Orientador: Marcio Aurelio Pires de Almeida / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Artes / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-05T17:17:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Leal_MaraLucia_M.pdf: 6322028 bytes, checksum: 6037b21e56093c8cbc33513618b4a84b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005 / Resumo: Esta dissertação de mestrado investiga o trabalho artístico do diretor e dramaturgo George Tabori, concentrando-se no trabalho que ele desenvolve com os atores, a fim de verificar se, no decorrer dos últimos trinta anos, a partir de sua experiência como diretor, ele conseguiu sistematizar uma metodologia de direção de ator, como afirmam alguns de seus comentadores. Como, contudo, a vasta obra de Tabori engloba várias áreas, consideramos necessário, inicialmente, discorrer sobre a trajetória desse artista, que, partindo do jornalismo e da literatura, tornou-se roteirista de cinema, depois dramaturgo e mais tarde diretor de seus próprios textos, de peças contemporâneas e de obras de autores clássicos de sua predileção, tais como Shakespeare, Beckett e Kafka. Assim, buscamos também, com esta dissertação, preencher uma grande lacuna e inserir o trabalho de Tabori, praticamente desconhecido no Brasil, no debate nacional sobre o fazer teatral / Abstract: This Masters dissertation examines the artistic oeuvre of the playwright and director George Tabori. It focuses on the work he developed with actors, in order to determine if during his thirty-year career as a director, he has managed to systematize a specific method of directing actors ¿ a claim made by some of his critics. Since Tabori¿s distinctive career is so multi-faceted, this dissertation will begin by tracing the artist¿s journey ¿ with its beginnings in journalism and literature ¿ from screenwriter and playwright to director of his own dramatic texts as well as those of his contemporaries and works by favorite classical authors including Shakespeare, Beckett, and Kafka. Moreover, studying Tabori¿s legacy, which sadly remains so little known in Brazil, will hopefully allow his unique contributions to contemporary theater to find their way into the national discourse on theatrical creation / Mestrado / Mestre em Artes

La liaison de la nourriture, de la boisson et du spectaculaire caractérise le théâtre depuis l’antiquité. La présente étude questionne cette relation à partir de la naissance officielle de la mise en scène en France, à la fin du 19e siècle et jusqu’à aujourd’hui. Le point de départ et de repère est la France, pays qui a vu naître et a accueilli toutes les grandes évolutions du théâtre moderne et de la gastronomie. Au fur et à mesure, le champ géographique s’élargit pour inclure d’autres pays européens (Russie, Grande-Bretagne, Suède, Allemagne, Suisse, Italie, Espagne, Grèce) ainsi que les pays de l’Amérique du Sud (Venezuela, Colombie) et les États-Unis. Des pièces, des mises en scène et des performances, qui mettent en avant l’alimentation et la cuisine en tant que pratique d’art ou en tant que lieu, sont réunies et analysées. Quatre axes de la pratique théâtrale sont suivis : la dramaturgie, la mise en scène, la scénographie et le jeu de l’acteur. / Since ancient times, theatre has been characterised by a bond between food, drink and the spectacle. This study provides an account of this relationship from the beginnings of theatre direction in late 19th century France up until the present. Our departure and reference point is France, a country that witnessed and fostered the most important innovations in theatre and gastronomy. Progressively, our area of geographical focus is enlarged to include other European countries (Russia, United Kingdom, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, and Greece) as well as countries from South America (Venezuela, Colombia) and the United States. We have collected and analysed a series of plays, stagings, and performances in which food and drink consumption, cuisine and the kitchen are featured prominently. Four axes in theatre practice have been followed: dramaturgy, theatre direction, scenography and acting.

[pt] A presença de diretores teatrais italianos (Adolfo Celi, Ruggero Jacobbi, Luciano Salce, Flaminio Bollini, Gianni Ratto, Alberto d`Aversa) na renovação do teatro brasileiro (década de 1950) remete ao campo teórico de representação dos processos de modernização da cultura, entre anseio de globalização (alcançar o padrão internacional) e preservação do local (atingir o Brasil autêntico). A polêmica entre esteticismo cosmopolita e brasileirismo permea o debate renovador desde a sua implantação. Motivada pela missão pioneira de instalação da cena dirigida, a transculturação de pessoas e idéias que ocorre com a interferência da geração dos diretores italianos no processo de denvolvimento da cena brasileira oferece recorte temático privilegiado para narrar os fatos da modernização da arte no Brasil. Suas intuições, heranças, oportunidades e invenções perdidas, investigadas em amplo acervo de documentos inéditos, sugerem um quadro de realização somente parcial do sonho moderno. / [en] The presence of italian directors (Adolfo Celi, Ruggero Jacobbi, Luciano Salce, Flaminio Bollini, Gianni Ratto, Alberto d`Aversa) in the renewal of Brazilian theatre in the 50`s refers to studies in the field of culture modernization processes. The polemics between cosmopolitan estheticism and brasility has, since the beginning, pervaded the debate about cultural renovation. Motivaded by the pioneering mission of implementing the directed scene, the transit of people and ideas wich take place under the interference of that generation of Italian directors in the process of development in the Brazilian theatre, give us a special perspective when narrating facts about the modernization of art in Brazil. Its intuitions, its legacy, oportunities and lost inventions, investigated in a large collection of undisclosed documents, suggest only a parcial view of the modern dream.

No description available.

Dissertation work Andrej Krob follows Krob`s remarkable journey to theatre from meeting Vaclav Havel during his military service in 1957, through Krob`s arrival to Divadlo Na zabradli in the early sixties of 20th century and especially his collaboration with director Jan Grossman, next to who Krob gradually work his way up from stage technician to the director. From the numerous Krob`s productions is the attention paid to the very first one, almost unknown directorial act, student production of Kral Ubu, presented on chateau Breznice in 1964, however this dissertation is mostly dedicated to the selected and key Krob`s productions of Vaclav Havel`s plays. Meeting this author was for Krob personaly as well as for his directorial poetics progress entirely fundamental. That`s why this work describes and analyses in detail semi illegal production of Havel`s play Zebracka opera, presented by Krob in Horni Pocernice in 1975, which has became establishing production of Divadlo na tahu, as well as Krob`s production of the same play from 1995. Separate chapter of dissertation has been also dedicated to Krob`s video production of Havel`s play Pokouseni from 1988 that brings unique opportunity of artistic performance observation. This dissertation determines at the very end, based on in-depth analysis of the...

Thesis (M.A.)--Miami University, Dept. of Theatre, 2005. / Title from first page of PDF document. Document formatted into pages; contains [1], iv, 57 p. Includes bibliographical references (p. 56-57).

Cette thèse s'inscrit dans une dynamique de recherche qui seulement récemment a commencé à remettre en discussion une doxa de l'historiographie théâtrale un peu simpliste: dans le contexte italien, l'avènement de la mise en scène moderne serait un phénomène tardif, par rapport à d'autres Pays, comme par exemple l'Allemagne, la France, la Russie. Ce « retard » trouverait son origine dans la persistance d'une tradition autoréférentielle de l'acteur. Le système dans lequel il se produit - un système de troupes nomades, en l'absence d'un pôle théâtral hégémonique comme pouvait l'être Paris pour la France - serait inévitablement réfractaire à l'intrusion d'une figure artistique perçue comme étrangère: le metteur en scène. Il faudrait attendre l'après-guerre pour assister en Italie à l'affirmation de ce qu'on appelle la regìa. Ce lieu commun de l'historiographie a véhiculé une série d'équivoques et d'approximations qui aplatissent un phénomène comme l'affirmation de la mise en scène moderne, nourrissant ainsi un discours téléologique de progrès qualitatif.Une série de recherches menées à partir des années 2000 nous invite cependant à considérer la mise en scène comme un aspect de l'art théâtral dans toute sa complexité. Des concepts comme ceux de proto-regia (proto-mise en scène, Perrelli, 2005), de continuité/discontinuité (Sarrazac-Consolini, 2010), montrent les limites d'une définition univoque de cet art. Sous cette lumière, le contexte italien apparaît alors comme un terrain en friche. Une étude récente a justement montré la sensibilité du système italien envers l'œuvre des maîtres européens de la scène, en tournée dans la Péninsule entre 1911 et 1940 (Schino, 2008).Nous nous proposons alors de revenir d'une part sur la construction de l'idée du « retard », et sur les raisons qui ont fait de la mise en scène un véritable graal, d'une autre part nous souhaitons souligner de quelle façon cet art émerge en Italie justement à partir de la présupposée cause du retard: l'acteur. L'avènement de la mise en scène ne serait donc pas une épiphanie brusque, mais un art qui s'exprime de manière différente, selon le modus operandi des artistes et en fonction des caractéristiques du système théâtral. / This doctoral thesis challenges the simplistic doxa in theatre historiography that views genesis of theatre direction in Italy as a late phenomenon in comparison to other countries such as Germany, France, and Russia. This “delay” is thought to be due to the actor’s persistent self-referential tradition. According to the doxa, the Italian theatre system would have been resistant to the introduction of the new role of director, which was perceived as extraneous. This situation would have been caused in Italy by the popularity of wandering companies and the absence of a dominant theatrical focal point such as Paris was in France. The phenomenon of a strictly speaking regìa would have only emerged after the Second World War. This view has led to a series of misinterpretations and misunderstandings that oversimplify the phenomenon of the development of modern direction, favouring a teleological argument of qualitative progress. However, a number of studies carried out from the 2000’s encourage us to consider the direction as a complex aspect of the theatrical art. Concepts such as ‘proto-direction’ (Perrelli, 2005) and continuity/discontinuity (Sarrazac-Consolini, 2010), show the limits of an univocal definition of this art. In light of these studies, the Italian panorama appears as an uncharted territory. A recent study of the European directors’ tours in Italy for the years from the 1911 to 1940, has actually demonstrated the Italian system’s responsiveness (Schino, 2008).My research investigates the origin of the concept of “delay”, and the reasons by which theatre direction in Italy came to be considered by scholars as some sort of grail. I also highlight how direction in Italy emerges from the main source of the supposed delay itself: the actor. Indeed, the appearance of theatre direction is not abrupt; but rather a multifaceted art, which changes according to artists’ modus operandi and is dependent on the characteristics of the theatrical system.