Gluma u dramskom i gluma u postdramskom teatru

Abstract

Predmet rada odnosi se na glumu u dramskom i glumu u postdramskom teatru, sa svrhom da istraži sličnosti i/ili razlike među njima. Gluma u dramskom teatru predstavlja oponašanje stvarne radnje gdje je glumac dramski lik koji želi provesti neku svoju volju, postići neki svoj cilj. Njemu se suprostavlja drugi dramski lik iz čega nastaje dramski sukob. U dramskom teatru prevladavaju većinom verbalni znakovi temeljeni na dijalogu i monologu. Glumac u epskom teatru se distancira od lika kojeg igra, on se s njim ne poistovjećuje, kao što to čini glumac u dramskom teatru. Glumac u epskom teatru svoj lik pokazuje. S druge strane, postdramski teatar negira načelo mimetizma, izbjegava oponašanje i podražavanje, on uglavnom operira s neverbalnim znakovima, paralingvističkim i ekstralingvističkim. Pojam smrti karaktera koji se veže uz postdramski teatar ne može biti definiran na takav način, jer se tu u suštini ne radi o smrti karaktera, već o drugačijem označavanju s obzirom da se u postdramskom teatru događa jedna kompleksna preobrazba u samoj prirodi karaktera. Glumac je u dramskom teatru označen kao glumac, dok je u postdramskom teatru za glumca primjereniji naziv izvođač. Razlika između glume u dramskom i postdramskom teatru očituje se u različitom (drugačijem) korištenom sustavu svih kazališnih znakova. Za potrebe ovog rada provedene su tri strukture istraživanja. Prvo istraživanje obuhvaća analizu predstave Petera Handkea “Psovanje publike” u kojoj Handke u biti piše jedan esej o pitanjima dramskog, epskog i postdramskog teatra, a koji označava kraj avangarde i onoga što će se zvati postmoderna te već u tom tekstu ispituje sve elemente koji su prisutni u raspravi o dramskom i postdramskom. Drugo istraživanje odnosi se na profesionalne glumce, redatelje i teatrologe o pitanjima glume u dramskom i postdramskom teatru, kako bi se sa profesionalnog stanovišta dobio uvid u njihovo poimanje distinkcije i/ili sličnosti između glume u dramskom i postdramskom teatru. I treće istraživanje provedeno je među gledateljima kazališnih predstava, kako bi se dobili odgovori na pitanja kako publika i na koji način percipira i doživljava dramsku i postdramsku predstavu te što za njih znači gluma u dramskom, a što u postdramskom teatru; sve s ciljem da ovaj rad dobije objektivan i sveobuhvatan karakter. Na osnovu postavljenog teorijskog okvira i provedenih istraživanja, u zaključnim razmatranjima potvrđene su postavljenje hipoteze rada da postdramski teatar označava izvođačko-umjetničku formu koja se nadovezuje na dramski teatar i koja je na kraju i proizašla iz dramskog teatra. Međutim, u postdramskom teatru koriste se različiti jezični sistemi i različite tehnike označavanja. Kazališni znak u postdramskom teatru ostaje, on je i dalje znak, ali je njegova funkcija promijenjena. Do toga dolazi iz razloga što se glumačka sredstva povećavaju pa tako i gluma doživljava stalnu transformaciju i evoluciju

The paper deals with acting in drama and postdramatic theater, with the purpose of exploring similarities and/or differences between them. Acting in the drama theater represents the imitation of real action where the actor is a drama character who wants to impose some of his will, to achieve some of his goals. He is opposed by another drama character from which a dramatic conflict arises. Drama theater is mostly dominated by verbal signs based on dialogue and monologue. The actor in the epic theater is distanced from the character he plays, he does not identify with him, as does an actor in the drama theater. An actor in an epic theater shows his character. On the other hand, the post-drama theater negates the principle of mimetism, avoids imitation and excitement, it mostly operates with non-verbal signs, paralingvistic and extralinguistic. The concept of the death of a character that is connected to the postdramatic theater can not be defined in such a way, since it is essentially not about the death of a character, but about a different marking since in the postdramatic theater a complex transformation takes place in the very nature of the character. The actor is in the drama theater marked as an actor, while in the post-drama theater performer is a more appropriate name for the actor. The difference between acting in the drama and postdramatic theater is manifested in the different system used for all the theatrical signs. For this paper, three research structures have been implemented. The first research involves the analysis of Peter Handke's "Offending the Audience", in which Handke essentially writes an essay on the issues of the drama, epic and postdramatic theater, which marks the end of avant-garde and what will be called postmodern, and examines all elements that are present in the debate on dramatic and postdramatic. The second study deals with professional actors, directors and theaters on issues of acting in the drama and postdramatic theaters in order to gain a professional view of their understanding of the distinction and/or similarity between acting in the drama and post-drama theater. And the third survey was conducted among the audience of theater performances in order to get answers to how and which way does the audience perceive and experience the dramatic and postdramatic performance and what does the acting dramatic and postdramatic theater mean for them; all with the aim of giving this work an objective and comprehensive character. Based on the established theoretical framework and the researches carried out, in the concluding considerations the hypothesis of the postdramatic theater has been confirmed to indicate the performer-artistic form which is complementary to the drama theater and which eventually came from the drama theater. However, postdramatic theater uses different language systems and different marking techniques. The theater sign in postdramatic theater remains, it is still a sign, but its function has changed. This is due to the fact that acting means are increasing, so the acting is experiencing constant transformation and evolution.