Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on modern drama
Essay on modern drama
The conventions of drama
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Madison Micucci
Since 300 B.C, dramatists all over the world have modeled their works after Aristotle’s definition of drama as “the imitation of an action that is serious…in a dramatic rather than narrative form with incidents arousing pity and fear wherewith to accomplish a catharsis of these emotions.” Aristotle’s ideas have endured centuries of change and continue to transcend cultural and historical boundaries. Countless works, whether classical or contemporary, follow the example set by the ancient Greeks, Shakespeare and others, to create dramatic masterpieces that thrill, dazzle and overwhelm the audience by appealing to their emotions. However, the dawn of twentieth century gave rise to new theatrical forms that take the audience into a world of unfamiliarity and deep introspection. While modern plays differ vastly in form, scope and origin, they all deviate from Aristotle’s code by rejecting the fundamental belief that a drama must arouse specific emotions in its spectators. Specifically, the plays of Anton Chekhov, Bertolt Brecht, Tennessee Williams, and Samuel Beckett eschew emotional stimulus by deemphasizing sentimentality and encouraging a more cerebral experience in which the audience must actively evaluate and contemplate what they see.
Anton Chekhov was the first of the aforementioned modern playwrights to achieve this effect. His most famous work, “The Seagull” has become a hallmark example of indirect action, a technique that intentionally places the most climactic or important moments offstage and disallows emotional reactions to those events. For example, Chekhov informs the audience that the innocent young Nina naively follows her desires into a dangerous whirlwind that leaves her penniless, alone, and p...
... middle of paper ...
...ion for action by Estragon and an unspoken, mutual decision not to move. Since the unknowable fate of Vladimir and Estragon cannot arouse sympathy, the audience is challenged to contemplate the significance of such an ending.
As a final reflection on modernist drama, one should recognize its indefinable nature. While this discussion calls attention to the thread of emotional detachment that runs through all of the above plays, modernism in general knows no boundaries in terms of style, content or structure. The criteria once used as a standard to determine the validity of a play have lost some their former credence to many modern playwrights. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, modern dramatists have evolved so divergently that their only commonality is the desire to push the limits of tradition and introduce alternative methods of provoking thought.
In this essay I shall concentrate on the plays 'Road' by Jim Cartwright and 'Blasted' by Sarah Kane with specific reference to use of language and structure of dialogue as examples of dramatic techniques.
The play that we read for this unit is Too Much Punch For Judy, by Mark Wheeller. It is a form of Verbatim Theatre, meaning that it is based on the spoken words of real people. This play is about the story of a young woman who kills her sister in an alcohol related accident. When I first read the play I couldn’t empathize with the story as I haven’t experienced such a shocking event before. In this essay I will describe, analyse and evaluate both my work and the work of other actors in my group, focusing on the mediums, elements and explorative strategies of Drama.
Even though this outline has been in existence for thousands of years, one can see it still being put to good use with modern playwrights. One can see what happens when emphasis is misplaced, spending time perfecting Aristotle’s minor elements, like spectacle, and under developing more important ones like characterization. Such is the case with Carrie the musical. It was executed to the best of each actor’s ability, the show simply fell flat. One can conclude there is a direct correlation between the terrible implementation of Aristotle’s guidelines and the lackluster quality of the show and its characters.
The Modernist Fiction period took place during the 1920’s and revolutionized the American way of life in literature, economically, and socially. There was a national vision of upward mobility during this time that represented the American Dream. The upward mobility was seen through the consumerism and materialism that dominated this decade economically. Popular novels of this time reflected the mass consumerism in the lives of those wrote them. During the American Modernist Fiction period, Americans became increasingly materialistic throughout the roaring twenties; therefore, the American Dream was to obtain upper class status through the possession of material goods, which was reflected in many of this period’s works.
The triviality of melodrama is so often the theatrical scapegoat that boils the blood of the modern-day critic: the sentimental monologues, the martyred young lovers, the triumphant hero, and the self-indulgent imagery. Melodrama would seem the ultimate taboo; another failed Shakespearean staging or even worse, an opera minus the pretty music. Ironically, Bertolt Brecht, dramatic revolutionary and cynic of all things contrived found promise in the melodramatic presentation. Brecht examined and manipulated the various superficial and spectacular aspects of theatre, establishing a synthesis of entertainment and social criticism as his fundamental goal. Bertolt Brecht employs various facets of melodramatic technique in The Jewish Wife, ultimately reconfiguring the genre and conveying his central theme; a society rendered immobile at the will of a totalitarian regime.
Aristotle (384-322 B.C. believed that tragedy, as an imitation or mimesis of life as it could be, held more importance than history, which simply records the past. He considered that performance of a tragedy provided the perfect cathartic experience for an audience, leaving them spiritually purified and inspired. He felt spectators seeing and experiencing great hardship befall the play’s hero or heroine would achieve this emotional state and benefit from it.
In Euripides’ tragic play, Medea, the playwright creates an undercurrent of chaos in the play upon asserting that, “the world’s great order [is being] reversed.” (Lawall, 651, line 408). The manipulation of the spectators’ emotions, which instills in them a sentiment of drama, is relative to this undertone of disorder, as opposed to being absolute. The central thesis suggests drama in the play as relative to the method of theatrical production. The three concepts of set, costumes, and acting, are tools which accentuate the drama of the play. Respectively, these three notions represent the appearance of drama on political, social, and moral levels. This essay will compare three different productions of Euripides’ melodrama, namely, the play as presented by the Jazzart Dance Theatre¹; the Culver City (California) Public Theatre²; and finally, the original ancient Greek production of the play, as it was scripted by Euripides.
piece a modernist one. The play’s dialogue, technology, and the fragmentation of the piece, are
In theatrical performance, the fictional realm of drama is aligned with the factual, or “real” world of the audience, and a set of actors feign re-creation of this factual world. At the same time the audience, by participating as spectators, feigns believability in the mimic world the actors create. It is in this bond of pretense between the on-stage and off-stage spheres of reality—the literal and the mock-literal—that the appeal of drama is engendered. The Merchant of Venice then, like any effective drama, ostensibly undermines realism by professing to portray it. The work contains no prologue to establish dramatic context; it offers no assertion of its status as imitation, a world separate from our own. And yet, the bond of pretense forged between actors and audience prevents the line between the fictional and the factual from being blurred completely. This division allows the device of metatheatricality to emerge as a means by which the play can ally itself with realism, rather than undermining it, by acknowledging its own status as drama.
Drama, and Writing. Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 6th ed. New York: Pearson-Prentice, 2010. 40-49. Print.
Modernism is defined in Merriam-Webster's Dictionary as "a self-conscious break with the past and a search for new forms of expression." While this explanation does relate what modernism means, the intricacies of the term go much deeper. Modernism began around 1890 and waned around 1922. Virginia Wolf once wrote, "In or about December, 1910, human character changed." (Hurt and Wilkie 1443). D.H. Lawrence wrote a similar statement about 1915: "It was 1915 the old world ended." (Hurt and Wilkie 1444). The importance of the exact dates of the Modernist period are not so relevant as the fact that new ideas were implemented in the era. Ideas that had never before been approached in the world of literature suddenly began emerging in the works of many great authors. Two of the pioneer Modernist writers were Joseph Conrad and T.S. Eliot. The tendencies to question the incontestable beliefs embedded in all thinking and to focus on the inner self dominated. Old viewpoints were tossed aside to make way for the discovery of modern man's personal spirituality. Two works that are considered important forbears in the Modern period are T.S. Eliot's The Wasteland and Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness.
Hamlet is not only a representation of the world, but it is a presentation of the theatricality of the world, and it aims to acquire the detachment that allows self-reflection. According to Catherine Jo Dixon, the word “meta-theatre” is derived from the Greek prefix meta, which signifies a “level beyond the subject that it qualifies” (1). Arguably one of the most memorable examples of meta-theatricality is from William Shakespeare’s Hamlet in Act III, Scene II, where Hamlet stages a play in an attempt to “catch the conscience of the King” (2.2.526). However, while this is one instance of meta-theatre in Hamlet, Shakespeare created an entire work infused with meta-theatre, either through the direct use of theatre or theatrical metaphors and imagery. Others include Polonius’ praise and report on the Players (Ham. 2.2.325-29), Hamlet’s advice to the Players (Ham. 3.2.1-39), and Hamlet’s antic disposition. The effect of this was that it allowed the emphasis of the contrast between truth and pretence, reality and illusion.
In Six Characters in Search of an Author Pirandello illustrates the point that in art there is no one reality, only perceptions. Art is one perception held by the one artist, in the case of the play, the author, who brings this perception to an audience. To illustrate this principle, Pirandello uses many staging approaches and techniques to merge art and theater into real life, while highlighting the shortcomings of drama and art in imitating life. Four elements are used within the play: the Characters themselves, the lines spoken by the Characters, the play structure pertaining to acts and scenes, and the stage directions within the play.
In conclusion, the famed twentieth century playwright Arthur Miller is a complete modernist. Throughout his many works, he uses modernist ideas of the worst of human nature to create very strong characters that establish and work in the roles he makes for them well. All of these points can be further exemplified by the literary criticism of Christopher Bigsby, Harold Clurman and anonymous who all help to show further the path of modernism that Miller undertook in the creation of his many landmark plays. Overall, Arthur Miller’s influence as a modernist playwright not only had an effect on the entire theatre industry but also much of the modernist literature of the entire twentieth century as well leaving a profound image of what modernism truly is on American culture.
The ‘Modern’ era began, approximately, in the mid-1800s (Worthen), following its predecessor the Romantic period, which was an era that was emotionally charged ad focused on the physical relationships between characters and being one-with-nature, rather than the focus of the modernist period, which was to bring social and political issues or statements into the storyline of a script whilst still keeping the stage, characters and overall performance aesthetically pleasing for the audience of the particular period. Modernism in the theatre is the act of bringing the stage and the forms of modern life, at one time, to a critical relationship. As stated by Worthen, the modernist period or the modern world we live in today began in the mid-1800s