Alter, J From Text To Performance

Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics
From Text to Performance: Semiotics of Theatrality Author(s): Jean Alter Source: Poetics Today, Vol. 2, No. 3, Drama, Theater, Performance: A Semiotic Perspective (Spring, 1981), pp. 113-139 Published by: Duke University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1772468 . Accessed: 24/05/2013 23:11
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Duke University Press and Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Poetics Today.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 171.67.34.69 on Fri, 24 May 2013 23:11:26 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

Semiotics of Theatrality* JEAN ALTER
Literature, Pennsylvania Comparative
Summary
oftheatrality, formalization a semiotic Thisessay i.e.,those by processes presents it As a descriptive artistic form. as a unique which theater canbe defined system, some ofitsworking On the other will is evident. often restate what hand, concepts notationsunusual,if not and the symbolic may appear controversial, ofclarity butat theexpense others couldbe substituted, unorthodox. No doubt ruled ofterminology, In matters andeconomy. adequacy byconventions, always or one mayregret, shouldbe thestandard. between toolsand results Finally, Ina theatrical drawn from ofconcrete absence experience. to,the examples object and it couldonlybe systematic; theuse of suchillustrations theoretical essay, of the text.It seemedsaferto forsake all would have doubledthe length their to supply on readers a few, and to rely thanprivilege illustrations rather own.
1. "THEATRALITY" : TEXT AND STAGE identifies the as a total artistic A 1.1. semioticapproach to theater experience two media of to its of of two pragmatic presence categories signs,corresponding it and As text a a of network verbal text, presents performance. expression: signs and involve whichusuallyappear in the formof playsmade of written words,1
* The neologism willbe used hereinsteadof themorenormalterm for "theatrality" "theatricality" several reasons. The veryconcept it identifies is relatively new and not uniformly defined,and within its linguistic and conceptualconfusion, connotations "theatricality" alreadyhas undesirable which"theatrality" is shorter, and easier to may help to avoid. In addition,"theatrality" simpler, handle orally. It has been inspiredby the French"thd6tralit6" which,in moderncriticalpractice, antedates"theatricality," and has gained widespreadacceptance.However,any readernot swayed invited to replace"theatrality" at his will. by thesereasonsis hereby by "theatricality" form in Western buta textmaybe, and often has been,preserved culture, I This is itsmostfrequent the memorization of oral versions,or through mechanicalmeans. through O Poetics Today,Vol. 2:3 (1981),113-139.
114
JEAN ALTER
butalso literary and cultural it codes.As a performance, linguistic, primarily inaddition ofmany ofsigns towords, offers a network include which, types body sets,lights, colors,props,intonations, costumes, etc., each type language, to a discrete semiotic with a discrete code,but all of them system belonging common theatrical and summarized here as staging conveniently signs2, involving ina performance verbal codes.Although, cultural operate strictly signs speaking, willbe separated forpurposes of clarity, and staging here as staging signs, they as all those a staged willbe understood that playaddsto thetext. signs to thetext and of theater leadsto theassimilation The literary only, fallacy The of a particular of literature. to the status in its reduction results genre to of theater leadsto theassimilation popular, fallacy, increasingly performing of a particular to thestatus in itsreduction and results theperformance only, havehad no previous sometheatrical performances genre of show.Obviously to have one; and somewritten playshave not been text,norwereintended are Butthese marginal to be performed. intended norwere cases,to performed, and needs both text performance, foras such.Totaltheater be accounted i.e., a concrete and a be an it which cannot form without art, permanent relatively it.3 which embodies manifestation all performing arts- music, for obtains this mime, 1.2. Whereas ballet, duality has thetext that liesinthehistorical oftheater autonomy - theuniqueness etc.4 read or sheets read music Few people notations; achieved. many choreography the hasinstitutionalized education andmodern seethem, than infact more plays, is not This circumstance from oftexts purely independently performances. study thefact intheater occurs which a semiotic from It stems fortuitous. only: process and intheperformance, as verbal inthetext arerepeated that verbal signs signs from their code their thattheyretain changes materiality linguistic although the(erroneous) reflects ofthetext Theautonomy to sounded signifiers.5 graphic
as assumesthatthe conceptof staging This generalization signs,or "objects,"is not problematic it. such, althoughmuch of the ongoing researchon theatricalsemioticsstill aims at clarifying However,thefunctionof thesesignsis not questioned,and thisessay is not concernedwiththeir nature. more controversial in any art, since even marbleerodes,and since, duringtheir is no permanence 3 No doubt there withchangesin codes. But all is materiallife,all signschange as theirsignifieds changetogether thatany work and any conceptof art mustdiscountsuch absolute positions,postulating relative, of its moment thevery as clearly to be perceived whichhas a sufficient surviving degreeof durability thatqualityof perand indeedas beingspecifically producedto last,possessesin effect production, forart. manencenecessary betweensome of thesearts and theateris verythin,and has been occasionally 4 The borderline and practice.Are towardopera), in theory erased (cf. Wagner'sconceptof total theater, tending itseemsmore or mime?Methodologically however, Wordstheater Acts Without Beckett's speaking, thanwithlarger ones, and then withthemostspecific conceptspossiblerather advantageousto start to interexcludedfromtheseconcepts,showingthattheytestify deal withmarginalcases initially in the conceptof each pure form.Theater,in and not to less precision action betweenpure forms thatmostrestricted sense,musthave actorswho speak, even whenpuppetsreplacehumanbeings. productswhichmay tend more or less to theateror music or ballet; and Acts Operas are hybrid case of theater an extreme WithoutWordsrepresent by mime. corrupted code withitstraditheliterary theirnon-linguistic thattheyalso shift codes, exchanging 5 It is true
2
115
thatthereferents6 of theverbalsignsare belief nurtured fallacy, by theliterary from textto stage,and hencethatreading notmodified maybe bythistransition and seeing.By thesame argument, butreversed underthe forhearing substituted forthetext, of theperforming maybe substituted fallacy, performance pressure and henceequivalent to all other to thestatusof a pre-text, reduced staging signs, arts.The very thanin theotherperforming whichassumean autonomy greater itstwo manifestations, as a is thusinternally notionof theater polarizedbetween articulation. of a unique aspectof their result this tension betweenthe text and the performance, 1.3. More specifically, defines theater whatmostclearly as different fromotherarts,can be expressing of verbaland staging interaction as the productof a necessary identified signs, the former.It underliesthe phoenix-like the latterpartlytransform whereby transformation through qualityof theater:the constantprocessof re-creation The conceptof "theatrality," old textsin new performances. whichrevives i.e., to theater, willthusbe understood hereas thenature ofthat thatwhichis specific No doubt in any specificinstancethis process is process,or its potentiality. and/or factors: or evento a largedegree dictated, byhistorical literary influenced, and technical theatrical considerations, social,economic, tradition, psychological in can be assessed,or evenexpressed, etc. Most of theseelements determinants, on theprocessof semiotic codes,articulated words,and, bythemeansof cultural
but thisalso obtains,ceteris tions forthe theatrical code withits tradition, paribus, forthe other initialcode has no social acceptancecomparableto thatof theliterary arts,thoughtheir performing code of theater. theessay,is understood as thatto whicha discrete hereand throughout 6 The word"referent," sign, or a networkof signs, refers the readerand/or the spectatorof a play. Three clarifications are First:The referent neededto avoid confusionor misunderstanding. maybe an object, or a person, of all of them.It maybe therefore or a feeling, or an idea, or an action,or a combination moreor less concrete or abstract, therangebetween, simpleor complex,covering say, a chairand thephilocannotbe undifferentiated sophical messageof a play. However,thereferent by itsdefinition (as a it is alwaysparticular, and locatedoutsidethesignin a real or imaginary world. signified); specific, as a referent of a sign,is notunderstood as Thus, to takean extreme case, thenotionof "freedom," thegeneralconceptof freedom, butas thatconceptbelievedin, and applicableto, thespecific world to by the play. Second: Obviouslyno complexnetworks referred of signs,nor discrete signs,have whichwaitto be discovered inherent referents Referential involves bythereader/spectator. activity thecode used in theproduction of thesign,and thecode used in theperception of thesign;and they his own referent, determines may coincide or diverge.In the finalanalysis,the reader/spectator when it reachesa certain and, ideally,that referent may each timebe different (and is different But such a relativistic degree of complexity). position,valid for all arts as well as for theater, discussionof any work of art. Thus here,as in any studyof literature, excludesany meaningful a certainconsensusexists,among music, it is positedthat,despiteinevitable variations, painting, in theexchangeof critical of thesignswithwhichthey deal. ideas, as to thereferents people involved Third: Such a concept of "referent" correspondsto a large extentto the hackneyedconcept of and maybe replacedby it at thecost of clarity or precision, and a shift from a semiotic "meaning," or at best philosophicalapproach. On the otherhand, within the approach to an impressionistic a referent is not identicalwiththe signified, as it alwaysrepresents inasmuch semioticperspective, in a real or imaginary situated outsideworld.Surprisingly something specific enough,at no pointin this essay was it necessaryor useful to utilizethe concept of the signified, with one exception in footnote mentioned 8.
116
JEANALTER
it is essential to formalize thelatter, First,however, i.e., to set up a theatrality. of semiotic whichtakeplace whena textbecomesa operations descriptive system performance. 2. TOTAL TEXT AND STAGED TEXT in threeor fourways 2.1. The words"textof a play" are generally understood in a polemicalconfusion. In theater-as-communication embattled and/or studies, in thespirit text is of theperforming the made to include both verbal and fallacy, no relevance But a has here. even which,however, signs, logicalpractice staging The mostusual reducedto verbalsignsonly,"thetext"needs further precision. the of the even literary impact fallacy among the meaning,indeed, betrays still refer to the of theater. text of the as to a practitioners Many play specialtype It has its own constraints, a particular of literature, to be read as literature. stress on dialogues,and resulting mixture of "show"and "tell,"an overwhelming all signsplayan equal role, which are identified. Nonetheless, diversely properties of or directions whether parts speeches staging (didascalia), and, just as in a interact and their combine to determine a referent whichis narrative, signifieds When read as located outside the text, in a historicalor imaginary reality. to RichardIII, and Waiting Godot to RichardIII refers literature, for imagined is involved.Viewed in that Vladimirand Estragon. No theatrical experience thetextof a play willbe called herethe literary text(TL). manner, notation text 2.2. The same written i.e., as a graphic maybe also readas theater, In such case, admittedly to thatperformance. of a performance, referring quite to determine a referent which all signsinteract and combine rarein itspureform, When read as is located on some future stage,conceivedas real or imaginary. to an actor(identified RichardIII, and or not) playing RichardIII refers theater, or not). Vladimir and Estragon on some stage(identified Godot to actorsplaying to be performed, and hencethat Such a reading assumesthattheplaywas written theatrical an imaginary itshouldbe approached as a virtual performance, yielding The howeverlimitedby the reader'sgiftor habit of visualization. experience, of signsof a play thusvisionedwillbe called the totaltext(TT). On the totality thetotaltextis obviously identical to theliterary levelof signifiers, but,on text, thetwo In practice, thelevelof referents, are obviously different. however, they each other. do tendto corrupt readings of a play,mostrelevant of thetext 2.3. The third here,willbe calledthe meaning the of verbal and defined as text totality signswhichappear as such staged (T), thestagedtextis often bothin thetextand in theperformance. By convention, in can neverbe this to the total to be identical text; fact, identity postulated results realizedalthoughit can be approachedin some cases. The discrepancy in the inherent one total and between of alterations from three texts, staged types of the nature on two and and therefore theatrical inevitable, contingent process of the performance. the textand the circumstances between two 2.3.1. Inevitable alterations:They originatein the distinction in the virtual of signsin the total textdependingon theirfunction categories is theactual dialogue,be it reducedto one On theone hand, there performance.
117
to many,i.e., thetotality of written wordswhichare sounded voice or increased are thestagedirections takenlato on theimagined hand,there stage;on theother of written wordswhichrefer to visualor soundeffects, sensu,i.e., thetotality or non-verbalized in shortto elements of the emotions,or authorialcomments, virtual from verbalcodes to staging whichdemanda transposition performance codes. A totaltextalwaysincludes some dialogue,lesttheater changeintomime, and somestagedirections buttheproportions (be they onlynamesof characters), mayvary.In otherterms: (1) TT # Td + Ts, with Td = 0 andTs = 0 where ofdialogue andTs = totality ofstage direction signs. signs, Td = totality In a concrete as suchin however, performance, onlythedialoguesignsremain the staged text,since only theypreserve theirverbal form.Not that all stage directions a trace. Some do, because theyexpressauthorial disappearwithout comments whichcannotbe conveyed by themeansof staging signs - social or thatan uttered statement is a lie, etc. But observations, philosophical warnings mostcan be transposed intoone or severalstaging and sometimes are. systems, Yet, as oftentheyare not. And evenwhentheyare, it is not as an integral and withthesame privileged statusas thedialogue, partof thestagedtext, necessary butas one of themanyoptionsin thechoiceof thestaging the signs,made after selectionof the stagedtext. This defacto removal of thestagedirections from thestagedtext is no doubta historical fromthepraxis,and can be surveyed as such.7 phenomenon emerging But theoretical considerations may help to explainits acceptance.In the first to the dialogue, stage directionsbeyond a bare place, in contradistinction minimum are not necessary for the transition fromtextto performance; they referto categoriesof stagingsigns that a performance must use specifically is thus redundant if not in specifics, anyway;theircontribution by function, whichare a matter of choice. In the second place, in the production of total whenold playsare stagedanew,a clearseparation of functions theater, especially obtainsbetween the"author"- one or morepersonsinvolved in writing thetext - one or morepersonsinvolvedin as a permanent and the "director" element, a concrete Even though these twofunctions staging performance. maybe fulfilled a at the first of a by singleperson performance play,or distributed amongmany even audience),the verysurvival of theater in its actors,technicians, (including dual formdependson the theoretical of the two A functions. text autonomy would discourage supplied with compulsoryand exhaustivestage directions creative revivals on the stage, downgrade the functionof the "director." thefreeassertion of thatfunction a downgrading of therole Conversely, requires of staging directions, leadingto a totalnegation.Finally,by dintof the formal constraints of written aroundthedialogue,stagedirections are plays,structured
of earlyperformances in Greek theater 7 It is possible, for example, that the ritualconnotation caused the rigidity of prescribed whichdid not need to be specified in thetext,and stagedirections thatthe gradualerosionof whathad become an emptytradition createda vacuum whichmodern authorshurried to fillout.
118
JEANALTER
and of a straight than similarelements or spotty, more fragmented, narrative, withmanyotherstaging signsthatthetextdoes alwaysrequireto be integrated thepolicyof mustadd. Undersuch conditions, but thatthedirector not specify musthave naturally fromscratch prevailed. starting the dialogue, and are alterations:They affectspecifically 2.3.2. Contingent translated concerns A first stagedtexts category imposedby outsideconditions. and cultural froma total textin a different linguistic language,withdifferent a dialogue whichdiffers offers codes. The Englishversionof a Greektragedy inextreme morethanbya simple text theoriginal from cases, changein signifiers; of contingent The second category than translated. it mustbe adapted rather of to an acceptedpractice It corresponds interest. is of a moregeneral alterations of limitations of in text because the total and/orchanging space, dialogue cutting version theintegral Few playspresent means,or humanresources. time,technical of theater of the written postulatethatthesecuts or dialogue. The conventions marked shouldbe clearly if are must be or, they not,they inconsequential changes identical not and the total from is which text to a as leading text, adapted staged to it. But at whatpointdoes adaptationbegin?And how to insurethatcuts or changes would not be made for ideological ratherthan technicalreasons? or both of thetwo of the totaltext,foreither alterations contingent Assuredly, and still do. in variations indeed have texts, staged yielded great causes, of theatrical the formalization Conventionsto the contrary notwithstanding, follows: noted as this be that processesrequires
xO 0 withx (2) T = TT - (Ts + xtd),or T = Td - xtd, andx = variable. inthetotal of dialogue where text, td = a unit is thedialogueof to as text, referred thestagedtext,hereafter In otherterms, of It is thetransformation thetotaltext,minuschangesallowedby conventions. whichlies at the heartof the that textas it becomes part of the performance theatrical processto be formalized.
3. TEXT TO STAGE: SHIFTINGREFERENTS as a process identified is commonly to performance text from 3.1. The transition thetext tainted thatperspective, Within fallacy, of interpretation. by theliterary which are of signs ambiguousand is viewedas a network always sufficiently of parallel number an indefinite to admit of work art, complex, as in any one stress then would of means the The performance, referents. signs, staging by an As text. the activity, these interpretative or severalof i.e., interpret referents, amenableto formal and hardly sucha processwouldbe elusive, subjective, highly thatthereferents of the postulates veryconcept interpretation analysis.Besides, in nature,and interchangeable, are identical of thetextand of theperformance and thesame typeof events, in thesame typeof locus, involving i.e., occurring whenthe is illusory animatedby the same typeof actants.But such an identity thanliterature. rather as theater identified textis properly a playas ifitwerea specialcase of habitof reading Indeed,onlytheingrained of text forthereferents of a commonnature can accountfortheillusion narrative
119
and performance. RichardIII, approached as a literary rather thantheatrical text, does referto outside events:the real or imaginary storyof an English king, located in the time and place of his historicalreign. Similarly, the actual of RichardIII refers to thesametypeof story, in thesameplace and performance and the two RichardsIII, maydiffer time.The two stories, in kind,but not in nature:thedirector thesame historical character as theauthor, and his interprets may be more or less closelyinspired by theauthor's;thetwo are interpretation Of course, a chronicle, a painting, a film,may have as well interchangeable. sucha performance and hencesuchan interpretation, sincein each case inspired theprocessmovesdirectly from a network of signsto an outsidereferent. When the textis read as theater, a different however, processtakes place since,as a networkof signs, it refersspecifically to anothernetwork of signs,i.e., the and notto outsideevents. Richard to be staged, III was written performance, i.e., thecrucialtheatrical to trigger moment whenverbaland staging signscoalesceto form a new(iconic)sign;butRichardIII is staged, as a network of signs, to evoke an outsideevent.The two referents have a different locus (theater, England), different actants(actor, king),different in nature, and times;theyare different cannotbe interchanged. The transition between one referent to theother, hence between textand performance, a transformational rather thaninterprerequires tativeprocess.8 3.2. This transformational affects theverbalsignsof thetextat thetime activity a double shiftin when, enrichedwith stagingsigns, they undergotogether thusoccur,bothinvolving thesame signs.The resulting difference in operations
from function: to referent, andfrom referent to newsigns. Tworeferential signs thenature of thereferents cannot reflect therefore in thesigns anydifference
of staging thereferential indications signs,but theseare not supposedto modify of the verbal signs, but only supplement themwhen necessary.The process and change, but as it were by default;in an ideal generatessome interaction
first aimsat ensuring thematerialization for thereferent ofthe operation simply verbal andverbal retain a commanding role.Because ofthenature of signs, signs their must be matched with a number referent, i.e.,a concrete performance, they
it mustlie in variouswaysin whichthey interact and combine.And, themselves; thetwo operations takeplace simultaneously thestaging indeed,although during and followdifferent The process,theyare ruledby different concerns practices.
it can be expressed as a straight addition of twofunctions: situation,

(3)
R(T) = P = F(T) + F(S) where R = referent, P = performance, F = function, andS = totality of = as ofverbal staging signs text, totality (T, staged signs). The second operation,transforming the performance into an iconic sign to outsideevents, is moreteleological in naturesincethecommanding referring
The word "transformation" is understoodhere as the process whereby a sign is attributed a different referent thantheone therelevant code initially provided.In mostcases thatinitialreferent to thesignified in thelinguistic defined corresponds thelocationin code, butmade specific through the outsidereal or imaginary world.
8
120
JEANALTER
factorbecomesthe referent to be obtained.This referent may be inspired by a of thetext, butitmaybe conceived in a different literary reading wayfora variety of reasons. Stagingsigns no longerserveto supplement verbal signs without their referential are often used to change but,on thecontrary, potential affecting in orderto generate a new referent, whatever it may be. thatpotential together The entireprocess furthers interaction and transformation and, in an ideal function where mustbe expressed as a single mathematical each element situation, all others: can modify (4) R(P) = E = F(T,S) E = outside realor imaginary. where events,
referents with not onlyaim at establishing two different 3.3 The two operations in The of first one coexist a state tension. also twodifferent ideally they practices; their of staging impact, signsas low as possible,and minimizes keepsthenumber of the verbal signs; in contrast,the second so as to preservethe integrity the the stagingsigns and undermining maximizesthat impact by multiplying the same out concurrently, are carried verbalsigns.Yet thetwo operations using account of theplay.Together at each articulation and hencecoinciding they signs, The into a the text is transformed forthe crucialactivity performance. whereby verbal and of both in a network two the combines outcome final single processes aims and two balance between this delicate but practices adversary signs, staging between The tension tillthevery end of thestaging remains activity. problematic for the limits the and in thus referents the two time, defines, space proper of need text and the for between creativefreedom, director's respect polarized but two the to a dual fallacies, corresponding temptation, personalexpression: the two previous takes place. Consolidating alwaysresolvedanew whentheater at thestaging tension thisinternal phase,and indeedat alwayspresent formulas, as: will be of the verycore theatrality, expressed R[F(T) + F(S)] = F(T,S) takesplace whenadditiongenerthetransformational In otherterms, activity of A futher coincide. as two referential ates interaction understanding processes two of the discussion a thatactivity operations. requires separate (5) 4. REFERENCEOF THE TEXT: VIRTUALAND ACTUAL PERFORMANCES as R(T) = P = F(T) + F(S), accountsfor 4.1. The first operation,formalized of signs,is matched thestagedtext,viewedas a network by theprocesswhereby it is not an of thattext.In theatrical its referent, practice, i.e., theperformance instantaneous phases whichgenerate operation,but the productof two distinct activities.During the firstphase, beforethe actual referential two different a itis completed), thestaging during processbutbefore begins(or, rarely, staging is it or intermittently, textmust be read (studied); at that time,continuously in themindof thereader/director. virtual one or several attributed performances thevirtual towarditsfinalform, progresses Duringthesecondphase, as staging actual eventual the are erased and both lead performance. to, by, performances shows no visible traces of any virtual No doubt the actual performance
121
and there is no reasonto seekthem.9 On theother hand,at leastone performance, virtualperformance does take place as an autonomouspart of the theatrical informs thenature of transformations processand, as it appearsand disappears, and between text and contrastwith the actual stage, both by similarity performance. 4.2. Takingplace at thetimeof reading, and in themindof thedirector (though mediated various the of thestagedtext through techniques), virtual performance offers a complete or any solid format all. In fact,reading and the form, hardly referential do notdirectly accompanying imaginary activity, graspthestagedtext, but ratherthe total text transformed into the staged text duringthe mental No doubt the reader as director mustbe assumedto read theplaynot operation. as literature but as theater, not in an outsidereal or i.e., placingits referents world but on some future no and doubt he may disregard imaginary stage, whatever directions the total text other stage contains, already substituting staging the nature of his mental signs; nevertheless, fluctuating processes,and the of mental tendto maximize theimpactof stage insubstantiality imagesin general, in thetext, directions be itonlybecauseof their relative coherence. As a result, the text constituted that tends to remain close to the staged mentally during phase total text. In otherterms,withrespectto the virtaulperformance, the basic referential formulamay be modifiedas follows: R(T) = P - F(TT) + F(S) = F(Td + Ts) + F(S) sincethereis no absolutedemand foradditionalstaging Furthermore, signs, althoughit may be expectedthat theywill be always suppliedin and by the their number is a variablewhichin extreme cases maytendtoward imagination, zero. And sinceeventhemostinventive director is limited bythemind'sinability to picture all the detailsof a live experience, the staging signshe may add in a virtualperformance will be always fewerthan in the actual performance. A director with little thatphase,mainly to rely imagination maythenchoose,during on thetotaltext,reinforcing the impactof its stagedirections and keeping to a minimum hisown contribution of staging formula becomes: signs.The preceding (7) R(T) = P - F(TT) + F(S), butas S - O, so R(T) - F(TT) (6) Such extreme cases maybe rare,butthey dramatize thenatural trend of virtual to draw close to the referent of the totaltextin its integrity, performances and without additions.And thistendency has in turnpracticaleffects on the actual itsinternal tensions. As a general performance, heightening rule,indeed,thetotal textdoes notstress to clarify in stagedirections, usingthem primarily ambiguities thedialogue.Whena play is read as theater, theseminimal also stagedirections serveas reminders of theproperreference of thetext,i.e., a stageperformance. On the otherhand, whenthe play is read as literature, the same directions are viewedas signsreferring to an outsideworldin thesame manner as thedialogue. are kept to a minimum, Thus, when stage directions theircontribution to a
of L'Age d'Or, substituting printedaccountof the staginghistory forthe 9 Ariane Mnouchkine's textof thatplay, offers a ratherfrustrating at the reconstruction of a similarprocess. attempt
122
JEANALTER
orliterature ofa playas theater also decreases, anddialogue differential reading for of thereferential Thispresents no problem functions. alonebearsthebrunt Evenreduced a total referential to headed themosticonic processes. dialogue, distinct toactors ortoreal(or either text canbe readintwoclearly ways, referring to thestage or to real(or imaginary) plays, places.In many people, imaginary) to notions or unitsof the dialoguemayrefer however, simpleor complex between differences which staged escapethespacialand temporal relationships orphilosophical, events: andreal/imaginary events considerations, psychological of both or cultural conditions on individual social,moral Depending messages. themajor these referents virtual and actualperformances, maybe even assigned andno markers ofthereader, theattention roleina play.When they monopolize between distinction with a theatrical thevery himthat heis dealing remind text, world and he lapsesintoa on thestageand in an outside referents disappears, of a minimal use of stage that theconvergence indicates Praxis literary reading. hasbeentherule andpsychology ofmessages valuation directions anda maximal the But had it beenotherwise, in theatrical thanan exception rather history. in certain wouldstillobtainthat, thana probability) cases, (rather possibility - invirtual wouldmerge, and literary theatrical performances leading readings In text. andtheliterary - to an identity of thetotaltext thereferents between as and the dialogueis conceived are minimal, whenstagedirections short, the for theformula orideological observations messages, stressing psychological becomes: virtual performance
(8) R(T) = P - F(Td + Ts) + F(S), butas S - O andTs - O, so R(T) - R(TL)
ofa Trojan thepart thus thevirtual In thestaging plays performance process, or tends to it Focusofthereading introduce, oftheliterary horse phase, fallacy. ofliterature, as a mere materialization of theater or,at back,theconcept bring which of intoa different ofliterature a transposition happen system signs, most, of theories etc.Evenmodern havebeenfilmic, butcould tobetheatrical pictorial, when andpropagate recommending this fallacy acknowledge directing implicitly to in order thetext a play,thoroughly before thatthedirector, study staging results The of characters. its or delineation itsmeaning, assimilate i.e.,itsmessage referent a mental as R(T) = R(TL), generate hereformalized of sucha study, the on a exert will director, in theactualperformance, perforce pressure which, hischoice to achieve havewanted thegoalhemay at oddswith through possibly to thebasic but contribute cannot tension The of staging help resulting signs. at thecoreof theatrality. tension into insight 4.3. The (construct yieldsstillanother performance of) virtual the on and made between A contrast theatrical psychology messages processes.
whichdirectly one hand, and otherreferents depend on spacial and temporal of verbalunits,or networks some that in effect other the on hand, posits signs, without to theactual performance thevirtual any from units,can be transferred transformation noticeable phase. At thetimeof reading, signsin either bystaging function, their referential signsto fulfill requirenor receivestaging theyneither constant remains presence despitetheinevitable and, on thestage,thatfunction
123
of the staging subverted (cf. below,8). The number signs,unlessit is selectively and impact of suchverbalsignsarevariables, and usually in thevirtual than larger in the actual performance; but it is essentialto formalize theirrole in the theatrical in combination with theparallel(and complementary) function process, of textualsignswhichare transformed. The basic referential formulaforboth virtual and actual performances mustbe thusexpanded: (9) R(T) = P = F(T) + F(S) = F(Tn) + F(Tm,S), where ofverbal notmodified and Tn = totality signs bystaging signs, ofverbal modified bystaging signs signs. Tm = totality In a virtual where thestagedtext tendsto correspond to thetotal performance, text,the following processmaythusbe formalized: butas S - O, so R(T) - F(Tn),and R(T) = P = F(Tn) + F(Tm,S), since R(T) - F(TT), so F(TT) - F(Tn) - R(TL) verbalsignsof the dialogue tend to resist Indeed, in a virtualperformance, transformations in thetext by staging signs(whether provided bystagedirections or suppliedby the imagination), and this non-modified dialogue tends to be viewedas thetotaltext, a referent whichdrawsclose to thereferent of providing the literary on the most In extreme immaterial level. text, cases, such a reading reduces theaterto a coded communication of ideas or emotionsratherthan with a stress on verbal But in any case, within events, the special signifiers. text vs. the elementand the reborn polarity i.e., performance, permanent manifestation of art, the virtualperformance servesas a counterweight to the creative desirewhichrisksto breakthe continuity of a givenwork.Although it without traceintotheactualperformance, thevirtual merges cannot performance thusbe dismissed fromany exactaccountof theatrical processes. 4.4. In a virtualperformance, staging signsmay, in certain cases, tendtoward zero. By contrast,in an actual performance, thereare always a numberof whicha play cannotbe staged.Such signsdo compulsory staging signswithout not need to be specified in the text,and their individual referent mayvary;but a finite number of compulsory theyfall within whichoperateon the categories basis of distinctly coded semioticsystems. Thus theremust be sets (be they reducedto a bare surfacein the open), costumes(be theyreducedto nudity), actorswho talk (even if absentphysically) and/oruse face and body language and colors (evenif maskedor motionless), a light (be theyreducedto darkness), certaintempo, etc., each choice having a referential in terms of the charge withothers.Because they code, and interacting are necessary, corresponding the of thesesignscannotfallbelowa certain threshold totality defined the minimal by of a text,whichmust be materialized in the formof an actual requirements performance. thissecondphase of the staging However,during of other process,a number signsmay be added whichare not compulsory but optional,i.e., not required minimally by the textas conditionof materialization, but chosen freely for a of reasons.Some of theseoptionalsignsmay appear to be compulsory, variety (10)
124
JEANALTER
insofaras theyare specified in the text;however, if they references by discrete seemthusto be dictated foritsmaterialization, are notnecessary bythetext, they and theiruse remainsoptional(cf. below 6.3.). To a largeextent, all optional signs fall within the same categories as compulsorysigns, developing or the latter; but their privilegedarea is that of stage props, supplementing of a textalthough neverrequiredforthe materialization theoretically generally of optionalsignsis an absolute indicated then,thenumber bythetext.In theory, variable, as they may tend toward zero or increaseindefinitely (being only of space, time,technology and humanbody). Practically, checkedby constraints withcompulsory and withverbalsigns,in of course,optionalsignsinteract signs, if not impossible. a way whichmakesany cleardistinction Yet, if quitedifficult of optional signs are definedas all stagingsigns in excess of the threshold willhelpto identify of thatthreshold determination signs,a reductive compulsory as props) to the them.Thus, when optionalsignsare openlyadded (especially compulsorysigns, they are easily perceived as such; when they develop will or differentiation, theirpercefition by redundance compulsory signs,either of the staging signsat the timeof the depend on the minimalencodedreferent to refer to a forest, three trees suffice anymorewill If, forexample, performance. optionalsigns. represent betweencompulsoryand optional signs is essentialfor a This distinction of the staging processbecause it enablesone to separatea constant description an important to formalize value froma variablevalue, and thusbetter aspectof of the choices Indeed, all otherthingsbeing equal, i.e., regardless theatrality. of optional of signs,any increasein thenumber actuallymade in each category fromthevirtual removethe actual performance performance, signswill farther formulamay be The basic referential referent. and hence fromthe literary expandedas follows: R(T) = P = F(T) + F(S) = F(Tn) + F[Tm,(Sc+ So)], of andSo = totality of compulsory where staging signs, Sc = totality signs. staging optional and optionalsignsmay bothcompulsory In thecase of a virtual performance, of the and oftendo tendtowardzero (Sc - O and So - O), so thatthereferent referent texttendstowardtheliterary (10). In ( F(Tn) - R(TL) ), as in formula the case of an actual performance, however,even when optional signs are constant at their threshold minimized (Sc > signsremain (So - O), compulsory referent: the from different is of thetext always literary 0), and thereferent (11) R(T) = P = F(Tn) + F(Tm,Sc) * F(Tn) -- R(TL), when So - O as is usuallythe case in actual Finally,when optional signs are multiplied, in mind,the resulting referent has a director the where personal performances moves farther away fromthe of the text,i.e., the performance referent itself, the distance by the combinationof verbal signs referent, increasing literary (11): modified by optionalsigns( F(Tm, So) ), as in the fullformula (12) (13) R(T) = P = F(Tn) + F[Tm,(Sc+ So)] * F(Tn)- R(TL), when So - a
125
In otherterms, as So/, so R(T) * R(TL)/, whereascompulsory signsplay thesame partof an irreducible core as thenon-modified verbalsignsplayin the text. 5. REFERENTOF TEXT VS. REFERENTOF PERFORMANCE of thereferential 5.1. A fully a text whereby expandedformalization operation becomes performance contains two variables which directly depend on the decisionof the director: (14) R(Td - xtd)= P = F(Tn) + F[Tm,(Sc+ ySo)], where x andy = variables which toward zero. maytend
These variablesare not independent, as theyinfluence each otherand alter relationsamong the otherelements. The determination of the variablestakes thedirector is facedwith a constant, place in twosteps.Initially, Td, i.e., thetotal thefirst variablein defining themagnitude of dialoguein thetext.He introduces of discrete verbalsignssubtracted from thedialogueinorder xtd,i.e., thetotality to yieldthestagedtext.This mayappearas a minor of thetheatrical stepin terms itprecedes thetransformational thetext-toprocesssincein theory activity during withthat performance operation.In fact,of course,it oftenoccursconcurrently and sometimes for technical, activity, up till its completion.Besides, whether or ideologicalreasons,and frequently for all threetogether with commercial, as a bonus,itplaysa capitalrole,leading considerations to alterations of personal thetextall themoresignificant because they are concealed.Sociologyof theater must pay special attention to this firststep. For the purpose of a semiotic describedas only affecting the formalization, however,it will be sufficiently of stagedverbalsigns,both modified and not modified. Thus: totality - (Tn + Tm) / , when x /. Xtd in thesecondstepof choicemaking involved are morecomplex.At Operations thatpoint,thestagedtextbecomesa constant, but,as thestaging processbegins, therelationship between and notmodified verbalsigns, Tn and Tm, themodified mustbe determined. theirnumbers are inversely so By definition, proportional that (15) Tn / - Tm /, andviceversa. On theother of Tm necessarily relates to thethreshold hand,themagnitude of compulsory stagingsignsSc whichautomatically modifya certainnumberof verbalsigns,so that (16) Tn / - Tm / - Sc /, andviceversa. in some Finally,any increasein the numberof optionalsignsSo mustresult increasein thenumber of verbalsignsmodified by staging signs,so that (17) (18) So / - Tm /, andviceversa. The total paradigmof interrelations betweenthe varioussignsmay thenbe as follows: expressed
126 (19)
JEANALTER
versa. So / - Tm / - Scs / - Tn /, andvice on the director's choice is the Withinthisparadigm,the variabledepending of of a the the feedback effect, any magnitude optionalsigns.Through operation all theelements of the result whichaffects decisionin thatarea has a cumulative it close, or drawingit away fromthe literary eitherbringing performance, in thetheatrical consists function referent. Sincethedirector's processspecifically in motion to set it he be be that in producing tempted staging signs, may expected On the other the of the text. that reduces role thecumulative hand,by operation he also maybe assumedto textas thebasis forhis activity, choosinga particular elementof his art. The two the value of that text as the permanent affirm The dynamicsof staging a tension. are contradictory, commitments creating a of theprocess, solved the be at that this tension through only completion require seriesof successivechoices. These choices, however,are not totallyfree.The directornecessarily operatesin a historicalsituation,deals with specificand determined. whichare culturally within certain works different texts, parameters which must be examined. But the most All these factorsexert constraints of hischoiceliesinthefundamental which affects circumstance immediate duality the of the referent decision in that the fact theperformance, concerning i.e., any sincethesame signs of theperformance, texthas a direct impacton thereferent are used in both processes. of which twosimultaneous 5.2. The staging indeed,involves operations, process, seeks to The second discussed. has been one first the organize operation only in orderto obtain,through theavailablesignsof theperformance and/ormodify are utilized thesame elements some outsidereferent. their Although interaction, follows different interaction their in thetwooperations, (cf. above 3.2.) principles is to thefirst, in contradistinction aims. The secondoperation, and has different of his of the intentions referential the i.e., director, concept guidedby primarily and not onlyof thetext,shouldbe. of theentire whatthereferent performance, of his work,but In thatsense,he does not look backwardto theverbalpre-text And yet,each additionof of thecompleted to theimplications forward staging. of theverbalsigns,does affect an optionalstaging sign,and/ortransformation be checked and musttherefore of thetext, viewedas thereferent theperformance More to the point: each decisionmade duringthe first by that consideration. operation withinthe paradigm of possible choices does in turn affectthe and mustbe checked of signs,and henceitsreferent, as a network performance this formula the unified of (5) illustrates against the latter. An expansion referents: the two and two the between operations, interdependence = R tF(Tn)+ F[Tm(Sc+ So)]l F(Tn,Tm,Sc, So) of thetextat Any increasein the optionalsignsaimingat thematerialization to contribute its mustthusalso fit function referent itsliterary from somedistance own director's The the of of the referent to the constitution performance. text. a materialize to freedom his limits desire referential on the specific will vary,of course, depending limitation 5.3. This particular He may be in turn to the performance. attributes that the director referent (20)
FROMTEXTTO PERFORMANCE
127
be good, willalso encourage belief in "eternal" humanvaluesand in a "universal" of art.It willdowngrade nature theneedfor,and influence of,change;and hence would tend to discourageradical transformations of the textof a play, since in thatperspective theater thestatusquo rather oughtto preserve thanupsetit. It wouldextollthecontribution of theauthor, who expresses truths to be permanent
of factors which are mediated determined hispsyche: through by a number cultural unconscious theatrical motivations, needs,ideological background, or tradition, actors, etc.), (bybackers, producers, personal pressures experience critical orpolitical ofaudience tobe reached, available resources censorship, type technical etc.Results willvary for eachindividual actors, (a given means), stage, evenbroadsociological factors cannot be predicted to combine in a case,since uniform twotypes of possible individual factors. referents However, waywith thusproduced deserve attention becausetheypolarizethe area of potential In thefirst choices. outside referent to the place,thedirector's maycorrespond referent ofthe hisreading him that referent to text, i.e.,towhat literary persuades be. In thiscase, whiletension remains within thematerialization process (cf. of theperformance no longer acts as a constraint. The above),the referent director's freedom is greater, in a narrower butsolves fewer and field; problems the theatrical lose their The secondspecialcase moves dynamism. processes toward ofperformance thenotion as a network ofsigns, the subverting negating ofan outside interest orrather that referent to thestage andits referent, shifting Suchperformances refer tothemselves as performances, signifiers. primarily i.e., drawattention to their as butwithdraw them from their signs signs, (staging) semiotic and deprive valuejudgements, them, proper systems vague interposing from their codedreferents clever talented costumes, (beautiful designs, acting, bodies- all "meaning" is also freed from stunning nothing else).The director constraints oftheoutside is but limited the new considerations which referent, by create occasional of tension, sources lesssystematic and therefore lessapt to coherent and hence lessdynamic. both solutions, generate ultimately Obviously cases represent referential choices between which oscillate the marginal of referents chosen for the But the overwhelming majority finally performance. thesereferents from theliterary of thetext, referent degree by which diverge and/or insist ontheir in function the determination of of regulating manipulation verbal andstaging can be related to their to or one of the other the signs, rapport extreme poles. 5.4. The relationship between thereferent of thetext and thereferent of the andhence twosides between the ofthestaging cannot thus performance, process, the relative attraction of either the or escapebeinginfluenced by literary the the of the text or of the performing fallacy, respectively stressing importance andhence or of the role performance, and minimizingmaximizing optional signs thetransformation ofverbal Butthetwofallacies inturn do notoperate in signs. a vacuum, andcanbe tied tovariations inmore universal attitudes which define of a society. theZeitgeist Atissuehere is thebasicapproach to theproblem of initspolitical, andartistic A society ramifications. change, philosophical holding to thebelief ithasreached that a satisfactory a plateau ofmaturity development, where evolution what hasbeenalready andjudged only to perfects accomplished
128
JEANALTER
over and over reenacted, and it would distrust fromhis at detracting attempts In short,it would offer intentions. a fertile of the groundforthe perpetuation in a stateof upheaval, a socialbodywhichfinds itself literary fallacy. Conversely, or dissatisfied aware of rapidchanges, withitsconditions in changes and seeking a remedyfor its ills, will question all sortsof universals, advocate historical transformations relativism, propoundnewvaluesfornewmen.It wouldpromote in art, renewalof inherited of texts.Theaterin forms, adaptationsor updating would be viewedas an agentas wellas an objectof change.The thatperspective a particular and themoredissatisfied moreunstablethesociety group,themore suspicionwould be attachedto authorsof the past as a partof thatpast which worksforitsunnatural perpetuation by usingartto keepup obsoletenormative could be subverted, wouldbe used onlyifthey values. Textsof suchauthors i.e., As a result, lead to extolling to yieldnewmeanings. theseconditions transformed and propagating of the director, the performing the function fallacy.It is not does indeedoccurat timesof unrest thatmost"experimental" accidental staging or or uncertainty, amongsocial groupswhich,forvariousreasons,are marginal order.A semioticsociologyof theater to the prevailing withrespect adversary of thatphenomenon, both diachronically would requirea detailedexamination in can be, or are, reflected in society how tensions and synchronically, showing between thetextand the stage. tensions thetheatrical 6. THEATRALITYOF THE TEXT VS. THEATRALITYOF VERBALSIGNS or absencethereof, and parallelto otherfactors thisgeneral 6.1. Within tension, and itsrolein thedirector's whichdirectly affect conceptof an outsidereference which a variable itself constitutes of the text thechoice staging signs, determining Theatrical is submitted. which it transformations to on has a potential impact the to transforare moreresistant indeedthatsome texts indicates visibly experience lies If in variations fewer mationsthanothers, performances. theatrality yielding the both fortransformational in the potentiality permanence insuring processes, thensuchtexts and therenewalof theater, maybe said to have a low theatrality new of thedirector, and do notgenerate thecreativity index:theydo not inspire as a Just be cannot mean that This not does staged. frequently they performances. its referent times be reread can as literature changes read although many play eventhoughits at each reading,so a play can be oftenperformed onlyslightly theliterary muchfrom nordoes itdiffer does notchangemucheach time, referent at a referent. play is revived Besides, thereare manyreasonswhya particular But do with theater little to most have and only proper. time, particular so as to the text,and varytransformations whichdo transform performances and makegenuine of theatrality thespirit bothcapture evernewreferents, project index do not art. Texts with a low theatrality to the theatrical contributions for turnintoperiodpieceswhichsurvive thisprocessand, frequently, encourage a director by the theymay stimulate reasons,thoughoccasionally archeological theypresent. verychallenge of a textobviouslycannotbe indexedin a vacuum,sincethe The theatrality The as wellas textualfactors. transformations to resistance dependson external
129
may change,the verbalcodes may change, prevalent typesof transformations coded theatrical to outlineconditions practicesmay change,etc. Any attempt are equal. whichdetermine thetheatrality indexmustassumethatall other things Within thatperspective, one can posittwogeneral which are however, parameters viewedas semiotic units:thedegree of integration of verbal applicableto all texts in the use of the linguistic code. signs,and the degreeof precision 6.2.1. The integration of thetextis understood to thehomogeneity hereto refer of referential and thecoherence whichoccurbetween relations unitsor networks of verbalsigns.In thisparticular sincetherelations between referents are respect, in question, northeir and notthereferents themselves whether loci,itis irrelevant thetext is readas literature or theater, theserelations concern actors i.e., whether on the stageor real/imaginary of actions,feelings, people outside;the structure ideas willbe thesame. For therestricted limited to purposesof a textual analysis theassessment of thetheatrality on a literary or index,one mayindifferently rely a theatrical to thedialogueonly reading.In thatsense,thetextof a playreduced can be expressed as a functionof all units of the dialogue, before any modification by the staging signs: (21) I(Td) = F(tl, t2,t3...tn...), I = theatrality where index to theintegration ofverbal corresponding signs.
There can be no totallydisintegrated withan infinite text,since a function of solutions number wouldyieldno finite forthetext.Nor can there referents be even the simplest practically any totally text,withonlyone referent: integrated too complexa network of signsleadingto performable/performed play offers multivalent functions. The degreeof integration variesbetween thetwoextremes, with differentiated potentialsfor transformations. Though always somewhat ambiguous,a text may be extremely homogeneousin its subject matterand coherentin its structures. The message (moral, philosophical,political),the thecharacters' themainand secondary climate, words,actions, psychology, plots, thegeographical in short all referential units are tied space and thehistorical time, to each otherin sucha waythattheycontribute to each other, and thatminimal units can be subsumed in larger units which in turn composeevenlarger ones; and the totality is further devicesof parallelor contrasting integrated by structural themes arrangedin multiplecorresponding patterns,eschewingsuperfluous like (dangling)elementsand leavingno gaps unfilled.Such a text functions or a function of functions, marked of relationships, clockwork, byrepeated types formalized as follows: (22) + 1),F(tn + 1, tn + 2)],... tn t2),F(t2,t3)],...F[F(tn, I(Td) = F tF[F(tl, The transformation of any discrete entailsinevitably thetransformation unity of otherunitswithwhichit is directly the modification of associated,secondly in units shift units,and thirdly encompassing larger by analogysome referential related theentire by structural textmaybe changedin its devices,so thatfinally connotations (and evendenotations). Such a totaltransformation occurs- rarely - in cases of outright as a of parody(Hamletstaged farce)or a willful disregard
130
JEANALTER
denotational referents of words (Grotowski's treatment of the Cid); usually,a director facedwitha highly textwillrather minimize transformations integrated and thusremainclose to theliterary referent. a heterogeneous Conversely, text, withdisconnected and episodes,equivocal characters, unspecified geographical historicalcircumstances, no evidentstructures beyond some general theme, incoherent transformations which chronology, etc.,willeasilyaccomodatepartial need not extendfarther thandirectly associatedunits.The freecreativity of the director The texthas a hightheatrality index. enjoysgreater opportunities. 6.2.2. When verbalsignsare transposed fromtextto stage,theydo not change their code butdo changethemateriality of their as soundsubstitutes for signifiers, the same become more to theactionof staging vulnerable token,they writing. By to transformations of signs,and especially generated by a compulsory category thesesigns:thevoice. Indeed,not onlythecultural linbut even the basic code, an ever-threatening guisticcode are far frombeingunequivocal.In particular, must in confusion be check paradigmatic continuously kept by the syntagmatic and to written that certain words, order; extent, safeguards: provide theycan be read at one's bestpace, and rereadwhenneeded.The spokenwordis muchmore treacherous. Underthebestconditions, it is heardless distinctly thanthewritten wordis read; and it cannotbe retrieved once it is uttered and gone. Its paradigmatic (and/or connotative) and, by the same potentialis thus much greater, ithas a comparatively voicethatprofers for token,theinevitable greater potential in rich its referential content. But not all words are transforming equally not all uses of and the code are linguistic equally paradigms/connotations, A or multivalences. to eliminate ambiguities (or lax) in trying potential rigorous in its vocabulary, in its statements, internal textwhichfavorsprecision clarity in detail of equivocal terms(a character or explanations definitions explaining of the the freedom proportionally whyand how he loves another),diminishes in orderto transform wantto exploitthelinguistic confusion who might director verbalunits.On theother value of specific thereferential hand,a so-calledpoetic and rejects text,or a textwhichindulgesin vague terms,avoids explanations transformations codified bythe opensthewayforpartial sequences, grammatical meansof voice and otherstaging theatrality signs.Such a textwillhave a higher index and, ceteris paribus, a greaterappeal for staging.The precisionof the of the dialogueare not necessarily code and the degreeof integration linguistic effective related;but whentheyconverge, they producea textwhichcan be very in real but and as theater, lacking bothas literature theatrality. is frequently 6.3. A different applied to entiretextsalconceptof theatrality to is that verbal if at discrete it better units; wit: the theatrical all, fits, though and hence to the use of or leads refers in a signs, staging which, play,explicitly No and notliterature. thereaderthathe is dealingwiththeater servesto remind do occurnot onlyin thedidascalia(expendable doubtsuchindications by definicosto sets,timeof day,gestures, light, tion),butalso in thedialogue:references such as etc. Even props are oftenmentioned, tumes,appearanceof characters, and theprecision etc. Of course,thefrequency mirrors, chairs,weapons,letters, sincetheysimply to do withtheatrality, have little of such indications providea
131
fewspecific signswhichmustbe made anyway, optionsforthechoiceof staging and they can be assimilated to descriptive unitsin a literary whichis notin reading advance oriented towardtheater. Textswitha largenumber of such indications thanothers;and theveryconcept,promoted are not moretheatrical by thepershould be discarded, witha similar notion,originating forming fallacy, together in thesame source,thatplacestheatrality of a playin itspotential forspectacular and features associated with show. a But verbal costumes, sets, i.e., gestures, which refer to in do a role the transformational signs signs play staging processof the text,and in thatsensedo affect itstheatrality. At first their influence could in factbe termed sinceit limits sight, restrictive, thefreedom of thedirector to modify thereferential valueof textual units.A text with a highfrequency of verbalsignsreferring to specific wouldhave staging signs a low theatrality and a text with few of this nature would index, specifications have a hightheatrality index. By the same token,it could be arguedthatsuch thecategory of nonsigns,whichshallbe calledperforming signs(Tp), fallwithin modified textual their and that the signs(Tn), increasing proportionally number, related calledpotential fall within the staging signs,hereafter signs category (Sp), of compulsory as theyare prescribed in a general signs(Sc), insofar way though thespecific form thattheproliferation observed of mayvary.It could be further of potential on the performing signsin the text,and the resulting growth signs or indirectly cause a relativereduction in the role of modified stage, directly verbalsignsand optionalstaging signs,as in theadaptationof formula (20): R = + + + (23) F(Tn Tp) F(Tm Tp), [(Sc Sp)+ (S -Sp)] - Tp),(Sc + Tp),(Tm + Sp),(So- Sp)] F[(Tn = where of verbal andSp = totality of totality performing signs, Tp potential staging signs. in performing of thetext Finally, anyincrease signswouldthusdrawthereferent closerto theliterary and reducethecontrolling roleof thereferent of the referent, also brought closerto theunderstanding of the play as literature. performance, Such a perception of thefunction of performing/potential signsno doubtowes muchof itspopularity to thequestionable of studying theater in thetexts practice of the literary only. Not only proponents fallacy,but also those who want to avoid itspitfalls and honestly to readplaysas theater, seizeon thepresence of try about the performing signsin the textin orderto be able to draw conclusions eventual based on an assumedmaterialization of thecorresponding performance, potentialstagingsigns.All sortsof verbalspatial indications, forexample,are takento define thescenicspace of theplay; and verbalevocations of sets,colors, are acceptedat theirface value as partsof thetotalnetwork gestures of signsin to an outside world.In reality, of course,suchan approach performance referring onlyevokesa virtual whosereferent performance, i.e., a performance staysclose to theliterary referent. Withrespect to theactualperformance, forthe necessary of thetheatrical completion process,iterrsin thebasic assumption thatperforming signsmay not be transformed fromtextto stage,and duringthe transition that theyalways yield theircounterpart in potentialsigns. Both theoryand
132
JEANALTER
of staging thatperforming show, on the contrary, experience signsare not diffromotherverbalsigns,and thattheir treated resistance to transformferently ationsdependson variousfactors, none of whichhas an absoluteimpact. in thatsenseare, of course,thesameconsiderations The mostevident variables thedirector's attitude towardall verbalsignsof thetext whichdetermine general he wantsto giveto theperformand towardtheconceptand role of thereferent of textualreferents, cases of parodyor total disregard ance. Thus, in extreme performing signs can be denied theirparticularrelationwith corresponding a literary willinsure thatrelationship of a text staging signs.Conversely, potential in mostinstances, to thesame extent as forstagedirections outsidethedialogue. no performing however, signcan be assumedin advanceto Practically speaking, the natureof the sign,i.e., both its degreeof be safe. Anotherfactorconcerns withothersigns.Only in veryfewcases does the precisionand its integration and variations;most textualindicationleave littleroom for transformations in facta choice represents performing signsare so vaguethatanymaterialization among many possible potentialsigns. This obtains especiallyfor 5ets and to compulsory stagingsigns: what is a costumes,and most verbal references a On theother or a or "blow"? hand,the "smile," "wall,"or a "door,"or a "dress," Certain it the more resists transformations. is morea performing sign specific, even in materialized cannot be though, by manyways, props,or unusualgestures But evenin thiscase thepotential can be downgraded. variousmeans,they stagcan alwaysbe subas theverbalindication indeedonlypotential, ingsignremains to transformits resistance the of verted or dismissed (cf. below,8). Finally degree with of its integration also dependon thedegreeand extent ation willgenerally function.The corresponding other verbal signs, viewed in their referential potentialstagingsign will have greaterchances to occur when its presenceis a of a large numberof otherverbal signs,forming requiredby the referents be cannot most central even a coherent exempted sign Yet, performing entity. is willingto extendthisprocessto major if the director fromtransformations but possiblechoice. In fact,thedegreeof integration units- an unlikely textual of theentire in thatsensethedegreeof integration manifests of performing signs index. in the or decreases increases with theatrality text, corresponding verbalsignsmay of performing of a largenumber thepresence In other terms, that butnotin anyautomatic of a text, reducethetheatrality way. The resistance to veryspecific refer whenthey such signsoppose to transformations, especially thanan a temptation rather and wellintegrated represents signs, staging potential to the visual performance, i.e., to to adjust the actual performance imperative thefinalchoiceof referent. on theliterary Furthermore, aligntheoutsidereferent theperof factors whichaffect each timefroma multiplicity results thedirector as a whole. verbalsignsand thetext as all other forming signsin thesame manner as itaccountsfora insofar is thususeful The notionof performing/potential signs to assess the and helpsbetter mode in thetransformational processes, particular and certainly of a text;but it mustnot be viewedoutsideits context, theatrality fromthe textto the of referents not as a safe bridgeallowingthe movement performance.
133
7. COHERENCE VS. INCOHERENCE the transformation One additional factor determining operationshas been thevaluationof coherence overincoherence. In assumedto be constant: hitherto factors it can be amongwhichit belongs, fact,however, just as all othercultural shownto varyin timeand space among individual groupsor even individuals. in theater, Like theothervariablesoperating it is polarizedbetween two abstracand totalincoherence. totalcoherence tionswhichdo notobtainin practice: Any is complexenough to accomodatesome play at any of its stages of existence Whena text is brought coherent. to and too complexto be entirely incoherence, thestage,theperformance conceived as thereferent of verbalsignswillapproach whenthevariousstaging a single verbalunit,simpleor coherence signsaffecting whateverits complexity.Such a complex, converge on a single referent, coded referential valuesbothof of course,dependson historically convergence, in and variations verbal and stagingsigns,and is undermined by ambiguities codes. The verbalexpression of a particular emotion, say,anger,maypointeither to by to cold rage or blind rage; and eitherof thesefeelings may be referred within each colors,gestures, voices, multiple stagingsigns applicablecategory: frequently lights,etc. Costumes in particular change theircodes: in the 17th was coded as appropriate a contemporary Frenchcostume fora Roman century characterwhereastoday a Roman toga is requiredfor coherence.These are thevaluationof coherence however whichmustbe solvedafter specific problems is made. Conversely, a certain of circumstances number influence thevaluation of it coherence takes One notes that subversion of coherence tends to before place. occur at some historical often marked conscious or unconscious periods, by at othertimes;that malaise, while strict advocacy of coherencepredominates theater courts coherence morein somemilieux thanin others; or thatcertain texts not their certain or (but necessarily (but not performances) performances their to refer or as coherence incoherence their necessarily texts) messages.A historical musttake thesecircumstances underconsideration, studyof theater withthe impactof theatrical in orderto assess properly the together traditions, variable.Indeed,whatever itsvalue at any changesin thecoherence/incoherence or relaxes all other criteriapertinent to given moment,it eitherreinforces theatrical processes. a strong Without stress on coherence, thetheatrality of a text becomesa meansincetheintegration of verbalreferents no longer offers ingless concept anyresistance to transformations; themodification of one signat theexclusion of related unitswillresult in an incoherence either acceptableor even desirable.Similarly, the transformation of a verbalreferent into a notionat odds withits specific definition in thetext willbe viewedas a permissible incoherent device.The entire between thetextand theperformance as itsreferent willbe erodedat relationship bothends:an incoherent followed (and virtual reading performance) haphazardly And theperformance as a network of signsreferring to by an incoherent staging. theoutsidewilllose, bythesamepolicy, anycoherent requirements imposedbyits own goals, and any coherent influence on the staging of thetext.In short, any move toward a stronger valuation of incoherence opens wide the theatrical
134
JEANALTER
of thedirector, thetension between the processto thefreedom but,bydestroying textand theperformance, leavesthatfreedom outsidetheconstraints of an artof theater, leadingat bestto happenings. The valuationof coherence condition of theater, appearsthusto be a necessary but to a point.Beyonda certain neededto preserve thetension value, minimally between textand performance, coherence in an increasingly policesthattension restrictive thefreedom of thedirector, and reducing theatrical way,limiting processesto computerized The coherence of thetext as a network of signs operations. and thecoherence of theperformance as their referent mustcoincide;and so must of theperformance thecoherence as a network of signsand itsreferent outside: Even if it werefeasible, such a perfect coincidence would eliminate any creative of theater. A certainmeasureof incoherence renovation appears thusto be as as thegeneralvaluationof coherence. for its survival But thequestion necessary is: How much?And sincetheanswers of a vary,theexactdegreeof incoherence total theatrical cannot be nor which particular experience predicted, stageof the what be nor be involved. One can processmay affected, signsmay onlypostulate thatmosttransformations are indeedcoherent, butthata variable number maybe theater from absolute normative incoherent, any liberating processes. 8. TYPES OF TRANSFORMATIONS: FROM CONFIRMATION TO SUBVERSION in as 8.1. Withinthebasic transformational formula process, (20), staging signs a double function.Some serve to materialize the text,and are partial fulfill of theperof verbalsigns(butalso operateas signsforoutsidereferents referents in the serve as also others signs operateas partial performance (but formance); of theverbalsigns).The study as of staging referents signs signsof theperformas partial of thisessay. On theotherhand, operating ance lies outsidethelimits of the verbal signs, they participatein transformational referents processes in terms of general textand stagewhichhave beendiscussed between conditions, takes place when but need more detailed formalization. Obviouslysomething all verbalsigns a playis staged, verbalsignsencounter signsand, whenever staging at least some staging encounter signs(compulsory signs).The questionis: How in their coded referents What typesof alterations are theyaffected? may exactly and thereferreferents between their textual on therelationship occurdepending entsof the stagingsigns?Any answerto thisquestionmustpositthatall other it is possibleto distinguish are constant.Withinsuch a perspective, parameters and and complex bothdiscrete of transformation, fivebasic types units, affecting to entire a orientation the sometimes play. providing distinct at all. In manycases, there 8.2.1. Confirmation appearsto be no transformation extrafor introduced of compulsory The referents signs(or optionalsigns staging of the with the referent concur neous purposes),as theyare culturally coded, it. A without even in the as coded verbal costume, text, stressing mildly sign, given for fora certain forexample,coded as appropriate group,but not as symbolic of a character which is identified verbtheperception thatgroup,does notmodify which has occurred contribof thegroup.The interaction merely allyas a member such A staging referent. of theliterary utesto thepreservation favoring practice
135
between textand performance, furthers reducesthetension the clearly processes thedevelopment and hampers of theater. Of course,confirmation literary fallacy, connotations is a delicateand oftenrisky of staging operationbecause cultural codes varybetween and evolveswiftly. Failureto movewiththetimes, subgroups or properly to gauge an audience,maylead to unexpected results. Period pieces offerthe safestbet for successful and by the same tokendraw confirmations, close to theirliterary referent. If one separatesunitsaffected by confirmation fromthe remainder of the dialogue, the entireprocess may be formalized as follows: (24) + F(T - xtm)+ F(S - s), where R(T) = F(xtm,s) tm- tnandhence - R(tL),andas x / so R(T) - R(TL),where x = variable number F(xtm,s) of verbal units t confirmed s, and s = corresponding bythestaging signs number of staging as x increases. which increase signs
It maybe notedthatperforming verbalsignstp are a popularchoiceforconfirmation by thecorresponding staging potential signssp. 8.2.2. Reinforcement Whenever as an unstaging signsstressthesame referent is obviouslyreinforced in its equivocal unit of verbal signs, that referent An the audience. and a perception by costume, specialintoappropriate make-up thus serve to reinforce the textual of a character's indication nation, may or role hoarse voice for a fora villain). black hat profession (symbolic prostitute, A mildreinforcement blendsintoconfirmation, and does notcause anyparticular tensionbetween textand performance, whenonlya singleunitis conespecially cerned.Nevertheless some referential is and more dramatic change generated, effects of signsare considered, a stress Thus,whencomplexnetworks mayresult. laid on a particular referent withreferents whichare merely mayentaila contrast of the play are then modified;and the confirmed; partial or total structures tensionbetween the textand theperformance reingrows.Or else, a systematic forcement of a largenumberof unitsmay entailenoughstress on the ultimate referent of the play to transform its textualmode. An initially "realistic" story on parody. Such extreme formsof reinforcemay become caricatural, verging mentmaybe produced whencultural codes are affected bymereconfirmations by temporallags. By different means,theyachievethenthe same goal as straight thegap between textand performance. subversion, i.e., maximize The same result whenthey are used to maybe accomplished byreinforcements shift thereferent to theperformance itself drawattention (cf. above 5.3.). As they to a particular combination of signsat the expenseof others,the role of the relatedsignifiers acmanifestly grows.The stress may bear on verbalsignifiers, centuated a intonation of thevoice,or bygestures of actors.Most through special such reinforcements underline usually,however, staging i.e., features signifiers, associatedwiththe"professional" facetof a performance: or of beauty cleverness actors and designs.Carriedto an extreme, this strategy both the downgrades textual referent and thereferent of theperformance, theplayintoa transf6rming fora show in thespirit of theperforming pretext fallacy. Formula(24) mustbe modified to accountforall thesepossibilities:
136 (25)
JEANALTER + F(T-xtm) + F(S-st), where as x/ so R(T) = F(xtm,st) R(T) + R(TL) /, where thereferents of which reinforce thereferents of t. signs st = staging
8.2.3. Restriction A verbalunit may be ambiguousin presenting two or more referents withequal or different A selective stress. reinforcement of one of these referents in a restriction of referential bythemeansof staging signsresults potentialities of thetext, and hencean alteration. A character whosenature is purposeleftuncertain some overt verbalstatements at specific motivfully despite hinting ationswill lose complexity and interest whensymbolic staging signs(e.g., black one of thesemotivations. The departure theliterary from hat,as above) reinforce of theplayis obvious.Of course,notall texts lendthemselves meaning equallyto restrictive transformations sincetheirdegreeof ambiguity varies.Whileno text has completely the extent precisereferents, only a fewinvolveto a significant of one or morecompeting coexistence definite choiceson the referents, requiring He mayavoid restrictive butmayalso seizeupon this effects, partof thedirector. to transform the text,creating and exploiting theatrical opportunity tension."' on theotherhand,are not clearly from restrictions, Fragmentary distinguishable reinforcements and do notcontribute or evenconfirmations, muchto thetension In short: between textand performance. (26) as x / + F(T -xtm) + F(S - st,),where R(T) = F(xtm,st) so R(T) * R(TL) /, where which one(t')ofseveral referents of reinforce only signs st, = staging t. theverbal sign
on theuse of of transformation 8.2.4 DiversionWhileotherforms relyprimarily connectedto the verbal signs,the operation stagingsignsalreadyreferentially on thecontrary on theactionof optional calleddiversion relies hereafter primarily to theverbalsigns.As they referential relation any definite signswithout staging referents neither confirm nor reinare associatedwitha giventextual unit,their them of thatunit,butmodify thereferents contradict force norstrictly bytheprodiveror elimination. Like theothertransformations, cess of addition,alteration free the on variation in of but this and sion varies scope depends strength impact, than on the natureof the text.In rather of the director will and inventiveness rules and henceno limiting to theuse of optionalsigns, there are no limits theory, diverin the are order to a few observations fordiversion. clarify way However, and theproblems sions function theyraise. verbalunitis occurs when a performing The most radical case of diversion unitwith denieditscorresponding either unit,or whena staging staging potential Such cases obviously referent is substituted. a different (but not contradictory)
both refers a case in point,sincetheprotagonist Rise of ArturoUi offers 1o Brecht'sThe Resistible of Ui to one of thesereferents in Chicago. The restriction and a gangster bythe to Hitlerin Germany facetwill yied a the German or the Italo-American means of stagingsigns exclusively stressing witha message quite removedfromthe literary message,althoughall verbal signs performance would be retained.
137
entailsomerelaxation of theprinciple of coherence, whenthey concern especially some significant but discrete a specialeffect whichmay unit,and hencegenerate be desiredforvariousreasons.On theotherhand, a generalized of this practice an entire to all verbalsignsas well play,and extending typeof diversion, marking as to performing based on a convensigns,mayachievea newlevelof coherence tional acceptance of this operationas a part of the theatrical process. For whenactorsare askedto actouttheir released example, phantasms bya particular to thewordsthey textand not thepartscorresponding a widespread diverutter, sion is justified In mostcases, of course,diversion by faithin psychoanalysis. of timeand space to multiply takes milderforms.It feedson the availability than rather with,the compulsory optional stagingsignsparallelto, integrated The forms mildest of diversion sometimes take signs. (though veryspectacular) when the are inserted between formal units of when the place text, optionalsigns thestageis frozen and/orfree;they function almostindependently, some though alteration is achievedwithrespect to theorganization, and mood of progression, the textualreferents. A similartype of diversionmay accompanyan action verbalsignsand staging expressed through signs,but on a different partof the still it will to contribute autonomous, stage; although largely downgrade,or practicallyerase, the simultaneous textual referents.The most effective an integration with other their diversions, however, attempt signsin orderto shift in a particular referents of the performance. direction, inspired by the referent desireto stress an atmosphere of brutality will inspire himto Thus, a director's innocuous verbalargument expanda relatively bythemeansof additional staging to brutal actions.The paradoxof diversion liesin thefactthatsuch signsreferring discrete effects oftenfail to modify the total referent of the play; and thatan extendeduse of diversionmay result in changingthe basic status of the It maybe viewedas an adaptationrather thana production of the performance. audiences. Indeed, the toleranceof given play, at least by more conservative diversion is highly conditioned theatrical and social factors, bycultural tradition, considerations. Diversion no doubtconstitutes themosttempting, themostunpredictable, and the most creativetransformational process; it generatesa dynamictension between thetext and theperformance; theater but,whencarried far,itturns very intoa show, encouraging theperforming fallacy.Thus: (27) + F(T-xtm) + F(S -yss), R(T) = F(xtm,yss) where as y / so x / andR(T) * R(TL) /, where ofstaging y = number = and without referential signs connections to ss, staging signs ss optional verbal signs.
subversion occurswhenthereferent 8.2.5. Subversion of thestaging Straight signs is coded as the opposite of the referent of the verbalsign. It is achieved,for whena dwarf a night sceneis brightly example, playsa giant, lit,or a staidmatron Whenseveralstaging appearsin bobby-sox. a single verbalunit,the signssubvert textual referent is notonlyundermined (in a wayakinto theprocess of diversion), buteither or transformed discounted intoitsopposite.The multiplication of sub-
138
JEANALTER
thusmaylead to a performance versions which reverses thereferential messageof to parody.By itsmechanical thetext, or moresimply little action,whichrequires originalityon the part of the director, subversion does not encourage whichexploitthe tensionbetween transformational the textand the operations in a It a blunt creative is and instrument, spirit. performance leadingto overkill, to utilized dedicated fun. like onlyby groups any frequently collegiate-type Yet, it can be subtlyused, either to make a specific otherformof transformation, unitof thetext, or to restore of a major a discrete thefullimpact point,involving of the text has been referential which weakened by changesin cultural message serious codes. Thus a dramaticplay of, say, late 19thcentury, stagedwithout even butan would be as transformations comical; melodramatic, today, perceived it drain the of mask and some as subversion were, can, part important outrageous In revive dramatic mood." the and its the of rest of thus text, parodicpotential text to the tension between however increase subversion tends of course, general, as follows: whichcan be formalized and performance, (28) R(T) = F(xtm,s_ t - sp and t) + F(T- xtm) + F(S- s-t),where s_ where as x / so R(T) * R(TL) / , of the referents arecodedas opposite whose where s t = staging signs t. verbal oftheassociated referents signs
9. PERSPECTIVES and to to each other takeplace in a vacuum.Theyrelate None of theseoperations a becomes a when text which occur of semiotic theentire performprocesses range here,others ance, i.e., whentheater happens.Some of themhave beendiscussed have been simplyevoked, and stillotherswere taken for granted.Two major or not well-known werealready as ifthey weretreated areasin particular territory, as the and text as such the i.e., amenableto semiotic such, performance analysis: in each case, the natureof signswhichcompose themand the way in which are produced.Thereare tworeasonsforthisomission.In thefirst referents place, as thereare alreadymanytextualanalysesof specific plays,or even of theater withsemiotic and somehavebeenundertaken approaches.Conversely, literature; to staging witha specialattention studiesof performances, thebody of semiotic overtheyears.Mostof whatcould havebeensaid has beenrapidly growing signs, The second reason restson a would have been redundant. herein thatrespect
" Robert Ludlum's recentproductionof Camille may help to clarifythis positive action of textof La Dame aux camilias (TL or TT) of a double negation.The original subversion byan effect but mostof itsreferential of translation, was alteredperhapsmorethanallowed by theconventions of T.B. was played dying Gautier,thedemi-mondaine However,Marguerite impactwas preserved. would lapse intoa very deep a verymasculine lookingperson,who occasionally by Ludlumhimself, as unitof theplay,and received a major referential bass voice: a clear case of subversion affecting because of thatsingleparodicsubveraudience.Yet, despite,or rather parodyby a laughing straight tragicmood of the play was also perceivedby the audience whicheventually sion, the generally thata confirming died on stage.Ludlum postulated to silenceand sorrowwhenMarguerite reverted content:a of its referential subversion of the textwould resulttoday in an involuntary treatment that calculated to counteract into a comedy. His subversionwas (correctly) drama transformed dangerby its veryexcess.
139
If indeedtheessenceof theatrality orderof priorities. liesin thecentral postulated transition fromtextto performance, thenany unified semiotic of theater theory mustevolve fromthatcenter a meta-language whichwill outwards, developing enable us to approachboth textand performance as a singlefieldof eventually thantwo separateones as now. The applicationof any descriptive studyrather to theunderstanding and performances of texts system belongsto a secondorder of priorities, with a more specificdiscussionof psycho-sociological together factors. idea mustbe tested First,thecentral againstcritical reactions, and, likea in transformed withan audience. contact play,

Alter, J From Text To Performance

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Alter, J From Text To Performance

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

it can be expressed as a straight addition of twofunctions: situation,

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

FROM TEXT TO PERFORMANCE

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi