Meeting August 2021: Difference between revisions
(added the abstract) |
(added question mark) |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
(3) Can we start a discourse leaving of from questiong the basic lexicon of more and less. More or less what? |
(3) Can we start a discourse leaving of from questiong the basic lexicon of more and less. More or less what? |
Revision as of 08:37, 19 August 2021
The Abstract
“Even though the postdramatic turn in the performing arts has radically reshuffled the dramaturgical hierarchy of different signifying entities that are at stake in a work of art, light as an essential signifier and agent in performative situations and, as a consequence, the practice of lighting design has until now been underappreciated (1). Setting aside some specific practices, light is in general less recognized, analyzed and understood as a fundamental part in the dramaturgy of contemporary performing arts practices, nor does it find its way into the artistic curriculum of performing arts educational programs in general. Lighting design has been evolving greatly though, both as an autonomous and an interdependent artform, however much of that work gets lost in translation when it comes to the dialogue with directors, theatre makers, dramaturges, performers… (2) How to speak about light? How to create from the perspective of lighting (design)? How to make light a full and equal signifier within a contemporary dramaturgy? (3)"
(1) But what is causing things? Is light too much considered as a normality – something like: 'there’s always light'. Or is it because of a lack of lexicon? Are we not able to talk on light?
(2) The materialisation of light: it turns away from being a performer and becomes a something you can regulate in terms of ‘more/less’.
(3) Can we start a discourse leaving of from questiong the basic lexicon of more and less. More or less what?