Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 09:05:55 -0500 From: john bell <john_bell-AT-emerson.edu> Subject: Re: PUPT: Mister Rogers - "Sure his crude puppetry didn't influence me or anyone else perhaps." - "Crude: not refined; lacking grace, taste, tact, or polish; rude." Merriam Webster Dictionary One the one hand, I think "crude" might not be the most apt adjective to describe Fred Rogers' puppet work. As Mary Robinette points out, Rogers' straightforward puppetry is entirely within the mainstream traditions of handpuppet theater throughout the world. Specifically, this work does not rely on moving mouths, and does not go after intricate, "realistic" gestures. To say this is "crude" tends to disparage that tradition. Is the better alternative articulated mouths, brighter colors, rod-operated arms, flashy graphics, jaunty music, and hip irony, i.e., mainstream American television puppetry? Can we consider the possibility that "crude" puppet theater might achieve some effects that flashy puppetry can't? On the other hand, hurrah for "crude" puppetry! Sometimes (now, perhaps?) it's necessary to speak right out, and tell the truth about the world. Hurrah! for crude puppetry's directness, bluntness, its unabashed articulation of sentiment and story. Hurrah! for the "crude" puppetry of Bernice Silver, Karagoz, Wayang Kulit, Punch, Kasperl, French Guignol, Petruschka, Tolu Bommalatta, Sicilian puppet theater, Mexican handpuppet theater, Vietnamese water puppets, Bamana rod puppets, Mamulengo, Dada puppet theater, and hurrah for every single crude puppet around the world now currently trying to stop the insanity of war so artfully sold to us on television! "Crude" puppets can talk about the truth, can make fun of governments, can communicate complicated ideas and reach us directly, immediately! Thank god for this, and thanks to Fred Rogers. john bell
HTML VERSION:
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005