No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Ecriture Dramatique and Ecriture Scénique: Two Playwrights' Points of View (Ionesco and Arrabal)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 January 2009
Extract
The producer is a relatively recent and adventitious figure in the dramatic art. Whereas for centuries the theatre contrived to exist with a tripartite structure (author-actor-audience) in which the true intermediary between the author and the public was the performer, a new intermediary now exists in the shape of the producer, whose functions are partly organizational and partly creative. Barely a century has elapsed since Antoine, the first French producer in the modern sense, embarked almost single-handed on his mission to restore the French stage to its former integrity. During this time the producer's growing prestige and influence have made his role ever more central to the art of the theatre, so much so that there are times when mise en scène appears to have supplanted the dramatic writing it was engendered to serve. This is certainly one of the more controversial developments in the modern theatre, and a challenging one for writers, critics and public alike. My intention here is to consider the playwright's position in relation to this challenge, by showing how two leading modern writers, Ionesco and Arrabal, have responded in sharply differing ways to the changing climate of mise en scène in France. First, however, it will be useful to summarize how, and how far, the delicate balance between the playwright's authority and the producer's functions has evolved in recent years.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © International Federation for Theatre Research 1981
References
Notes
1. Jouvet, , ‘Le Métier de Directeur de Théâtre’ (conférence prononcée aux Annales le hr juillet 1936), in: Réflexions du comédien (1941), pp. 208, 209, 211.Google Scholar
2. ibid., p. 214.
3. ‘Le candle d'amour, Le Théâtre 1968–1 (Paris, 1968), pp. 63–4.
4. Quoted by Zand, N. in ‘Le besoin de vivre’, Le Théâtre 1968–1971, p. 57.Google Scholar
5. ‘Déshumaniser’, Le Théâtre 1968–1, p. 73.
6. ‘Nos fêtes’, Le Théâtre 1968–1971, p. 82.
7. Poirot-Delpech, B., ‘Le cimetière des voitures d'Arrabal’, Le Monde, 21.12.67.Google Scholar
8. Vigneron, J., ‘Le cimetière des voitures d'Arrabal’, La Croix, 28.12.67.Google Scholar
9. J. Lemarchand, ‘Aux Nuits de Bourgogne’, Figaro Littéraire, 23.6.66.
10. Ionesco, , Notes et contre-Notes (Paris, 1962), p. 179.Google Scholar
11. ibid., p. XXX.
12. ibid.
13. ibid., p. 206.
14. ibid., p. 188 (my emphasis).
15. ibid., pp. 165–7.
16. Bonnefoy, C., Entretiens avec Eugène Ionesco (Paris, 1966), pp. 112–13.Google Scholar
17. Notes et contre-Notes, p. 185.
18. ibid., p. 186.
19. Entretiens avec Eugène Ionesco, p. 105.
20. ibid., p. 108.
21. Notes et contre-Notes, p. 184.
22. Entretiens avec Eugène Ionesco, pp. 109–10.
23. Notes et contre-Notes, p. 166.
24. Interview with O. Asian (radio broadcast), ORTF, 21.6.66.
25. Schifres, A., Entretiens avec Arrabal (Paris, 1969), pp. 84–5.Google Scholar
26. ‘Le Théâtre comme cérémonie “panique”’, Théâtre V (Paris, 1967), p. 9.
27. Quoted by Trilling, O. in ‘The Defiant Ones’, The Guardian, 2.2.71.Google Scholar
28. Entretiens avec Arrabal, p. 99
29. ibid., p. 85.
30. ibid., p. 96.
31. ibid., p. 85.
32. ibid., p. 77.
33. ibid., p. 78.
34. Arrabal, , ‘Le Nouveau (Nouveau) Théâtre’, Modern Drama, vol. 20 (1977), p. 217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar