 |
 |
I don't know if you want to addres visual anachronisms exclusively, but there are several cases of contemporaneous "material" becoming part of illusionistic performance. Henry Irving had incidental music composed that was "a combination of rhythmic pantomime and suggestive hummings"--so one could argue that the music might be "at odds" with the setting. Max Reinhardt's Symbolist leanings made more of the emotion of the spectacle even though they were highly illusionistic. In my morning ramblings, I can't think of anyone that specifically employed one simple anachronism designed to somehow embody a profound statement before Peter Brook. But that is Brook's MO. He has over they years often found one simple visual trope to embody his theme. I guess what I'm saying is that there has been a certain anachronistic tendency in any era. (Look at filmed costume dramas of the '30s and then look at one of the '80s or '90s and notice how different the same era, both of which are historically "accurate," will look in terms of hair, costume, etc.) The major difference now is the conscious employment of anachronism as a trope in itself--the [and I don't really like this phrase] Postmodern condition dictates that we mix visual tropes--the reasons for this we can certainly debate (though I don't think this is the forum). All right. Enough. *********************************************************** Terry D. Smith School of Drama, DX-20 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195 [log in to unmask] On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Alan Baragona wrote: > I'm teaching _Love's Labor's Lost_ for the first time, using the Signet > edition by John Arthos. Arthos includes his own essay "_Love's Labor's > Lost_ on the Stage," in which he discusses Peter Brook's "'landmark' > production" of 1946 in which Brook mixes his anachronisms, dressing everyone > in 18th-century costume except Constable Dull, who is dressed as a Victorian > policeman. Arthos implies that Brook was the first to use anachronistic > costuming in this way (or perhaps I'm just inferring it), as opposed to, for > example, Welles's famous production of _Julius Caesar_ as thoroughly modern > fascists. This mixing of anachronisms for Renaissance and medieval drama > seems to be the rule now, if the Washington, D.C., Shakespeare Theatre and > the Shenandoah Shakespeare Express are any measure, and I wonder if it > really was Brook's innovation. Does anyone know of any earlier modern > performance practice along these lines? Is there any evidence that it is a > sui generis rebirth of original practice in early drama productions (e.g., > mixing togas and pumpkin pants)? > > Alan Baragona > [log in to unmask] > > "A man who is not a liberal at twenty has no heart. A man who is not a > conservative at forty has no brain." Winston Churchill > > "VMI: where the heartless are taught by the brainless." Alan Baragona >