Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 23:38:12 +0100
From: Stephen Kaplin <skactw-AT-tiac.net>
Subject: PUPT: Mime Article


Robert,
	Thanks for posting that article on mime. It really does mirror some
of the cultural alienation that many of us feel as puppeteers.But some
differences  are apparent.
	First-- the field of mime seems to be a much more circumscribed
field than the field of puppetry. As such, it is easier for a single school
or style to dominate the entire form. There's no Decreau in puppetry, thank
God, to carve the commandments into stone.
	Second-- Puppetry  is a much more flexable field, adaptable (for
the most part) to any cultural situation or individual temperment. Mime
(like classic ballet) bends the artist into a pre-existing mold. it sounds
like mime is more like Chinese opera in that over the course of time it has
become a rigid discipline that brooks no change or rival.
	It's nice that Puppet Festivals don't have to deal with these kind
of tensions. Can you imagine the Paska-ites and the Hensonists duking it
out during critique sessions?
	I always felt that our field (like Mime) should develope an arsenal
of critical tools to help study our craft. But such tools could lead to the
kind of insider vs. outsider arguments that seems to bedevil the mimes.
H-mmm.
	I'm curious-- are ventriloquist or magician conventions as
vituperative as the mimes'?
				Stephen K.




  --- Personal replies to: Stephen Kaplin <skactw-AT-tiac.net>
  --- List replies to:     puptcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Admin commands to:   majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu