Theatre Design & Technology - Spring 1989 - 24

itably failed to resolve some details of props which ultimately provided an insight into the detail of character
and interpretation.
The process of interpreting the references involved some
degree of "synthesis": putting together the parts of the
productions to build a mental picture of the whole - not so
difficult since I had seen most of the cycle OIiginally. This
process of assembly is closely related to the synthesis
involved in watching a production: the elements exist,
whether in apparent combination in Wagnerian total theatre, or enabled to speak for themselves, in a Brechtian
separation of the elements. In each case, it is the mind of
the viewer which enables the whole to come together.
Although the experience of a production seen only
through documentation can never approach that primary
ell:perience, it can enable a clear enough view of the whole
to be built to enable a consideration of aim and achievement to take place, particulariy in relatIon to the script
(which, hopefully, would also be available), and to permit
engagement in critical analysis and debate.
The potential debate about the "Histories" was rapidly
fading from view as I contacted a series of designers who
had worked on various productions of the plays over the
last 25 years. The list had been compiled from the Shakespeare Library in Birmingham, which held press cuttings
and programs for most of the productions. In each case,
little real documentation had been done by the designer,
and there was little reason to expect that the producing
companies would have much more. The decision to
postpone the workshop became inevitable, though there
are now plans to mount it on an international basis in
1989.

At the point of postponement, an address by Ralph
Koltai, fiJst given to the Royal Society of Arts, was published. After de cribing the work of the designer in general,
and considering his own experience in engaging detail, he
ended as follows:
There are no books or publications on Stage Design in
Britain, none conveying the nature and atmosphere of
our productions. We have failed to record an important period of our Theatre History. The photographs
were never taken to remind us of the achievements
and milestones in this second half of the twentieth
century. Why do we appear not to care for or take pride
in excellence 1 We must learn to broaden our vision.
We owe it to ourselves and to future generations l
Apart from the limited efforts of Sightline, anJ infrequent personality-based articles in the trade and design
press, there is little effort to record and provide a basis for
future debate or understanding of much fine work by
designers, actors, and directors. The question of the value
we place on our work, and in turn the value it is accorded
by others, lies at the heart of this.
A problem is the obvious ephemeral nature of theatre.
Though attractive to many people entering the profession,
this can subsequently be a trap in preventing considered
development, based on the examination of past work. A
number of designers, myself included, admit to not having
recorded work in the past because we prefer to maintain a
production in the mind. Our responsibility should be
wider than our own memories, of course, but this isn't

GRAHAM ASSOCIATES
ASSEMBLY AND PERFORMANCE
FACILITY CONSULTANTS

SPECIALISTS

FACILITIES

FOR

THE

PERFORMING

AND FINE ARTS.

FEASIBILITY STUDIES

ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM WRITING

FACILITY PLANNING

TECHNICAL SYSTEM DESIGN

CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION

900. THE INTERCHANGE BUILDING
1655 PEACHTREE STREET, NE
ATLANTA. GA 30309
(404) 873-1949

SUITE

TD&T'

SPRING' S8S

Free catalog upon
request.
7030 aiel U.S. 23
brighton, m ich igan
48116
(313) 229-6666

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Spring 1989