Theatre Design & Technology - Winter 1995 - 12

character and allow the acral' ra approach and use the
unit appropriateh-.
Even starring down the path of illusionism on the open stage
mav be dangerous, in that this course opens questions that
are best not addressed. According ra designer Karl Eigsti,
One of the worst things you can do is to define too carefully, in terms of conventional architecture, where everything is. You waur to know that if the actors are going
down "vom one," the~' are going to the kitchen, or the
bathroom, or the bedroom, or outside. Obviously you
have to define that to a cerrain extent. BLIt when you put
up a door frame and they have to go through it to get to

SOME DIRECTORS AND DESIGNERS

FEEL THAT THE PROSCENIUM ARCH NOT ONLY

ENCOURAGES A PICTORIAL APPROACH,

IT IS IN FACT A FRAME THAT

DEMANDS FILLING.

that place, then you are creating a barrier. You are creating a wall to the audience through which they see the
play. Then it becomes increasingly difficult for the audience to partiCIpate.
Illusionism may simply fail to be effective on the thrust or
arena, making the presentational approach preferable. tling
points Ollt that the visible technical apparatus of the open
stage makes illusionism unattainable, in that the audience
can see the means by which the illusion is created: "\Vhen
you are sitting in the same room, all the mechanics-the
functional things that create the show-are all in view. You
cannot mask those things off."
]n addition, sighrline problems may doom illusionistic
techniques on an open stage. In a proscenium theatre, the
designer can successfully employ illusionistic devices ra represent reality because of the relatively controlled viewpoint.
But in an open stage theatre, the spectarars view the stage
from many directions, so illusionistic effects may fall apart.
Perspective effects may not work for spectators on the sides
of a thrust stage, and parts of the scenery may be entirely
invisible to them. \Vhile some designers have tried using
illusionistic Jcvices, particularly forceJ perspective, on the
thrust stage of the Guthrie Theatre Jensen observes that

I 0

\\ I "

I I R

'J"

T D & T

"they worked for (\vo-thirds of the audience, but there was
one-third for whom the technique did not \\'ork. The illusion became distorrion."
Another practical problem is the proximity of the audience to the stage: The audience as a whole in an open-stage
theatre is closer to the stage than in a proscenium theatre.
On the open stage, therefore, the designer does not have the
distance ra pull off certain tticks. According ra Michel SaintDenis, "Verisimilitude as well as magic needs distance. Both
depend upon a physical separation bem'een the public and
the stage." , John Gassner believes that a distinct separation
bem'een audience and performance is necessary:
Only an actual gulf between the stage and the auditorium can sustain the illusion of a distinctive environment. Only a spectator who is physically separated
from the stage can function as a detached observer and
can partake of the illusion that the stage is an environment. And only the actor who can ignore the audience
can consistently treat his stage as an environment rather
than a platform on which to play to the audience.'
Seeing the audience on the other side of the stage may also
undermine efforts toward an illusionistic effect. Ming states,
"]n the arena stage, illusionistic production is impossible
because you are looking at other people, and so the picture is
not there; it isn't really a picture."
As for the proscenium theatre, many maintain that this
stage form is uniquely suited to illusionism. George Izenour
declares, "The proscenium theatre is an illusionistic theatre,
and] think it is wrong to think that it was ever intended to
be anything else." Santo Loquasra suggests that the proscenium theatre is the most practical stage for achieving an illusionistic effect: "]f you want to create pure illusion, choose
the proscenium stage. You can achieve effects more successfully because the audience is viewing essentially from one
vantage point with all the machinery contained within the
Aoor and ceiling."
Some directors and designers feel that the proscenium
arch not only encourages a pictorial approach, it is in fact a
frame that demands filling. According to Tyrone Gurluie,
In a "picture-frame" theatre it is impossible not to pur a
picture in the frame. The whole intention of the building's design is to isolate and emphasize a visual impression. Even if the picture is of the simplest, least
representational character, the actors are seen against
this particular background; it cannot be excluded from
the audience's attention; it has perforce to be an important element of the performance. '
The illusionistic tendency of the proscenium is so strong
that some designers maintain that any attempt at a presentational approach is difficult at best; the result may even
end up being illusionistic. According ra Ming, in a prosce-

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Winter 1995