A lot of you have spoken very highly of Artaud, he is also one of my favourite theatre theorists.
I see him as the opposite extreme to Brecht, whilst Stanislavski sits in the middle.
That is not the purpose, it is just one of several tools he uses to achieve his purpose.
Brecht's aim was to make his audience think about what was happening on the stage, it was more a journey of self discovery and analytical thinking than an emotional and story telling experience.
He once said, "The theater-goer in conventional dramatic theater says: Yes, I've felt that way, too.
Dissertation Companies - Stanislavski And Brecht Essay
so, debaters, which [reactictioner camp are you in? imo, brecht insulted his bourgeoisie audience by thikning that they had to be told constantly that they were watching aplay and didnt want them to be under any illusions.though stan does have its good points, it is pretty much fool proof Thread Starter, I think you've got a bit of the wrong end of the stick with Brechts theory.I don't do Theatre Studies etc but I have an avid love for theatre which is why I've read a lot of Brechts, Stanislavskis, Artauds, Appias, Brooks, and more work.If this meant making the theatre freezing cold, and dropping drips of water onto his audience; so be it.That is very much external from the actors role, the technical or other sensual aids are just that, aids; they help to emphasise the emotions on stage.Bertolt Brecht is known for his work as a playwright and theater practitioner and for his investment in the genre of "epic theater." Epic theater, in contrast to the more naturalistic impulses of psychological realism, sought to have a point of view and champion rhetorical ideas over narrative ambiguities.The political project of epic theater can best be summated in the Brecht quote, "Art is not a mirror with which to reflect reality but a hammer with which to shape it." Epic theater often included elements of direct address, overt theatricality (such as minimal costuming, or actors playing multiple characters), fragmentation, and interruption.well, excuse me for thinking that people must already know theyre watching a play otherwaise they wouldnt be sat in the theatre!alos, i prefer stan's way of naturalism and they fact that he wanted people to beleive in his characters.' This is what Bertolt Brecht wanted his audience to do when they went to see his shows.He wasn't there to provide an emotional ride for his audience, but to provide a thought provoking experience that would make them question the morals of the characters actions, and ultimately the viewer's own morals and actions.