During the rehearsal process for The Taming of the Shrew, we were thinking a lot about the text and how we wanted to present it. Generally speaking, we played up the humor to the fullest extent, and tried to make our characters come across in what we were saying. Particular difficulties arose when we reached Kate's ending monologue. The director had a vision for the end of the show that was not explicitly supported by the text, but we went ahead with it anyway. Of the people I heard from after the shows, a few people understood the somewhat less simple ending we were trying to present, and a few were a bit angry because they did not understand. I can't, and don't, blame them.
This situation, however, puts me in mind of Collingwood's statement about art existing only in the imagination. The end result of the art was not what the cast presented onstage, because the process didn't stop there. The end result was in the minds of the director, the actors, and the audience. Depending on the person, the words sounded slightly different, the actions meant something slightly different. That was where the work of art was.
I am content to accept this, but I have to wonder: how well can we gauge the success of a work of art if it really exists in the mind?
No comments:
Post a Comment