I-Influence mediated by various factors to the theater.
The influence of the theater is obviously mediated by factors that stand between what is shown on stage and the spectator.
However, when we say that “ members of the public not present at the radio or television, or in the newspaper, in a state of “ psychological nudity (Joseph Klapper), this of course is extended to performing arts. People come with all its cultural and mental or what they call their “ vulgar prejudices “ to see a performance. And his reaction will determine the degree of impact.
There are people who saw Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, did not applaud the opening night because they did not understand or did not expect this final and Germany, this had to be changed so that the work could be presented. The theater, images, sounds, signs and infinite multiplicity of meanings that spur the soul and mind. Brecht was one of those who took advantage of the opportunity to spur the minds of viewers and they created a system to let you know stay up-as to what they saw, so they would know what was happening on stage was a lie and distance so as not to be swayed by the sentimentality. Clear that his theater does not deny the emotions, but, who looks to immerse yourself in an uncertain vision of life.
Theater as a communicator body, meets and goes beyond that great role. When Joseph T. Klapper says that “ what is not so obvious is that these attitudes, these dispositions, are active before, during exposure to the “ mass communications; merely reaffirm who looks asset is a deposit of dynamite waiting to be ignited.
A director who has taken great advantage, if I may say in this way, of what gets on stage or film is Ingmar Bergman. His vision of the human psyche and emotions still continues to speak and write. This is greatly evident in his film “ Person “, which has been classified as a masterpiece in which the split, gambling, and counterfeiting have the greatest personality of meaning, in addition to what is openly present able to someone who has deposited their haunts in someone who apparently does not do anything with it. What a situation to show people? What interest can he have? For seeing the film, the above lines have not been more than a pale attempt to try to explain in a few words.
“ “ The person tends to understand or to explain things according to their perception. And that’s not all, of course, only that which has impacted. Here we must deal Klapper’s assertion that “ People remember material reinforcing their own point of view, much better than the one that fights that way of thinking (…) both retention and exposure are high selectivity. “. The theater shows and keeps the mind selects, rejects, accepts.
II-The social influence of the theater.
Since ancient times, the theater has been seen as the bearer of magic and power elements, among them the healing.
More than 4000 years ago, the manifestation of disease was treated with a sort of witch doctor or shaman “ “ as we say in Creole, which to heal, dressed in furs, was painted in a special way, danced and spit out sounds . As we had in class the teacher Ugo Ulive, these are the first glimpses of the stage performance. And that persist even today in tribal societies of Africa and the Americas. That is, the cure was, and is today-a form of medicine and was that the healer acting “ “ it was not the same and dressed as usual.
The ancient Greeks also saw the healing power and its effects in patients who came to see a play. It is well known that the tragedy produced a cathartic effect called “ “ it was a state of emotional equilibrium was reached after having suffered or cried during the performance. This conduct is especially produced “ and not “ tragedy and comedy, because the first was egregious, solemn and moralistic while the comedy was unusual, bizarre and immoral.
The passage of time, with medication, have joined in different views of the effect produced on stage in his assistants, so that even denied women their participation as actors by having them sort of conditions conducive to Veined carnal weakness, excessive daydreaming and intellectual weakness. As actresses could not cure but ironically, if you trusted them as priests that soothes the soul from the smallest to the great lords.
When the theater became more specific and did not need intermediaries, but as such it was in potions, medicine, disclosure and provocation, and diversified its many significant and thus its impact was more direct. In fact it was so effective that the Romans gave it to the populace as a decadent game animals and people sacrificed everything in the middle of the most overwhelming glitz and sparing no expense for its staging.
The theater, not on his plane as he won circus then, but in his role as talkative voice of new thoughts came to undermine more than a crown and more than one company. This is the case of Aristophanes, who in his plays became so strong that political truths that often was arrested. A Shakespeare Cronwel ministers, they tried to limit the Puritanism and Protestantism to which the bard responded with the best of the creations to produce works whose theme is developed in other countries but rather reflected the English society with its problems socio-political: The Merchant of Venice, the problems of succession as in Hamlet, Ricardo and Enrique, the problem of power as in Macbeth, King Lear, Titus Andronicus and metaphysical fears as in The Tempest. And what about unrequited love and persuaded to die like Romeo and Juliet. Between these two periods: the age and the Elizabethan theater, was forged in the Middle Ages, doomed to try Christian religion, but also gave birth to the couple’s farces and themes as minstrel to escape a threatening and punishing verb always representing God and conscience of human beings.
Impact of theater in mind and body. The social impact of the theater as a means of communication. The theater impact because not only uses the verb but powerful images (noise, odor, plastic, etc.) Also reported, making it so versatile. This communication may cause significant effects. Recall that in Greek theater, the use of gadgets such as eccyclema or mechano-kind car with wheels and crane, had the mission of making characters appear or perform tricks that “ the “ moved theatest or spectator. It was primarily a theater to be seen despite being charged with a grand word. Greek and Roman
know the effect that these representations were politically and socially. The church in the Middle Ages used the auto-sacramental, miracles, etc., To persuade his parishioners not to sin as well as being the only one that explained the origin of human beings. It was a dark time, a mysterious and evocative drama. The Renaissance, was recreated in the expressive forms old and modernized using an introspective and desperate voice, the anguish of a living being very much in its internal jurisdictions felt abandoned by God, so it was a very anthropocentric. A theater that reflected anxiety, violence, excesses and alienation.
The Baroque period was an even more existential drama, while it is reloaded by hand, and developed further the commedia dell ‘art, but even more intimate addressed issues such as greed and manipulation that reflected Moliere in Tartuffe. The Romantic period, just as anthropocentric forged early stage managers and a way to put life in the tables is still relevant because it laid the foundations of a dialectic of leadership and how to represent the historically and socially people. Sure, it was and is a window that exposes the self, thinking and feeling people.
We have to see, then, that according to this maxim the theater has not changed but apart from the nineteenth century, it seems to become more existentialist. The advent of this century meant opening the windows with Norwegian Doll’s House Henrik Ibsen, who left for granted that society definitely boasted perfect indoors had major weaknesses and illnesses. The woman then explained his play and began to let her cry to hear that still remains. It’s when the passage of time appear Piscator, Brecht and his disciple, who definitely will use the theater as a means not only communication, but as pressure, reflection and encouragement to change a social-political vision merely bourgeois. Here is where the public will definitely not be the same.
When it is said that “ the theater is one of the most effective communication vehicles that have been … “ (Stambaugh and Gonzalez). We are not afraid to stress that nothing has been advocated vehicle but has a lot of cosmetic changes has shown since his philosophy scenarios each time.
-As there are directors, aware of this effect triggered the theater and performing arts play in their proposals to remove the mental structure that brings the audience. Why many principals have faced the strongest criticism and denials great, but certainly not indifference.
Now, the reaction may face strong paradigms linked to common thought and is naturally resistant to change. To conclude, we will quote his sentence “ Klapper … mass communication reinforces the attitudes, tastes and existing biases and behavioral tendencies of the members of his audience, including trends toward change “. No more words, especially considering that the individuals in the company feel accompanied and supported, so are subject to censorship and permissiveness that provision, but may eventually make that dreaded change, if not mass, at least those living certainly, because as Tennessee Williams’ Sweet Bird of Youth “ “: “ change, change because it “ does not change dies, words of Princess Alexandra del Lago a Chance Wayne, rundown hero nothing more and nothing less than love “ “.
As for the propaganda from the ancient Romans who sent roses to spray water on passersby to attend a performance or as in the case of the Greeks who called Areopagus court paid the salary of the judges for their theatest attend a conference or from the prohibitions of the Puritans who burned the Elizabethan theater to the censures and impressive sales of plays today, the theater will always impact a greater or lesser degree and be a victim or favored by such propaganda “ ` `.
The influence of the theater is obviously mediated by factors that stand between what is shown on stage and the spectator.
However, when we say that “ members of the public not present at the radio or television, or in the newspaper, in a state of “ psychological nudity (Joseph Klapper), this of course is extended to performing arts. People come with all its cultural and mental or what they call their “ vulgar prejudices “ to see a performance. And his reaction will determine the degree of impact.
There are people who saw Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, did not applaud the opening night because they did not understand or did not expect this final and Germany, this had to be changed so that the work could be presented. The theater, images, sounds, signs and infinite multiplicity of meanings that spur the soul and mind. Brecht was one of those who took advantage of the opportunity to spur the minds of viewers and they created a system to let you know stay up-as to what they saw, so they would know what was happening on stage was a lie and distance so as not to be swayed by the sentimentality. Clear that his theater does not deny the emotions, but, who looks to immerse yourself in an uncertain vision of life.
Theater as a communicator body, meets and goes beyond that great role. When Joseph T. Klapper says that “ what is not so obvious is that these attitudes, these dispositions, are active before, during exposure to the “ mass communications; merely reaffirm who looks asset is a deposit of dynamite waiting to be ignited.
A director who has taken great advantage, if I may say in this way, of what gets on stage or film is Ingmar Bergman. His vision of the human psyche and emotions still continues to speak and write. This is greatly evident in his film “ Person “, which has been classified as a masterpiece in which the split, gambling, and counterfeiting have the greatest personality of meaning, in addition to what is openly present able to someone who has deposited their haunts in someone who apparently does not do anything with it. What a situation to show people? What interest can he have? For seeing the film, the above lines have not been more than a pale attempt to try to explain in a few words.
“ “ The person tends to understand or to explain things according to their perception. And that’s not all, of course, only that which has impacted. Here we must deal Klapper’s assertion that “ People remember material reinforcing their own point of view, much better than the one that fights that way of thinking (…) both retention and exposure are high selectivity. “. The theater shows and keeps the mind selects, rejects, accepts.
II-The social influence of the theater.
Since ancient times, the theater has been seen as the bearer of magic and power elements, among them the healing.
More than 4000 years ago, the manifestation of disease was treated with a sort of witch doctor or shaman “ “ as we say in Creole, which to heal, dressed in furs, was painted in a special way, danced and spit out sounds . As we had in class the teacher Ugo Ulive, these are the first glimpses of the stage performance. And that persist even today in tribal societies of Africa and the Americas. That is, the cure was, and is today-a form of medicine and was that the healer acting “ “ it was not the same and dressed as usual.
The ancient Greeks also saw the healing power and its effects in patients who came to see a play. It is well known that the tragedy produced a cathartic effect called “ “ it was a state of emotional equilibrium was reached after having suffered or cried during the performance. This conduct is especially produced “ and not “ tragedy and comedy, because the first was egregious, solemn and moralistic while the comedy was unusual, bizarre and immoral.
The passage of time, with medication, have joined in different views of the effect produced on stage in his assistants, so that even denied women their participation as actors by having them sort of conditions conducive to Veined carnal weakness, excessive daydreaming and intellectual weakness. As actresses could not cure but ironically, if you trusted them as priests that soothes the soul from the smallest to the great lords.
When the theater became more specific and did not need intermediaries, but as such it was in potions, medicine, disclosure and provocation, and diversified its many significant and thus its impact was more direct. In fact it was so effective that the Romans gave it to the populace as a decadent game animals and people sacrificed everything in the middle of the most overwhelming glitz and sparing no expense for its staging.
The theater, not on his plane as he won circus then, but in his role as talkative voice of new thoughts came to undermine more than a crown and more than one company. This is the case of Aristophanes, who in his plays became so strong that political truths that often was arrested. A Shakespeare Cronwel ministers, they tried to limit the Puritanism and Protestantism to which the bard responded with the best of the creations to produce works whose theme is developed in other countries but rather reflected the English society with its problems socio-political: The Merchant of Venice, the problems of succession as in Hamlet, Ricardo and Enrique, the problem of power as in Macbeth, King Lear, Titus Andronicus and metaphysical fears as in The Tempest. And what about unrequited love and persuaded to die like Romeo and Juliet. Between these two periods: the age and the Elizabethan theater, was forged in the Middle Ages, doomed to try Christian religion, but also gave birth to the couple’s farces and themes as minstrel to escape a threatening and punishing verb always representing God and conscience of human beings.
Impact of theater in mind and body. The social impact of the theater as a means of communication. The theater impact because not only uses the verb but powerful images (noise, odor, plastic, etc.) Also reported, making it so versatile. This communication may cause significant effects. Recall that in Greek theater, the use of gadgets such as eccyclema or mechano-kind car with wheels and crane, had the mission of making characters appear or perform tricks that “ the “ moved theatest or spectator. It was primarily a theater to be seen despite being charged with a grand word. Greek and Roman
know the effect that these representations were politically and socially. The church in the Middle Ages used the auto-sacramental, miracles, etc., To persuade his parishioners not to sin as well as being the only one that explained the origin of human beings. It was a dark time, a mysterious and evocative drama. The Renaissance, was recreated in the expressive forms old and modernized using an introspective and desperate voice, the anguish of a living being very much in its internal jurisdictions felt abandoned by God, so it was a very anthropocentric. A theater that reflected anxiety, violence, excesses and alienation.
The Baroque period was an even more existential drama, while it is reloaded by hand, and developed further the commedia dell ‘art, but even more intimate addressed issues such as greed and manipulation that reflected Moliere in Tartuffe. The Romantic period, just as anthropocentric forged early stage managers and a way to put life in the tables is still relevant because it laid the foundations of a dialectic of leadership and how to represent the historically and socially people. Sure, it was and is a window that exposes the self, thinking and feeling people.
We have to see, then, that according to this maxim the theater has not changed but apart from the nineteenth century, it seems to become more existentialist. The advent of this century meant opening the windows with Norwegian Doll’s House Henrik Ibsen, who left for granted that society definitely boasted perfect indoors had major weaknesses and illnesses. The woman then explained his play and began to let her cry to hear that still remains. It’s when the passage of time appear Piscator, Brecht and his disciple, who definitely will use the theater as a means not only communication, but as pressure, reflection and encouragement to change a social-political vision merely bourgeois. Here is where the public will definitely not be the same.
When it is said that “ the theater is one of the most effective communication vehicles that have been … “ (Stambaugh and Gonzalez). We are not afraid to stress that nothing has been advocated vehicle but has a lot of cosmetic changes has shown since his philosophy scenarios each time.
-As there are directors, aware of this effect triggered the theater and performing arts play in their proposals to remove the mental structure that brings the audience. Why many principals have faced the strongest criticism and denials great, but certainly not indifference.
Now, the reaction may face strong paradigms linked to common thought and is naturally resistant to change. To conclude, we will quote his sentence “ Klapper … mass communication reinforces the attitudes, tastes and existing biases and behavioral tendencies of the members of his audience, including trends toward change “. No more words, especially considering that the individuals in the company feel accompanied and supported, so are subject to censorship and permissiveness that provision, but may eventually make that dreaded change, if not mass, at least those living certainly, because as Tennessee Williams’ Sweet Bird of Youth “ “: “ change, change because it “ does not change dies, words of Princess Alexandra del Lago a Chance Wayne, rundown hero nothing more and nothing less than love “ “.
As for the propaganda from the ancient Romans who sent roses to spray water on passersby to attend a performance or as in the case of the Greeks who called Areopagus court paid the salary of the judges for their theatest attend a conference or from the prohibitions of the Puritans who burned the Elizabethan theater to the censures and impressive sales of plays today, the theater will always impact a greater or lesser degree and be a victim or favored by such propaganda “ ` `.
No comments:
Post a Comment