Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 14:44:51 -0400
From: Preston Foerder <slovpete-AT-telesouth1.com>
Subject: Re: PUPT: Mime Article




mark segal wrote:

>  I always liked that definition of "good puppetry"
> (was it from the handbook?) that a deaf person should be able to stand
> in the back of an auditorium and be able to understand what is going on.

I would debate this.  Yes, the puppet communicates through movement.  And
puppets do not exactly mimic human behavior when speaking, they use many
techniques to allow the audience to follow the conversation and imply the
missing facial or body movements on to the sculpture of the puppet.  But to
say that a deaf person should be able to understand the piece implies that
the puppet mimes (no insult intended towards mimes) each and every action
while he's speaking, which looks overdramatic, and, quite frankly,
ridiculous.  There is a lot of great text based puppet theatre, which
equally depends on the word as well as the action.  This would be accessible
to the deaf through an interpreter, but in no way should this be a criticism
of the piece.  It would be like saying Shakespeare was a lesser playwright
because a deaf person standing in the back of an auditorium couldn't
understand what was going on.

Preston




  --- Personal replies to: Preston Foerder <slovpete-AT-telesouth1.com>
  --- List replies to:     puptcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Admin commands to:   majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu