Talk:Theatre/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Is there an English name for this?

There was a genre of play in 18/19th century Europe which was the precursor of the fantasy film, i.e., using stage technology to create a fantasy utopia where different mythologies were mixed for the masses. The only article I know is de:Zauberstück but is there an English name? --Rwst (talk) 16:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Masque has a little on this, but as it doesn't cover C19, and it wasn't "for the masses", it doesn't answer the question completely. --Old Moonraker (talk) 17:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Types of theatre

The types section is a strange congeries of incomparable items - some refer to the mood, some to the mechanisms of production, some to the method of creation and some to culture in which the form arose.

I would like to reorganise this, and started making the change; but I think it is a big undertaking, but would like to consult on how best to do it. My suggestion is an introductory paragraph covering the classification and mentioning some examples (and also pointing out that the classification is not exclusive) and then subsections such as

• Types of mood (eg drama, comedy, farce, melodrama, absurdism, children's theatre, pantomime, horror)
• Types of intention (eg political theatre, theatre in education, satire)
• Types of presentation (eg musical theatre, opera, physical theatre, puppet theatre, dance, multi-media, mime)
• Types of preparation (eg devised theatre, improvisational theatre)
• Culturally specific theatre (eg Sanskrit theatre, Noh, Kabuki, Chinese opera, Kathak)

Some items fit into more than one of these, and some of the items in the current list I would count as subclasses of some I've mentioned above.

Opinions? --ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed

I've removed the whole section as having undue prominance when compared to the size of the rest of the article. As it was the undifferntiated list was misplaced. More appropriate to create acategory or its ilk, and link from here with a (very short!) intro paragraph. - brenneman 04:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Amateur vs. professional

I'm not keen on this "sliding scale" of amateur vs. professional. Educational theatre, is definitely NOT non-professional and I have many friends who work in TIE (Theatre in education) who will testify to this. On top of this, a lot of community theatre is actually semi-professional (Augustin Boal anyone). If this was phrased as to typical production budgets for typical individual performances that would be another matter, but as it stands I'm not happy with it.

I would change it myself, but I feel it would be too big to do without discussing it first. Sebbi (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I changed the framing of this list. No more scale. Any ranking of these would be largely arbitrary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnostril (talk • contribs) 23:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I've organized the content into an equivalent logical paragraph that sounds non-controversial to me. However, the section title might be amended to better reflect what is said. Perhaps "Scope" is a better summary than "Amateur vs. professional"? Frodlimt (talk) 20:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Just had a look at this myself. I think your work is good Frodlimt, but rather than rename the sub-section I just removed its title merging it back into the section so that it serves as an introduction for the other sub-sections--Cailil ^talk 22:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

External links

I've removed a large number of external links per the guideline. If there are any that are contentious, copying the link here for discussion is how I'd do it. - brenneman 02:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Stand-up Comedy

Does stand-up comedy merit discussion under theater? If not, is it a separate performing art that should be discussed under "Performing Arts"?Gchuva (talk) 02:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If they are performing in character then yes. If they are performing as themselves no. (see discussion bellow) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnostril (talk • contribs) 23:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

How do you pronounce "theatre"?

I think it is "THEE-a-TREE." Of course, "theater" is pronounced "THEE-a-TER." — Motorrad-67 (talk) 14:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

In case anybody's wondering, this is the edit under discussion. AFICS it's not the pronunciation that's the issue: it's the established usage in this article, the established usage elsewhere on Wikipedia where this article links, and the specific names of some specific theatres or theatre districts in various capitals. These shouldn't be changed without another discussion. The first one is here. --Old Moonraker (talk) 14:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Arguing about minor spelling differences in two forms of written English, a language notorious for its inconsistency, is like digging an endless trench with a nuclear powered shovel. You get nowhere fast. Too much time is spent getting really angry over the placement of two letters, when we could actually improve the /ˈθi.ə.tɚ/ article. This kind of thing gives Wikipedia a bad name. And rightly so, if that's all people really care about. I don't mean to sound like I'm scolding, but this should be about the last thing on the list. I admit, I do use the British spelling of /ˈθi.ə.tɚ/, but I also spell "aluminium" "aluminum", and I really couldn't care less about what that article was called either. The fact of the matter is, there's really no good reason to change the article's spelling of /ˈθi.ə.tɚ/. Old Moonraker is right, it just messes things up. It's not going to make it any less readable to leave it be. I'd be saying the same thing if it were spelt the other way. --File:Flag of Soviet Canuckistan.svgYossarian^Complaints 10:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Although it would be nice if they'd finally give the British a Wiki of their own. The page looks like it was originally "theater" to begin with. -LlywelynII (talk) 14:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Theatre is pronounced the same way as theater (THĒ-uh-ter). Hspstudent (talk) 20:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

LLywelyn, if you want to propose a British English Wikipedia, look at the procedure at Meta:Language proposal policy. I don't think you will get much genuine support for the project, though. --ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Its my view that articles written in English should use the British spellings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.7.146.4 (talk) 21:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Theatre and theater are both pronounced (THĒ-uh-ter). The ER ending refers to the building or physical facility. The RE ending refers to the art form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.215.141.104 (talk) 19:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

You're correct about the pronunciation but wrong about the definitions 98.215.141.104. Both words mean the same thing - they are simply different spellings ("theatre" is the british-english spelling at "theater" the us-english spelling, like "colour" and "color") that's all--Cailil ^talk 23:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Military theater

I got redirected to this page while searching for Theater (warfare). Would someone please create an easy link ate Theater, so I don't end up here? Thanks. 70.251.147.224 (talk) 20:30, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Passion plays in 2000 BC??

"The earliest recorded theatrical event dates back to 2000 BC with the passion plays of Ancient Egypt" So... there were plays about the crucifixion of Christ, 2000 years before he was born? Uh, no. Someone please look up a legitimate source and put something correct there. -Winter123 (talk) 15:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Good catch. They were sacred dramas to the god Horus and I will change the text as soon as I can find a Wikipedia-approved WP:RS. --Old Moonraker (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

"Passion play" is not being used here in that sense, but there are sources[1][2] Actually it might be a good idea to be phrase it differently. -Dhodges (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. The big problem was the Passion play link! --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The 'Passion Plays' were about the death and rebirth of Osiris (which is technically correct use of Lat. passio, "suffering"), but it's an infelicitous usage, you're right. -LlywelynII (talk) 14:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no clear evidence about Egyptian theater, moreover can you consider a ritual as a theater? It has different functions. Where you can find a strict ancient Greek definition of comedy? Plus the whole next text about Roman Empire theater, medieval England and so on is, sorry for it, but stupid. You do not mention Christianity at all (which forbid to actors even a christian funeral). Maybe instead of enumerating countries where they do theater you can simply say it still extists. And islamic theater? Do not be ridiculous and read at least Borges (where you can surprisingly find a nice definition of theater), Muslims cannot even draw a picture of man (have you ever been to a mosque?). The puppet forms of theater are mostly from India. Which is generally not muslim country. I am sorry for I did not read the rest of your article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.193.12.27 (talk) 22:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

This is a comment only on the "ritual versus theatre" question in the above comment. Ritual and theatre are different, mainly due to their intent: Theatre has a "horizontal" function, ie: it is meant to be a relationship with other people. Ritual is a "vertical" function: it is meant to serve as function with a deity, or spirit, ancestor, etc.

Furthermore, ritual is a collective process: for ritual to work, all members (performers and audience alike) need to participate, mainly through belief (in this sense, the line between "performer" and "audience" is blurred.) In theatre, the distinction between the various parties is clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.133.62.97 (talk) 16:20, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Academic literature

If any of you have access to MIT press or informaworld you can easily source material to improve this article. http://www.mitpressjournals.org/action/showPreferences and http://www.informaworld.com Performatics (talk) 13:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The definition a given by Bernard Backermen is very poor

We need to find a new one.

I think that theatre is defined by people presenting themselves as something that they are NOT; they do not present themselves.

explanation: When Dr Smith delivers his lecture on the subject of clowning, he is presenting Dr Smith. That is not theatre. When at the end of the lecture he puts on a silly hat and glasses and shuffles across the stage. He presents a foolish odd character that he is not. THAT is theatre.

This helps with the above question as to whether or not standup comedy should count as theatre. Or exotic dance for that matter. If the performer presents a woman dancing on stage (which she is) that's not theatre. Where as if the dancer presents a mischievous librarian, that's theatre. (odd example, but the defining lines are to be found in the gray zones)

ALSO

Theatre requires the presenter to be physically present to the audience. (My Halloween photos on facebook are not theatre.)

AND

Those who witness the presentation must be aware that is an illusion. (Lies and deception must be outside this deffinition)

SO; Theatre is what occurs when one or more persons [isolated in time and or space] physically present themselves to one or more others as something that they obviously are not. (?)

Gnostril (cant find wavey on my keyboard) "wave wave wave wave" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnostril (talk • contribs) 22:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

That's better but I'm sure it can be improved upon.Gnostril (talk) 03:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Theatre vs Theater

I thought Wikipedia was en_US, shouldn't it be theater and not thee-uh-tray? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.58.237 (talk) 05:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

I like this explanation from http://www.theatreinchicago.com/news.php?articleID=7  :

Today, it is primarily considered that the word theatre/theater is in most cases interchangeable. Most American theater companies use the “re” ending and often you’ll see the “re” when the word refers to the art form or actual companies, but “er” when it refers to the building itself. So with this "rule" in mind we would say the Goodman Theatre is a great theater.

That's been true in my experiences also. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 14:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

You thought wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English Kungfukats2 (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

• Kungfukats2 is correct we use consistent spelling in articles without preference for American English or British English spellings. Also I've never come across Uncle Milty distinction at all. 'Theater' and 'Theatre' are the same word & have the same meaning - the only difference is the local spelling (like 'nite' and 'night' or 'color' and 'colour'). When you read American sources they call both the subject and the building 'theater' but when you read sources from over here in Europe it's 'theatre'--Cailil ^talk 21:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Lists, ad infinitum

Two embedded lists ("Notable theatre festivals" and "Awards in theatre") make up a sizeable percentage of this article. Do these really belong here? Yes, they relate to theatre, as do List of theatre managers and producers, List of theatre directors in the 20th-21st centuries, List of theatrical works by W. S. Gilbert, and so on. This would be a long article indeed if all related lists were embedded in this article, and doing so would only clutter this article without adding significant useful knowledge about this topic. In light of this, I have moved the embedded lists to their own, separate pages and replaced them here with links to those pages. -- Lambtron (talk) 13:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Lede image

It's disappointing that the subject-specific image of the interior of the Lincoln Center has been replaced by a rather generic image of a Beaux-Arts style exterior. Is there any support for reinstating it? --Old Moonraker (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Support - The interior photo does a much better job of illustrating the subject. Lambtron (talk) 17:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, in response to the cheers of acclamation for the proposal echoing around the auditorium (well, at least the absence of catcalls), implementing.--Old Moonraker (talk) 10:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)