Theatre Design & Technology - May 1965 - 4

In the des ign of a "theatre of mutua I moti on,"
submitteq by the Italian architect E. Venturelli
together with Jacques Polieri, the auditorium is
a virtual sphere (Figure lj. In the center of this
spherical space is placed a rotating support
structure with horizontal platforms mounted on it.
The platforms are placed at a variety of levels
and are intended for spectators. Vertical location
of the platforms is varied by means of special
equipment. The auditorium's volume is defined
by two concentric spherical shells, between
which, space is provided for access to a series
of stacked stages. The inner shell is not joined
to the outside one and freely rotates in a direction opposite to the rotation of spectator platforms.

in its center on the surface of an automatically
rotating, convex amphitheatre. The stage surrounds spectators as a perimetral ring-shaped

FIGURE 2:

Project for a "Spatiodynamic Theatre" by
Nicholas Schaffer (1962)
1. lighting platform
3. Panoramic stage
2. Conical amphitheatre
4. Service area

(annular) path, cantinuously moving in a direction opposite to the amphitheatre. Actors are replaced on the stage by automatically directed
"cibernetic sculptures" of a so-called "electron-L-":..L..!IiioiiOii....i..sJ.....~~.Ioi.Ij. .;6f~ilrli"'"..~.-....:l...i...Lu..;~.L_ic ba II et". In Sch offer's e Iec tron ic pu ppet show,
the living actor relinquishes his role as the
artist and master of scen ic art. Spectators placed
on the convex surface of the amphitheatre are
isolated from each other, and cannot see the
FIGURE 1: Project for the "Theatre of Mutual Motion"
(1962) Architect, E. Venturelli, Consultant,
remainder of the audience. One of the vital eleJ. Polieri
ments of the dramatic event, that is, collective
1. spectators
reaction to the presented action, is impossible
2. stage
under these conditions since at any given moment
each spectator sees different portions of the
panoramic action.
The inner shell consists of stages in circular
levels. As the stage layer rotates before the
spectator (who is himself continually in motion),
images of the action and its scenic environment
change continuously, simi lar to the frames of a
motion picture. The absurdity of this idea is selfevi dent. Di sregard ing the violati on of a II the
requirements of normal acoustical and vi sual
perception afa dramatic production, the enormous
technological difficulties and cost of realizing
such a plan are perfectly evident. This idea was
really born from the desire to create a theatre in
which the dyhamics of action and variety of
images would be as sudden and diverse as in the
fi Im--where thi s effect is obtained by incomparably simpler and cheaper means.
The same urge towards "cinematographicity" of
action has spawned a design even more utopian,
in the so-called "spatio-dynamic" (movement in
space) theatre of Nicholas Schoffer (Figure 2).
In his cylindrical building, spectators are placed

To the same group of projects must be relegated
theatres with perimetrically disposed stages and
floating, or island-like amphitheatres. A similar

FIGURE 3:

IOSITT

Project for a "Theatre of
R Doblhoffer (1958-1960)
1. "Floating amphitheatre"
2. Stages

Free Motion" by

THEATR£ DESIGN AND TECHNOlOOY

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - May 1965