Theatre Design & Technology - May 1973 - 48

With all due respect and admiration for the work of
the separate lighting designer, it is my feeling that
dividing the responsibility appears in the final result. You
can divide the work - one does not depend on the other.
But your stage designers do not seem to be working with
all of the materials and/or structures which would be
more helpful in lighting the production. As a result, the
lighting designers have to rely solely on the characteristics
of their medium - intensity, color, and fluctuations and
harmony of the changes. In the total sense, I found the
lighting isolated and often too colorful. Thus, the overall
production loses some of its strength.
On the other hand, in talks with my American
colleagues I realized that our lighting seems very plain
and not very expressive to them. In my opinion, it is
necessary for stage and lighting designers to work together
in a closer and more fundamental way. The stage designer
could, in this harmony of labor, utilize materials upon
which light could have a greater effect. To explain this,
let me use an anology. In photography we speak of a
"photogenic face" which is made more interesting by
the camera even though in real life, it is only normal.
In the same way there are materials we may call "Iightgenic". In other words, certain plain-looking materials
contain expressive potential, even capable of reinforcing
emotion, under theatrical light.
I believe that the United States' exhibit at the 1975
Prague Quadrienniale should concentrate on the work of
American lighting designers. It would be a most interesting
and valuable experience for European designers.
I was thrilled to see so many compact type theatres
in the United States. As your readers are probably aware,
there is an abundance of historical buildings in Central
Europe but very few compact theatres. For example, in
Czechoslovakia there are no such theatres.
Perhaps I did not see a true cross-section of American
stage designs in the course of my trip. What I did see
seemed to be largely conventional in appearance as if
they had been transferred from the end of the last century
to a new space. They were, of course, realistic plays,
written for a traditional theatre. I have in mind, in
particular, Wedding Band by Alice Childress which I saw
at New York's Public Theatre. By way of contrast, I
was very impressed with Ming Cho Lee's setting for
Henry IV at the Mark Taper Forum in Los Angeles. I
had assumed that the work in these "new" theatres would
inspire directors and designers to more non-traditional
expressions. Although I have seen only a few examples
in the course of my visit, I was not overly impressed.
Generally, the work had an awkward effect on me. There
seemed to be a conflict between the facilities present in
the "new spaces" and their use by the designers.
Toward the end of my visit I had the opportunity
to see several of the new vanguard theatres. I learned
that theatre in the United States is a live and creative

organism well aware of continuing developments throughout the world. Yet, except for musicals, productions are
behind the same type of work in Europe. The staging
does not reach the level of American drama. I believe
that an active exchange of experience - epitomized by
our tour - supported by olsn will be a major factor
in solving our common problems.
*

THEATRE IN AMERICA THROUGH THE EYES OF A
HUNGARIAN STAGE DESIGNER
IVAN SZABO-JI LEK

Before my journey to the U.S.A. I had heard and read
much about the theatre in America so my eagerness to
go and see was quite natural. We Hungarians have readily
believed that theatre in the truest form only exists in
Europe where theatre traditions have existed for a long
time and are indeed written in stone. What will theatre
be like in the Twentieth Century without tradition, what
part will the new theatre play in a modern dynamic
changing society? These were questions I had long asked
myself and I came to the U.S.A. to get answers. I am
grateful to the U.S. Department of State, the International
Research and Exchange Board in New York City, the
University of Pittsburgh and last but not least, U.S.I.T.T.
for the scholarship which made it possible for me to
attend their convention at Pittsburgh and to tour throughout the United States.
My tour, which took me to many places, was highlighted by stops at the universities in New York,
Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Madison, Wis·
consin, and Bloomington, Indiana. In sixteen days I
traveled 16,000 miles, saw twenty theatre bu ildings of
gigantic proportions, and attended eleven live performances. In addition I visited five TV & film studios, and
five multi-purpose sports arenas. I also visited four
theatrical lighting equipment manufacturing companies.
At the parties I attended I met some of the great names
in the field of theatre design.
At this point, I would like to say special thanks to
Dr. Joel E. Rubin and his very capable staff for their
very professional planning of my tour which was so well
coordinated and so free of complications. Only through
this professionalism and foresight was I able to have such
a wonderful trip. Such an unforgettable experience.
For having me in America and introducing me to the
American theatre I am very grateful!
My tour of the U.S.A. gave me great professional
pleasure. It far exceeded all my prior expectations. I
have no words to express my feel ings nor means in my
briefings back home to tell everyone what I had experienced. I can only give a very general impression of all

THEATRE DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY

MAY. 1973

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - May 1973