "phenomenal as thatwhichtheybasicallyare" (Alseleben,1973: 338). are valued explicitly can be placed intosignrelations. In thiscase one is "presentations" Naturally "ostention." The basic material of construction appearance through talking sign "has not been actively produced(as one producesa wordor drawsan image);it has been picked up among existing physicalbodies, and it has been shownor ofa particular modeof signproduction" ostended.It is theresult (Eco, 1977: 110; chosento represent italicsin theoriginal).The object is intentionally something aids are necessary. else. In orderto make thisclear further of thesituational context. This can come about,as happensin reality, byvirtue In the desert, whena traveler sees a chairit raiseshis hopes of meeting human in the a of their On the He chair beings. recognizes symptom proximity. stage,a chaircan signify thatthefollowing scenetakesplace in a house; butonlythen, if the spectator withveryspartanmeans of is aware thatthe stagingis working At thestart of theperformance thechairon theempty expression. stagewillbe, and remain,a chair. A spectator who is a connoisseur of furniture (thatis one initiatedinto the interpretive can deduce fromthe stylistic charconvention) of a piece of furniture acteristics the epoch in whichthe play takes place. This for interpretation is ruined if, for example, the stage design opportunity a rubbish withthe represents dump. Any typeof stool can also be interpreted, aid of other as a specialrepresentative of thecategory furniture" signs, "seating as a throne or perhaps an electric chair.Yet a chaircan also represent a mountain. Fromthisexampleone can appreciate in how manydifferent an signrelations on the situation object whichhas been pickedup can be presented, depending and/orconventionalization by othersigns.Thus Balcerzanand Osiniski give an accountof Wyspiafiski's of the"Acropolis," "where a normalbathtub staging withtheaid of varioussubcodes(gestures, scenicmovements and speech)which impartednew semanticvalues to the scenery- became in turn,a coffin,a a bed, and a burden which an Auschwitz inmate carried" confessional, (1966: 79). The MunichproT (Prozessionstheater) and fascinating stageda very revealing and signs,Alexej Sagerer's A wooden crossis play withmaterial "Bergcomics": on the summitof an being bound together by actors using two tree trunks, mountain. Another actortakesdown from thewalltwoblackragstied imaginary Thesehad already beenhanging on thewallbefore theperformance. He together. thenholdstheragslikea little childin hisarms.At thesametimehe says:"Likea dead little child."A little thecrossis erected and thematerial is nailedon to later, thecrossas an imageof Christ ("Whereis yourLord? Careful!Don't breakanyas a sign of the thing!").Even thoughthe rag has now also been introduced itstill retains themeaning "dead child."Again,"likea dead little crucifixion, child" is repeatedand at the dramatic climaxof the scene,the meaningchangesonce as a sign-vehicle of two signrelations again. The material, whichrefer back to dead objects,now suddenly a livingbeing. "B. grabsthe black rags, represents tearsthemfrom thecross,and presses them to herbosomas sheleaps up: 'It is my

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

244

WILFRIED PASSOW

child [. . .] it isn'tdead at all! It's alive!'." This swiftly made signconvention is terminated and thematerial of thesignis returned to itsmaterial subpromptly stance. The "mother"shows the "child" to all concerned:"Look, see how it "takestheragsat first moves,how it laughs! " One of thebystanders, however, themup a little.'Come on, don'tbe crazy,look! This withtwo fingers and lifts theragsto one side,thesethenbeing child! It's rubbish!'" He throws isn'ta little once again" (and thus appearingquite clearlyas rags), untilthey "spotlighted on of spectators, are removedfromtheplay. Even themostimaginative finally no for he in the can find it. is Still, meaning prepared scenery, seeingthematerial to place it intothemostdiverse signreferences. do notyet(or anylonger) Hence itis possibleto findobjectson thestagewhich - for in realfunction the havea signrelation. Theycan be used during play their is also It without individual possible importance. acquiring example,as a chair bathtuband as was thecase with are onlymaterial, thatat first Wyspiariski's they A their receive thecourseof theplotdo they meaning(s). proT'srags.Onlyduring a create in of different collection may possibly proportion objects particular with various room be can a for theatrical portrayed example particular sign(as but each and everypiece, taken as it is, is and remains pieces of furniture), real their in thehumanenvironment also retain All objectsexisting meaningless. not. or in are connected whether on the character signrelationships they stage, has a double contactwiththeseobjects.He recognizes Thus thespectator them, of his reality interaction on the levelof thereal spectator-stage (D), as elements to consider He is also able, undercertain withwhichhe is familiar. conditions, it. He thereby world"and/orconstituting to the"make-believe themas belonging within the fieldof fiction interacts (B). (simultaneously) mustactually all objectsused in theater It mustbe added thatnot absolutely in From to found be as the on up to theend antiquity reality. stage objects appear and ofteneventoday,theoppositewas and is thecase. The of the 19thcentury, butrather on to thestagedirectly, worldwas notbrought byartificial represented that a there is decoration The stage-prop dominated; single hardly painted signs. it represented. in dailylifethe function would have been able to fulfill to thatof "found"objectsfrom withregardto theactoris similar The situation The personon stage mustnot always but more complicated. the environment, alterthe He can also, as a stage-hand, invented character. a different, represent functional out a purely on theopen stage,i.e., carry job in theworking scenery in dressed of theactualplay,theactoris present thestart process.If, evenbefore dressedin a normal, or if,in a contemporary piece,he enters jeans and pullover, at mostfrom parthe is meantto be playing suit,itcan be deducedwhich everyday is possibleonlywithan additional Thus a signrelation a perusalof theprogram. theeventson thestage,the whichdoes not belongto theplay. Within reference on thelevelof he remains as a "presentation"; be considered actormustat first which scenicsignsis the publicinformed Only withthe help of further reality. he represents. character fictitious such as age, invariant attributes, An actor,like any otherperson,has certain

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICALPERFORMANCE

245

and voice. In the theater thesecan, to some extent, be physique,physiognomy concealed and alteredand/or masks,make-up, padding.The wigs by costumes, actor becomes in his externalappearance, at least partially,an artificially produced(iconic) sign for anotherperson.At the same timehe always retains attributes whichcannotbe concealedor altered.The smaller certain hisexternal, the the of his artistic existence. physical transformation, greater clarity private, willalso reactand act withhim - to varying The spectator degrees- in the to consider himas a sign,as fashion. He is mentioned double prepared previously of the"make-believe world"(B), yethe also considers a representation himfrom a so to The actor him as a person, aspect. impresses speak private, quite personal, notonlyin hisfunctional role.This"natural sideof just as a pupilsees histeacher in to see too art"(R6tscher, 1864: 54) leads to thetemptation, especially theater, muchnatureor just naturein art. a followed Meister Thus Wilhelm (in Goethe'stheatrical novel),"whootherwise a with and artistic becomes so fascinated a keen actby young eye," performance at least,loses his critical faculties. "She did not always ressthathe, temporarily herdelbearher,he blamedtheparts, whilst please him,and ifhe couldnotoften herpowerfully" icatecountenance and fullbosomagainsupported (Goethe,1950: the paradoxof thesituation: Herz very illustrated Joachim clearly 29). Recently to is above all the Mrs.X inthe ofacting artificial agreementregard Entirely process inwhose it more orlesstheperson name heappears, isthe as being although really ofexpectancy inthespectator actor's that effectuates an attitude and private publicity itisthe with actress's which him in shestimulates although very legs private erotically, ina fable! a sense inherent certainly (1977:136-137). Of course it is not the purposeof theater to eroticize the audiencewiththe of an actress;thatis the purposeof strip personalattractions tease,in whichan eventualact only servesto increasethe attraction and the eroticism. A real interaction on a privatelevel dominates,in which far-reaching is inactivity as regardsthe executionof the act. The opposite imposed upon one partner whichaimsto createfictitious characters appliesto theater, byusingsigns;a very activementaland emotional effort is demanded.Yet man, as a sign,stillretains his personalinfluence. The externalappearance of an actor can be alteredor even concealed by technical means.Howeverthepersonality of a personis expressed notonlyin his invariant but also to a fargreater in his rationally controlled attributes, extent, and particularly his emotionally producedbehavior.This applies both to the whichhe represents. actor,as a private person,and to thecharacter It seemsplausiblethatexpressions whichare undertheconsciouscontrol of a artificial personcan also be consciously reproduced (as an icon). Here, originally on the stageas iconicsignsof signs(i.e., signsare produced,to be reproduced metasigns). The symptoms of innerfeeling are closelyconnected to theexperienced feeling whichlies at theirbase. It is of lesserimportance whether thisconnection is of or of sociocultural It is important generic behavior origins. onlythatexpressional takesplace unconsciously. normally

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

246

WILFRIED PASSOW

Here again theater mustinsiston its claim thatall stageeventsmusthave an Denis Diderotstated whenhe confirmed artificial character. thismostclearly sign and to the that"he [. ..] who knowstheexternal them signs reproduces according is the greatest best ideal model, most perfectly, actor" (1968: 521). However Diderot'spremise thatthe actor may have "a greatdeal of discernment; [. . .] not sensibility" the instinctive but critical 1968: 484) ignores vision; (sensibilitY; of themajority, evenof creative humanbeings.It is based, ifat all, requirements is not on a conceptof geniuswhichmay be fulfilled by onlya few: "sensibility of a attribute the exactly greatgenius"(1968: 487). of theactress A metaphor whichDiderotchoosesforthemethod Clairon,who to be contrary inner seems and "actswithout is always"self-controlled" emotion," within which thatshe is "thesoul of a greatmarionette to thisview. He remarks contraand the Genius she has wrappedherself" puppet apparent (1968: 486). dictioncan be solved with the aid of Heinrichvon Kleist'sessay "Uber das thatconsciousness causesin the Kleisttalksof "thedisorder Marionettentheater." witha well illustrated naturalgrace of a person."He establishes example"that can be embodiedin a mechanicalpuppetthan in the conmore gracefulness EdwardGordon of a humanbody"(1967: 13). One hundred struction yearslater, with a puppet.For the actor wished to these influenced ideas, replace by Craig, forthetheater [. ..] useless,"for"theactionsof the him,man seems"as material of his face, the sounds of his voice, all are at the actor'sbody, the expression to reason of his emotions of winds the [. . .] It is uselessforhimto attempt mercy that"theactor in theoriginal). withhimself"(1962: 56; italics Craigthendemands we mustgo, and in his place comes theinanimate figure- thefiber-marionette may call him"(1962: 81). For Diderot and Craig the natureof man, "whichtendstowardsfreedom" workon the stage. to stableartistic a hindrance (Craig 1968: 56), is considered Yet "gracefulness Kleistsees in reasonan obstaclefornatural reapgracefulness. same the so that at as it has after were, eternity, through gone knowledge pears time it appears in its purestformin the human framewhich eitherhas no or an infinite one, that is in a puppetor in a god" (1967: 16). consciousness, or unconeitherveryconsciously fromthe centerwithin, Behaviorcontrolled fluctuations. showsthegreatest grace - and is notsubjectto emotional sciously, into or a god, or (transferred However,it can onlybe possessedby a marionette the stage - unfortunately? Diderot'shumansphere)a genius.Nevertheless Thus or even the cannotonly remainthe domain of marionettes, gods. genius of theactorsmay thatthenaturalfeelings even hereit mustalwaysbe reckoned butalso to hisownfeelings The actorshouldnotonlybe able to harness interrupt. as of emotion as external the conscientiously possible"so that signs "reproduce and 1968: "can be deceived" thespectators 488-489).Manytheoreticians (Diderot, the slightest without is this whether theaterprofessionals possible question Gotthold emotional EphraimLessingdeclaresin theHamburgische engagement. a passage understands "How farremovedis an actorwho merely Dramaturgie: to pointout one who at thesame timecan feelit!" Lessingwas also thefirst from between connections how the spontaneousand uncontrolled psycho-physical

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

247

and the behaviorof a person could be fruitfully used in a stage experience who has "forlong performance. Lessing beginswithan actor withoutfeeling, other thanape." He maintains thata greatnumber of petty enoughdone nothing to whichhe himself ruleshavebeenaccumulated within to him,according begins act. In observing theserules(according to therulethatthosevery modifications of the soul which produce certainchangesin the body will, on the otherhand, themselves be brought about bythesephysical theactorachieves a type changes), of feeling in theendurance whichis lacking or fervor of thosewho proceedfrom the soul. Yet, it is strongenoughat the right in the performance moments to of the involuntary createsomething from whose presence we physicalchanges almostexlusively believewe are able to reliably deduce innerfeeling (1963: 15). Konstantin S. Stanislavskij's "method" of constructing a role,whichinfluenced of actorsall overtheworld,as no other thetraining methodhas, is based on the samelines.This"method in combining consists internal and external events and in for the the the human creating feeling part through physicalactivity of body" in thisand following (1958: 37; italicsin theoriginal quotationsfromStanislavmovements emotionsare skij). Throughthe externalexecutionof expressive createdand controlled, which otherwise elude control. "The largely cognitive it be can influenced habits, bodycan be felt materially, orders, discipline, through and exercises;one can more easily cope with the body than withintangible, capricious,and fluctuating emotion,whichvanishesso easily"(1958: 56). Only theinnerbond of theinterior and theexterior within theactorand their mutual resultsin a convincing of a fictitious character:"the relativity performance external act and thephysical existence receive and warmth from theinner meaning in physical experience,and inner experiencefinds its externalembodiment existence" (1958: 57). The complex relationships,outlined above, in the application of the and personaldisposition to theconstruction of a performer's physical, spiritual role can hardlybe perceived external consideration of the events.It is through forthespectator how theactorpresents his emotions. He probably unimportant he has beforehimon thestagethesymptoms cannot,in mostcases, tellwhether of genuineand/ormanipulated or the purely artificial iconicsignof emotions, such a symptom. Fromthepointof viewof a spectator, thedifferentiation here between"so-callednaturaland artificial is almostimpossigns"(Eco, 1977:111) At least from the sible, which is why Eco considersit also unnecessary. solution of the performance productionside, for the theoretical process it is necessary. Furthermore thisdistinction is deemedof greatimportance, certainly as can be seen in the analysisof the quoted examplesfromDiderot,Lessing, and Craig. Stanislavskij The close bond between nature and artin theater also induces Tadeusz Kowzan to insist on a cleardistinction between natural and artificial signs:"We havejust said thatall thesignsutilized artare artificial. This does notexclude bytheatrical theexistence of natural in Howeverhejustifies signs theatrical this presentation." statement "The meansand techniques of thetheater very generally. are too deeply rootedin lifeto letthenatural eliminated. In an actor'sdiction signsbe completely

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

248

WILFRIED PASSOW

createdshades of and mimethe strictly personalhabitsgo withthe voluntarily are intermingled withreflexes" theconsciousgestures (1968:60). meaning, real existence of The theatrical signs,yettheprivate, signsshouldbe artificial of thepart.Thus, existence theactorpenetrates againand againintothefictitious or control, thisprivate existence can becomean introduction intentional through beingacted; yetit is also possibleforit to remain partof thecharacter integral world." residueoutsidethe"make-believe so to speak, as a material intact, whichforms thematerial theactoris to be considered Within thesignrelation, neutral and is not completely theconcrete appearanceof thesign.This material The spectator as of theperformer. determined bythepersonality open,butrather of thesign,he also has an withtheabstract is notonlysupplied meaning recipient on two withthe material.He interacts simultaneously relationship experiential an of thematerial levels.The character partin the consequently plays important ask "is in with and well one might Otherwise theater. why a theater join Lessing town invited the whole woman dressedup, memory tortured, built,man and I to create wish work and its with more. nothing If, performance, my together? would readat homebyanybody whicha good story thana fewof thoseemotions also nearenoughproduce"(1963:313). of signs, developed system developedor eventhehighest Language,thathighly the with also conveysmeaning.Why replaceor supplement help of language, can be conveyed relatively which information unequivocally,clearly, and human To beginwith, as theater? instrument involved an with such conveniently, the On does not only take place in reality communication language. through man that out has "Birdwhistell comments Klaus Sch6rer as pointed [... ] contrary, with other of the time used for interaction occupies a verysmall percentage behavior 'non-vocal' or better has, humansin vocalization said, [... .] non-verbal, value for an and can acquire communicative a constantcharacter in contrast, its message also transmits observerat any time" (1973:42). Insofaras theater habitsof the normal with it thus non-verbal receptive channels, complies through the spectator. as opposedto the meansof expression, of non-verbal theintroduction Through of communication a dimension also theater verbal statement, gains fixed, written, is of a spokenstatement life.The evaluation in everyday whichis also important it. the of on behavior the to a making person degree, great dependent, namely For, "taking into account the more limited possibilitiesfor consciously information of contradictory therecipient will, non-verbal behavior, influencing firstand foremost,believe the information conveyed throughnon-verbal themanipulated expression channels" 1973:6).Whentheactorportrays (Sch6rer, he is able to strengthen, refine,negate, etc. verbal of the innerexperience, messages. does whichforexamplea writer The producer basicallyhas the opportunity, from not of not have, of a choice betweenveryvariedmeans expression, only on the actor (=man). Almostall conventional sign thosewhichare dependent awarethe also use can which the of spectator's the are at stage, disposal systems and theircauses and accordbetweencertainsymptoms ness of the connection

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

249

as indications forthecauses or reproduce themas signs. employsymptoms ingly of signsand symptoms. is made fromset repertoires In In all cases, a selection addition, as already mentioned,new sign conventionscan be made. The concerned with conveyinga particular, producer's decisions are primarily in as optimala way as possible. decodablemeaning rationally Theatrical hand,cannotbe exclusively analyzedas abstract signs,on theother are theyselectedaccordingto the criterion of pure cognitive relations;neither of thesesigns- whether it is an objector a The material substance intelligibility. as it were, its originalcharacter. signal - preserves, person or an energetic are suggested; itsattributes connotations thesign-vehicle can, particular Through in the not or reactions as simplestimuli, hardlysubject to recipient produce thespectator). rationalcontrol(forexample,whentheactress's legseroticize at the conclusionof his book "thatthe signs Tadeusz Kowzan also confirms in all the other are manifested whichtheateruses, like those whichelsewhere with informative function. The signs far from their are satisfied artistic domains, an and aesthetic value an emotive or their combinations mostfrequently possess to but Their role thus not communicate value. is information, only (or affective) to the public these supplementary values." Since, however, also to transmit in thetheater, he does notelaborateon Kowzan is onlyspeaking about semiotics this problem.Still he does state "that the aestheticor emotivefunction can if not the onlyraison d'etreof certainsignsconveyed constitute the principal, should not duringa performance" (1975:212).Thus, analysisof presentation restrict to theanalysisof signsin abstract relations. itself The different of an "object" are possibilitiesfor the stage presentations demonstrated hereonce again withan example.In orderto portray a baby,the can bring a real childintothetheater. It is notable, however, to playa producer to doing.At first, thespectator thinks part,butdoes whatitis alwaysaccustomed the childis "nice"or "sweet"or "touching." A doll could replacethechildas an iconic sign. As withdolls, withwhichchildren and play, one can move further further unto the abstract,away fromthe exact representation to the piece of in proT. At thesametime, material which theactress carries a connection between theverbalstatement and/orthecontext of movement is necessary. Yet it is also alone of themother to infer thatsheis holding a babyin possibleforthebehavior herarms,without theactual existence of an object.A different solution is found in PeterStein'sstaging of Edward Bond's piece "Saved." Froman empty pram issuedthesoundsof a baby:as "rockers" threw stonesintothepram,manyof the theatergoers (particularly women)leftthetheater. Thereis, as yet,no clearknowledge as to whatspecialcharacter theindividual materialshave. It seems certainthat theypossess an intrinsic value. This is true for sounds, music, light,and colors. Acoustic and optical particularly have a purely effect on humans, as is wellknown.Of course, phenomena physical if thiseffect as well they or singly form thematerial fora sign. theyretain jointly Thus psycho-physical devices can be used both as materialfor signs,and withoutmeaning,to influence the audience emotionally. AntoninArtaud,for wished to in work this direction withhis"Th6etre et la Cruaut6," which example,

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

250

WILFRIED PASSOW

"aims at the organismusing precise devices" (1969:88): "There is continual noisein thisplay:thesounds,noises,and criesare firstly for selected background theirvibrational and for that which The qualities secondly theyrepresent [sic]. thenjoins in withtheserefined lighting devices,lightwhichis not onlythereto color or illuminate, but whichalso bears within and itself, powerand influence In a different he of talks "the of effect suggestiveness" (1969:87). passage physical to which can cause a man shudder" light (1969:100). in the Sixtieson experimental Artaud'sideas exerted a greatinfluence theater work. Amongstotherthings,he placed a much stronger on direct emphasis of of means in current theater. Not sensoryperception expression only does whichentrances, "theater as do the dances of the dervishes" (Artaud1969:88), which"letsno possiblesuggestion [. ..] be missed"(1969:66),appeal to thevital does this. Certainformsof capacityof the audience. Almost any production theateralways appeal more to the emotionsof the audience than to their or even aim at sensual amusements, as do farceor a greatmany rationality, musicalcomediesand shows. Such productions are, rightly, mostlyrejectedas beingto a greatextentor uncreative. completely They cannot,however, simplybe banned fromtheater; form within as a representational whichpoeticworks theater is to be considered is based on can also be created.The distinction here,as in fineart or literature, on "the superficial and profound aestheticvalues. Moritz Geiger'sreflections to theelucidation of thesequestions and also to of art"can contribute influences of the relationshipbetween "conscious perceptionand the establishment in the reception of art" (1976:190-194). unconscious experience Geigermaintains It requires to stimulation. artistic effect that"profound [...] is nevera reaction value of theobjectshouldbe consciously thattheartistic rather comprehended." "thoseworkswhichmerely appeal to the surfaceof theego, to its Accordingly from thefieldof art."One does notdenythem, vitalside,are eliminated thereby, any meaningin human life. They are "pleasurablestimuli"on par with"the the to be said against or gossip":"Thereis nothing of a game,or hunting pleasures a detective the excitement arousedby of a farcenor against amusement story." it is quitewrongalwaysto assume"that Geigeralso pointsout thatin theater, It should be added thattheclaim artistic effect is to be experienced." profound between mustalwaysbe art is also false. "The confusion thatthetheater superartistic effect is in thesecases much to art,and profound, ficialeffect, external and novella,all closerat hand, because farceand artistic drama,detective story No-one would confusethese when this have the same formof presentation. formis lacking"(Geiger,1976). artistic external is to be equatedwithart(or thewishto equate viewthattheater The erroneous in thatnearly all definitions of theater do not it withart) is also made manifest to shouldstrive of presentation. to theform refer Ideologicalgoals whichtheater it is described as a "moral otherthings, attainare alwaysquoted. Thus, amongst of good taste,in whichmust"be activein thepropagation institution" (Schiller), of morals" (Kaiser Joseph II of Austria) or should have an the refinement of exaltedestimation function etc.). The resultant (Lessing,Brecht, enlightening

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

251

leads the theatergoers, the institution evenat purely theatrical to entertainment, are enjoying art.On theother believethatthey which wishto serve hand,theaters simplyas "pleasurablestimuli"are oftendenied the rightof existence.Such with agitationagainst all representations attitudesoftengo together of vital of suchviewsban from thestagethebuffoon, humanlife.Representatives as did considertheater JohannChristoph Gottschedin 1737, advocate scenic purity, fortheimparting of literary or wishno indeedexclusively as an institution texts, matter whatto allow onlythosestagings to countas artistic works which appeal in theirsymbolism to the rationality of man. purely Here once can object,as does Geiger, that"there is no profound artistic effect in whichvital influences are not interwoven, indeedmustbe interwoven." He out that it to that in is assume vital influences a of art points wrong piece "always a penetration of thatwhichis external to artintotheartistic and signify sphere," that"their creation shouldbe avoidedbytheartist ifpossible."Thus thegaugeof art is not thedegreeof rationalcomprehension, for"on no account,shouldone that - becauseautocracy of vitalelements is external to art - within art believe, vitalelements itselffewer should signify the exaltedsummit of art. Rather,the moment thesevitalinfluences withprofound influences appearin connection they become something else, something new; theyare no longersuperficial effects, new meaning."Later Geigeremphasizes thisagain: theygain a fundamentally "Whereonlyprofundity without is to be foundthere exists thedangerof vitality the dangerof falling into thatgenreennuyeux, whichVoltaireso academicism, hated; just as, on the other hand, mere vitalityleads to superficialart" (1976:190-194). These statements on thesimultaneity of thevariousfields of byan aesthetician are confirmed fromthepracticalside: "We make the experience by a statement of thetheater: it stimulates spectator judge and argue.That is one of thenatures the brain. There is howeveranotherwhichincludesthe emotionalaspect. The wanders a complicated of emotions, ifhe absorbsthe spectator through labyrinth forces him"(Meyerhold, Thus "all deviceswhichare at the influencing 1930:121). artsmustbe usedas an organic to affect fusion theaudience" disposalof theother Hereone is neither in theater, northeater which (1930:126). preaching irrationality only aims to satisfycarnal desires. Wsevolod Meyerhold,from whom this statement originates, always understoodtheateras an artifact.Thus, using wordshe calls"a production Eugeniy Vakhtangov's theatrical, i.e., fitfortheater, if thespectator does not forget fora moment thathe is in thetheater, and if he does not fora secondcease to experience theactoras a master of his profession who is playing a part"(1922:354).This reference also confirms once againthatthe in two wayswiththeactor. interacts spectator a verysimpleequation according However,it is not possibleto construct to effects are conveyed which,on the one hand, superficial exclusively by stimuli derivedfrommaterial, and on theotherhand, all signsaim at profound effects because they are rationally decodable. Purely superficial effects can also be producedwithsigns (as is shown by the exampleof the detective story).The in obedienceto certain rulesof acousticphenomena, arrangement whichexerts a

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

252

WILFRIED PASSOW

on a listener, influence forexample,a musicalworkof constitutes, stimulatory otherthings, fortheaesthetic art. Amongst thefundamental criterion value of a and structural work is its syntactic construction. Even if numerous analysesof in thisarea, thestructure of theactual dramahavesuppliedimportant knowledge The basic explanationwith eventstill has not been comprehended. theatrical of staging is criteria and possiblerulesof compositional aesthetic arrangement stilllargely lacking. it must an aesthetic of presentation can attempt Beforean analysis evaluation, the of communication. to clarify first purely descriptively structure theatrical try the performance aims at It is of no concern,in the firstinstance,whether it What or whether these. is achieves or effects, beingsought superficial profound in theform of production and principles are themeansof expression represented in effects The material used on stagewithitsown particular in general. bytheater from use its a the sphereof vitalexperience obviouslyplays leadingrole, apart of of signs.From an aesthetic and construction pointof view,the relationship and and mutualdependence mutualpermeation, to signin simultaneity, material thenbecomeimportant. thebasic system withthe most variedsign vehiclesand these Since signscan be constructed devicesare sincenumerous vehicles also have an intrinsic value,and furthermore of the selection their because of used without stimuli, particular merely meaning in art in theater of artistic has becomea central material (as production problem declares of arrangement of thematerial" in general)."In artitis alwaysa question of of the aesthetics and fromthe standpoint Wsevolod Meyerhold(1922:101), is not that"without Nake confirms Frieder information doubt,artistic production first butalso - and perhaps of signs(abstract relations!), (only)themanipulation of material and substance, that is the and foremost - the arrangement of signs and notof thesignthemselves" of thematerial (1974:29-30). manipulation shouldbe fortheanalysisof presentation thepointof departure Accordingly, of material.As a basis for this,a catalogueof the usable and the designation would be useful.For even if it alreadyemployedsign and materialrepertoires can be used on thestage, of theenvironment all thephenomena seemsthatnearly of theater of theconstitutive as a result do existactual limits there requirements of It wouldgo beyondthelimits communication. of theatrical and therestrictions it could stillbe meaningful detailshere.In principle to go intofurther thisarticle betweenenergetic in a roughframework, to distinguish, appearances(such as createdphenomena naturally light,color, noise, sound, smell, temperature), and products the their and creatures behavior, weather) (such as rocks,plants, as codes, fashions). made by men (such buildings, objects,machines, world"one mustestablish "make-believe constructed To definetheartificially or to its construction whichmaterials(or signs)contribute in whichfunction, is interaction theatrical actual of level The role. merelypossess a functional of the with of the interaction real the particles from spectator thereby separated on thestagebut or superfluous effect), present (yetnotwithout necessary reality, not includedin the plot. It should be clear fromthe previousanalysisthat a

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANALYSIS OF THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE

253

clear distinction is not always possible here, yet it should still be perfectly attempted. between material and signshouldbe exactly defined. Finallythe relation The method withwhichmaterial as a signvehicle is presented in signrelations is to be thatis, how new signconventions are made in theater on thebasis of clarified; well-known codes. However it is not a question of merelycommunicating it is imperative to analyze the affective and emotional meanings.Therefore, of thosematerials effects intothe"make-believe world" - no matter integrated how they are used - and to analyze theirco-operationwith the rationally comprehensible messages.
REFERENCES und Asthetik,"in: Hans-Georg Gadamer & Paul ALSLEBEN, KURD, 1973. "Informationstheorie 1969. Das Theaterund sein Double (Frankfurt: ARTAUD, ANTONIN, Fischer).

in: ZagadnieniaRodzaj6w Literackich, Tom VIII, zeszyt2 (15) (L6di), Informationstheorie," 65-88. CRAIG, EDWARD GORDON, 1962. On theArt of the Theatre (London: Mercury Books). DIDEROT,DENIS,1964. Paradox iiberden Schauspieler(Frankfurt: Insel). 1972. Einfiihrung in die Semiotik(Uni-Taschenbiicher Eco, UMBERTO, 105) (Miinchen:Fink). 1977"Semioticsof TheatricalPerformance," The Drama Review,107-117. FRISCH,MAX,1965. Tagebuch1946-1949 (Miinchen-Ziirich: Droemer-Knaur). 1976. Die Bedeutungder Kunst (Miinchen:Fink). GEIGER, MORITZ, JOHANN WOLFGANG 1950. Wilhelm Meisters GOETHE, theatralische VON, Sendung(Berlin:Henschel). HERZ, JOACHIM, 1977. "Contents of Theatrical Communication,"in: James F. Arnott,Joelle Chariau, Heinrich Huesmann,Tom Lawrensonand RainerTheobald, eds., Theatre Space [Der Raum des Theaters](Miinchen),135-141. KLEIST, HEINRICH VON, 1967. "Olberdas Marionettentheater," in: Helmut Semdner,ed., Kleists Aufsatz iiberdas Marionettentheater (Berlin:Schmidt),9-16. das Theater,"in: Spektakel-Spektakel KOTT, JAN, 1972. "In welchenZeichen spricht (Miinchen: Piper). KOWZAN, TADEUSZ, 1968. "The Sign in theTheatre,"Diogenes 61, 52-80. 1975Littdrature et spectacle(La Haye-Paris:Mouton). KRUSE, LENELIS AND GRAUMANNCARLF., 1977. "The Theatreas Interaction and as Interaction JoelleChariau, Heinrich Space," in: JamesF. Arnott, and Rainer Huesmann,Tom Lawrenson Theobald, eds., TheatreSpace [Der Raum des Theaters](Miunchen), 149-157.
LAZAROWICZ, LESSING,

im Lichteder BALCERZAN,EDWARD AND OSINsKI, ZBGNIEW, 1966."Die theatralische Schaustellung

Vol. 5 'Kulturanthropologie' Vogler,eds., Neue Anthropologie, (Stuttgart: Thieme),321-356.

Osterreichische Akademieder Wissenschaften).


GOTTHOLD EPHRAIM,

KLAUS,

1977."Triadische in: Das Theater undseinPublikum Kollusion," (Wien:

Wardetzky, eds., WsewolodE. Meyerhold,AlexanderL Tairow, Jewgeni B. Wachtangow. Theateroktober (Frankfurt: R6derberg). 1930 "Rekonstruktion des Theaters," in: Ludwig Hoffmann and Dieter Wardetzky,eds., Wsewolod E. Meyerhold,Alexander I. Tairow, JewgeniB. Wachtangow.Theateroktober (Frankfurt: R6derberg). als Informationsverarbeitung NAKE, FRIEDER, 1974.Asthetik (Wein-NewYork: Springer).

MEYERHOLD,

Kr6ner).
WSEWOLOD,

1963.Hamburgische Otto Mann, ed. (Stuttgart: Dramaturgie,

1922."DerSchauspieler derZukunft" in: Ludwig Hoffman and Dieter

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

254

WILFRIED PASSOW

als Lehre vom "Theaterwissenschaft theatralischen Handeln," PAUL, ARNO,1972. Zeitschrift K1olner 23, 55-77. fiirSoziologie und Sozialpsychologie
im lindgriinen Hochwald - Bergcomics" "Eine heil3e Sommernacht ALEXEJ. (manuscript). des Instituts ffir Non-verbale Kommunikation 1973. (Forschungsberichte KLAUS, SCHERER, und Phonetikder Universitait Bonn, 35) (Hamburg: Buske). Kommunikationsforschung KONSTANTIN S., 1958. Theater, Regie und Schauspieler (Rowohlts Deutsche STANISLAVSKIJ, Enzyclopidie,68) (Hamburg: Rowohlt). der Theaterwissenschaft und Systematik in die Theorie STEINBECK, DIETRICH, 1970.Einleitung
SAGERER,

ROTSCHER, HEINRICH THEODOR,

Die Kunst derdramatischen 1864. Darstellung Wigand). (Leipzig:

EUGENIB., 1922. "Ober das Theatralische,"in: Ludwig Hoffman and Dieter WAKHTANGOV, Wardetzky,eds., Wsewolod Meyerhold,Alexander I. Tairow, JewgeniB. Wachtangow. Theateroktober Roderberg). (Frankfurt: zu Berlin: und Wissenschaft (DeutscheAkademiederKuinste MANFRED, 1972. Theater WEKWERTH,

de Gruyter). (Berlin:

Arbeitshefte Henschel). 3) (Berlin:

This content downloaded from 146.232.122.64 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:52:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

You might also like