Theatre Design & Technology - Oct 1967 - 39

study what the cinema could do, and then analyzed and
wrote a playas a play, designed all of the pieces of cinema
within it, and designed the major lighting. Then, this man
called on a technician and asked where he could best place
the screen and the projector.

ought to ask the question, "Is our technique reaching the
common, average man, who is used to mixing the amateur
with the craftsman or professional even as in the Middle
Ages?" I wonder if some of our technical know-how ought
not to move in the direction of reaching the audience. The

theatre is not connecting with the audience; the social conI don't think really that the arts are coming together. I
text of interaction is not there. Some of these resources
think that technology should remain subservient to the artist
might have gone into the effort at the Armory. I am one of
and should be called upon when necessary. The best artist
the admirers of the Nine Evenings, and I applaud the work
is the artist who becomes a technician, who comes to unyou did in the Armory, and the point of view that Bob
derstand himself and how he can perform his mechanism as,
Rauschenberg made that art should experiment, should seek
I believe, Mr. Snyder or Mr. Wilfred have designed their
interaction, rather than just hang and show.
apparatus for projection of their own works of art. I think
that there are two completely distinct questions here. One This is where I think that the church should be as well.
question is, What can a technician of some specialty do for There is space, all kind of space, if people would just move
the theatre and for playwrights? And two, What kind of out of the pews and maybe break up the balconies and push
Renaissance man can come about in today's society who the pulpits to one side, so there can be an encounter. In
can produce works of art with both technical and pure ar- cathedrals in the Middle Ages, the action occurred where
the crux was, as it was called. This was a sort of theatre,
tistic knowledge?
REI BACK: I want to comment on a dichotomy being brought
out here, which I don't think really exists: an engineer or
technologist at one extreme and on the other, the artist.
Actually, some of us have some of the artistic ability and
some of the technical. I agree with Billy Kluver that someone who is basically an engineer and who has not thought
in terms of his aesthetic or art or who has not developed
those qualities that we label artistic, cannot suddenly decide
and achieve successful work overnight. This is quite true.
However, I think that the combinations can be encouraged
to a greater extent.
SNYDER: I would like to correllate three things brought out
in this discussion. We have something new occurring in the
happenings, a development of contemplation, of wanting to-in the vernacular-"improve on things." People who are in
happenings are content with a form of theatre which is of
the soul rather than of the intellect. They are in a growing
number today. Mr. Carmines made the point that light technology and sound tend to work better with dance than with
drama, which has more intellectual content. I think that the
two observations are related. This new feeling seems to be
seeking almost a religious experience, a spiritual experience
from the theatre, an experience which does not necessarily
have an intellectual content. The enhancement of these spiro
itual visions of this contemplative mood can be brought
about by the appropriate use of technology.
GLENESK: I rather think that these distinctions are artistically invalid. An old professor of mine, H. Marshall
McLuhan, says that we perceive things totally as a total person, and I agree. It seems to me that you cannot break
down people in terms of technique, know-how, purpose, or
artistry. I think there is an element of the artist in everyone.
It seems to me that this totality was recognized in the theatre of the Middle Ages by the guilds' playing different roles.
Perhaps we are missing this totality of the social function
of the theatre, whether it has been a part of or an exten·
sion of or a tangent from society.
I feel that technology and what happens within the theatre
action may be esoteric in these attempts and these fade out.
This is especially true, it seems to me, in New York if you
look at it in its social context and not in an esoteric fashion.
But may not the theatre as a social force lead us to a significant element of these happenings? Many of the churches
and sanctuaries in New York, the temples, synagogues, cathedralS, and the theatres, are empty except for the big
lights on Broadway or the very avant garde Off-Broadway
hits, because they are so esoteric. I think that we really

OCTOBER, 1967

and most of the symbolic action took place there near the
crux, at the station of the cross. They would move around
and would "invoke" and there would be a sense of moving
through space. The audience understood that kind of happening. I wonder if we ought to consider removing some of the
aesthetic distance and using some of the natural Iighting in
the open air, Elizabethan style. Ought we perhaps to produce
that kind of eHect where the theatre and stage jut into the
actual gathering of the people so they can almost touch the
actors? There was a tangible sense of the kind that great
paintings are supposed to have. I wonder if we ought not
at least consider this question of whether or not our technology is allowing our theatre, our happening to get across
and do its bit to promote the social interaction.
BOWMAN: Mr. Armstrong, is the technology getting across?
ARMSTRONG: The Elizabethan theatre was one of the most
vibrant eras in the theatre, and what was being done was
exciting and moving, and something that people were interested in.
Look at the plays On-and-Off-Broadway, look at Deer Park,
a piece of old-fashioned theatre. No new ground was being
broken; no matter how many technological things were being
done, they had nothing to do with the content of the play.
What you are asking for, Mr. Glenesk, and I applaud you, is
to get back to the medium of the drama, back to an experience which is something that you cannot help being with
and participating in.
BOWMAN: We are talking about the vitality that is to be
seen now in churches. Would you comment on that, Mr.
Carmines?
CARMINES: I think that in particular what is a happening
and what is experimentation are two quite different things.
I think that this be-in, that Mr. Snyder was talking about, is
a movement in one direction, and a direction that I feel sympathy with. In some ways, it is an ti-technological. However,
through the use of technology, you might also arrive at the
goals of art. You could simply use a technological situation
as you would a human. The artist, for instance, who participated in Mr. Kluver's Nine Evenings, had a particular aesthetic long before he participated in those Nine Evenings,
that is, before and during his contact with technology.
Before that, they knew what the dance was, what the theatre was; and the technology used there was an extension of
their ideas of theatre function or aesthetics and not a confrontation with them of something quite different. Their feeling and attitude was already moving in that direction. Therefore, the demonstration, the technology wasn't a shock.

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Oct 1967