Month: February 2015

In Juliet Rufford’s book, the introduction makes some valid points but, also some interesting points too that show the progression of architecture through the different periods of drama: early Greek theatre, the Restoration period and the modern era of theatres and the architectures influence over theatre.

Rufford notes that the change in architecture of theatres had a link to the change in the audience, which could ultimately change what happens on the stage. This can be seen from ‘the huge size of the ancient Greek amphitheatre [that] demanded large gestural acting.’ (Rufford, 2015, 3) In this period of time, the audiences would be huge and they attended open aired theatres, therefore the actors had to project much more, this is also the reason for the larger gestures on stage. However, Elizabethan theatres, by way of contrast, were much smaller, and from the Globe theatre to the Theatre Drury Lane, there were changes that included going from open aired theatres to indoor theatres, mostly stood to everyone being sat and natural lighting to artificial lighting.

From open aired theatres to the indoor theatres, the architecture of the theatre influences the acting and theatricality because the actors didn’t have to project their voices as much, because their voices aren’t disappearing into the open air. Therefore, the newer architecture of the indoor theatres forced the audience to listen, even if in the Restoration period the audience openly criticised the actors on stage during the performance, but this gave way to the parameters of the contemporary theatres we expect to see today.

‘But perhaps the most significant change of all was that the auditorium lights were turned down… [and]…in the dark, the sights and sounds of the auditorium were stilled.’ (Rufford, 2015, 6) This change in 1876 by Richard Wagner for his Bayreuther Festspielhaus was a game changer in how architecture influenced the way people acted at the theatre. In the Restoration period, the stage and audience were lit in equal lighting because of a lack of technology, although it was cutting edge for its era. Despite the fact no one in the audience would have known to be quiet when the lights went down, it seemed as though it was a natural thing to do, and this was a clear paving stone for what we now expect to see and be a part of in a theatre surrounding.

The technology and the change in design of the theatres have shown how the change in architecture has had a major influence on the expectations from what happens on the stage and the whole theatre experience.

Rufford, J. (2015) Theatre & Architecture. London: Palgrave.

Andrew Brooks

I normally tend to think of the library as a studious place where some social interaction is allowed (well, in the university library), but I hadn’t considered it as a place to perform, even if we all are performing in that space without consciously knowing or thinking about it. A performance in the library isn’t something that comes naturally to ones thought process, so the ideas that first sprouted to mind consisted of possible social experiments and the breaking of library rules – particularly on the third floor where you HAVE to be silent.

It was this idea of breaking the rules, being rebellious in the library that got me thinking about the more extreme possibilities of what can be done in the library, for example, being purposefully loud on the third floor so that eventually someone will come and tell you to be quiet as the rules are very strict.

However, the first idea that came to mind was something that wasn’t anywhere associated with the libraries history or the purpose of a library, nor was it appropriate for the time of the year. I wanted to use a whole floor and just use it as a haunted library-come-scare fest; something that I knew would be out of the question but would be incredibly fun. After having a couple of sessions of watching videos in seminars and the reading we have done, the ideas of what could be done were increased further. I particularly liked a video we watched of a group of people wrapping the Reichstag as, for me, it made me question why they did it. The whole idea of wrapping something well known, or maybe something not so well known, is something that makes that object a blank canvas that anybody could envisage what the building really looks like or what it could look like in their heads, different to what it actually looks like. This is something that I certainly found intriguing, at first.

As I have previously said, it wasn’t something that came naturally to oneself when you think of a library, therefore, ideas for this project came few and far between at this early point because there was so much to take into consideration: the architecture, the history, and the uses of the library. So it is relatively difficult to decide at first because of the amount of different aspects of the library it is possible to focus on and create something on or around. For example, it’s possible to focus on why people use the library or the people within the library rather than the library as an object or building itself. As much as this appealed to me, to do a sort of social observation, it was something that I didn’t think would be as challenging as what I would have liked.

Andrew Brooks