Chapter 26...The Conclusion

As I read Chapter 26, I hoped for some grand, ground breaking conclusion to the debate of digital performance and how it relates the theatre we all know and love. I was a little perturbed that this conclusion was never truly reached--to my satisfaction at any rate. I will write about what I felt the conclusion did express.

One of the more interesting discussions in the conclusion was the difference between modern and postmodern theory. The author came to the conclusion that modernism and post-modernism do not exist in separate time periods as eras, but rather in concurrence as philosophical approaches. He deemed modernists as those who were accepting of new age technology as real and post-modernists as people who refused to accept this technology as real. Real to the post-modern thinker is the human and the human spirit. I found this particularly poignant--even amidst his apparent disapproval of post-modern thought--because I have often used that same argument in opposition to the use of digital technology in live performance. It is my belief that the driving force behind the connections felt by an audience during live theatre is the humanity present in the live actor. This human connection often--though not always--lacks in digital performance, hindering its success. If we continue to strip the human element from live performance, I believe we begin to erode the quality.

To contradict my own point, I was also struck by his reference to live theatre as being so caught up in dialogue and text that it misrepresents humanity as a group of organisms that exists solely in the realm of text. I agree with this statement profoundly. I think that the theatre has gotten lost in the text, and is suffering from this--made apparent by the lack of interest in theatre by contemporary audiences. Today's audiences are creatures of the digital age and expect to be shown things, not just told them. As such, the nuances of the text are no longer as important to our audience as they were in the past--though in my post-modern mindset, I
would love to see them maintain some semblance of importance.

If theatre hopes to survive as a viable art form, we must learn to adapt to the needs and expectations of our modern audience. I do believe that digital technology is a step in the right direction; however, I do not believe it is the only solution. The successful theatre of the future will not be one of pure digital presentation, but one of true integration and interaction. Even the most profound revolutions assert essential elements of their pasts.

In his final pages, the author retold his own experience with Uncle Roy--a digital performance. As I read the passages, I was less than thrilled and thought to myself, "This is nothing but a video game...this isn't art!" I was surprised to find myself reaching a different conclusion after completing the read. It seems to me that Uncle Roy is a truly successful piece of art, incorporating elements of the human into the digital technology. In the end, the artist has achieved his goal--to send someone home truly pondering life and the meaning of existence.