Semiotics of Theatre

According to a sociosemiotic theoretical framework, this paper reflects on the enunciative relations between the so-called "dramatic text" and its performance. First we will address the textual nature of playing on stage, to be no longer thought of as a deflection from the dramatic text, but as the result of dynamics of translation converging in the stage practice. The alleged opposition between the closure of the dramatic text and the phenomenal presence of the actor's body on stage must be reconfigured on the ground of enunciation frames, along with all their effects of reality and presence. During the performance, the actor uses his own figure to project an image that displays a series of semantic articulations, adopting enunciation strategies that can be analysed sub specie textis. Though many studies on theatre still support the idea that the effect of naturalism on stage depends on casualness and impermanence, we will rely also on the approach of cognitive studies to remark that this very effect is the result of precise enunciative strategies oriented to produce empathy between the actor and the spectator.

Abstract: The Saussurian adagio according to which linguistics is "le patron général de la sémiologie" is well known. To a certain extent, the verbal and non-verbal may be subjected to a common, semiolinguistic scheme of investigation. For instance, a fundamental phenomenon in the history of cult(ure)s – the transition of collective expression patterns from sacer ludus to ludus aestheticus – may be described in a semiological metalanguage. Thus, we intend to illustrate, by resorting to a choreographic corpus, the relevance of certain semiological concepts, traditionally applied to verbal objects:
·        “desemantization”/ “resemantization”: a relevant opposition, in our opinion, for the transformation of the choreographic language along with other structures of society;
·        “mutability” and “immutability” of the sign: a paradoxical condition for the subsistence of not only verbal, but also choreographic language;
·        the Saussurean principle of “alteration through continuity”;

    Key-words: dance, desemantization, gesture, (im)mutability, language, resemantization, ritual, sign, Saussure, theatre.the Saussurean concept of “shifting” the semiotic relation; in our opinion, shifting the original relation (ritualistic, magic-religious) between the choreographic significant and signifier is a symptom of the gradual “aestheticization” or “theatricalization” of choreographic “language”.

The aim of this dissertation is to examine whether or not, and, if so, how Backa Theatre’s stage art contributes to the questioning of norms concerning children and young people by subversive representation of the young. The study investigates the dominant discourses of “children as citizens”, “the young gang member” and “boys and masculinity” that are staged and hybridized in the productions of Lille kung Mattias (Little King Matt) and Gangs of Gothenburg, directed by Mattias Andersson and 5boys.com, directed by Anja Suša at Backa Theatre between 2009 and 2012. By analyzing how ideas concerning sex/gender, sexuality, race and age appear intersectionally in the selected productions, and how the discourses are structured artistically through casting, dramaturgy, directing and scenography/the use of space, the dissertation examines the artistic composition of the discourses themselves. Theoretically and methodologically, the dissertation is based on a combination of semiotic performance analysis and critical discourse analysis. Concepts from Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis such as activities, schemata, frames and scripts are used to uncover the performances’ foundations and relationships to the surrounding society, and to understand how the discourses are artistically formed and composed in the selected performances. In Lille kung Mattias “the becoming discourse” is staged and hybridized. According to sociologists Jens Qvortrup and James Lee the dominant view of children as being in a state of becoming adults has the consequence that children are granted neither significant private nor public space in the present tense nor are they taken seriously. In Lille kung Mattias the children in the audience are encouraged to conduct political discussions and democratically vote on Sweden’s national budget. Thus, they practice what religious scholar John Wall calls childism. In this, the becoming discourse is challenged, since the children’s current priorities and views on society are focused. Gangs of Gothenburg stages and hybridizes “the marginalized gang member discourse” found in the contemporary media debate. In Gangs of Gothenburg the medial process of generating meaning is staged and challenged. By using Sara Ahmed’s concept of phenomenology of whiteness, the racialization of the young gang member is discussed and problematized. The adult, white viewer position/ gaze is staged when the white middle-class couple watch and comment on the documentary interview of a young gang member. 5boys.com captures and stages “the patriarchal masculinity discourse” that, according to gender scholar David Buchbinder, is based on the practice of misogyny and homophobia, a strategy to distance masculinity from femininity. The discourse is hybridized by letting the actresses themselves choose their costumes, by incorporating metafictional elements in which the actors discuss each other and the play, by the use of passionate movements and dancing to music, and by the literal deconstruction of the scenography. Thus, by capturing the patriarchal masculinity discourse and combining it with other contexts, the very embodiment of sexism, misogyny and homophobia is problematized. This dissertation thus situates Backa Theatre’s productions in an intersection of political, philosophical and artistic ideas and practices where children’s and young people’s realities encompass existential issues, socio-economic conditions, the pronouncements of adults, and not leastwise, power structures. In Backa Theatre’s performing arts, the worlds of children and adults are presented as co-operative and existing in a conditional relationship.

Creativity for long has been described as an act that has to do with the mind. Creative mind is seen by array of scholars from the theatre and other disciplines as looking for solution to every challenge that comes before it. There are lot of challenges that are bedevilling the human race at large. One of such issues is that of tribalism, nepotism, political instability which has subsumed mankind in general and Nigeria in particular. It is the quest to seek for rightful solutions to some of these challenges facing the Nigerian society that has make playwrights all over the Nigerian shores to begin write their plays towards ameliorating some these challenges with their creative prowess. The playwrights commence the use of their creative minds to put the Nigerian society in the rightful manner democratically. The study intends reading some select Nigerian playwrights who have creatively used their minds to help in putting the Nigerian democratic practice in the right direction through their creative proficiencies. The paper suggests that the proper examination of creativity in some the plays written by the Nigerian playwrights will help a long way in reshaping the democratic process in Nigeria. The study concludes that the art of playwriting should be encouraged, and redirected towards the reconstruction of the Nigerian democratic practice

„Архитектоника на театралността” теоретизира детайлно върху семиотичния театрален дискурс и е опит за научна локализация на подобна проблематика в радикалния свят на театралната презентация. Театралният спектакъл не е просто игра и той конституира сам себе си като феномен, който надхвърля далеч тесните рамки на представлението и оправдава собствената си рефлексия на едно по-високо ниво на архетипна полиморфност. Това превръща театралния спектакъл в семиотична система, която произвежда много и различни знакови структури. Тази уникална знакова морфология предоставя идеално поле за изследването на типичните механизми при създаването на спектакъла и за детайлна вгледяемост в спецификите на театралния mimesis. В стремежа си да постигне adaecuatio rei et intellectus – пълната кореспонденция между нещото и смисъла, театралният акт прокламира една колосална полиформеност от знаково комуникативни системи, които са продукт на една специфична интерпретативна сфера. Спектакалът предизвиква троично-херменевтична зависимост, при която публиката тълкува вече изтълкувани същности, смисли и значения като ги трансформира  в други същности, смисли  и значения, което вече се конституира
като театрално представяне – първичен текст (автор), херменевтичен дискурс върху този текст- интерпретация (режисьор), вторичен херменевтичен дискурс върху вече явената интерпретация – свръхинтерпретация (зрител). Този триумвират създава парадигмата на спектакала като вторично явление вследствие на първичен продукт, водещо до третичен анализ и по този начин обуславя неговата свръхинтерпретативна знакова среда.

„Звученето на книгата на Ивайло Александров е различно от много други книги, които се опитват да теоретизират върху избраната материя. Други книги спират там, където теорията зазвучава убедително в своята автотеличност, без да напуска себе си, своя език - при него това е началото. Пиша за „Архитектоника на театралността”, а всъщност мисля за семиотиката и начините, по които тя разговаря с театъра, с театралното, с изкуството. От Велтруски до Ивайло Александров едно убеждение невидимо споява мислещите в семиотична светлина – семиотиката все още има потенции да разказва за театралността, а разказите все още могат да бъдат интригуващи.”

Проф. д.н. Мирослав Дачев

„Без съмнение сме изправени пред изключително професионална и прецизна творба, автономно изследване с ярък авторски почерк, в което тезите и теоретичните постановки са формулирани в логиката на един практически опит и с оглед на едно пряко практическо ползване на този труд представляват солиден теоретичен модел на всеки лабораторен театрален процес. Но въпросите, които тази книга буди, не са на нивото само на професионалната занаятчийска компетентност, а отскачат далеч в общото поле на хуманитарното знание, бидейки собствено екзистенциални и философски въпроси.”

Проф. д.н. Мария Попова

https://www.prosveta.bg/ceni-na-uchebnici/arhitektonika-na-teatralnostta

In her article "Paradigms of Communication in Performance and Dance Studies" Nicoleta Popa Blanariu approaches from an interdisciplinary perspective the measure in which performing arts (theater, music, ballet, Indian classical dance, folk dance, etc.), as well as ritual performance constitute a corpus that may be analysed by means of theoretical and conceptual tools in communication studies and semiotics. Popa Blanariu analyses the relation between signification and communication in performing arts, between different codes and artistic expressions through which these are realized, between verbal and the other artistic "languages," and takes into consideration how "linguistic" functions manifest themselves within "languages" specific to various forms of art.

Through the manifestation of the concept of a sign we discuss the question of how the meaning and significance takes place in a theatre environment, as we analyze the process of signification/communication in a theatrical stage reality. This semiotic perspective helps us to develop the idea of ​​a theatre performance as a theatrical text created by actor and space, and accepted by the audience. This text includes at its core two aspects of signification - linguistic/non-linguistic and performative (physical action), which actually stimulates the diversity of signification on stage. We explore the premise that as a text, as a semiotic construct of signs and sign formations, a theatrical performance is defined by a set of codes that are generally supra-theatrical cultural codes, and which are based on secondary sign systems of the performance - literature, music, art, mythology, religion, even the theatre itself as art. We indicate that the performative codes (sign systems) normally function simultaneously in a performance (paradigmatically) or linearly (syntagmatically), and thus they actively produce meaning [signification]. The signs that the viewer gets from variative sign systems on the stage are accepted under the principle of simultaneous contact, which themselves are in syntagmatic relation among themselves when producing signification. Quoting De Marinis 1993 [1982] , and in the process of reasoning, also De Toro 1995, we classified the performative text as a macrotext or text-of-the-text produced by variative series of partial performative texts that in the context of the overall performance constitute unique expressive result, a compilatory product of speech, music, costumes, gestures, dance, body sculpturing, etc. Thus, we conclude that the elements of the general performative text interact and they are united in one sense that constructs the theatrical text as performative expression. Theatre semiotics as a general principle, and in particular the ideas of the Prague structuralists, helped us look at theatre performance from the perspective of an interaction between actors and space in their overall verbal/nonverbal communication. In view of our reasoning up to this point we finally confirm the position that the actor and stage space are fundamental components not only of the theatrical text but of the theatrical performativity as a whole.

Through the manifestation of the concept of a sign I discuss the question of how the meaning and significance takes place in a theatre environment, as I analyze the process of signification/communication in a theatrical stage reality. This semiotic perspective helps me to develop the idea of ​​a theatre performance as a theatrical text created by actor and space, and accepted by the audience. This texts includes at its core two aspects of signification - linguistic/non-linguistic and performative (physical action), which actually stimulates the diversity of signification on stage. I explore the premise that as a text, as a semiotic construct of signs and sign formations, a theatrical performance is defined by a set of codes that are generally supra-theatrical cultural codes, and which are based on secondary sign systems of the performance - literature, music, art, mythology, religion, even the theatre itself as art. I indicate that the performative codes (sign systems) normally function simultaneously in a performance (paradigmatically) or linearly (syntagmatically), and thus they actively produce meaning [signification]. The signs that the viewer gets from variative sign systems on the stage are accepted under the principle of simultaneous contact, which themselves are in syntagmatic relation among themselves when producing signification. Quoting De Marinis ("The Semiotics of Performance". Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1993 [1982]) , and in the process of reasoning, also De Toro ("Theatre Semiotics: Text and Staging in Modern Theatre". University of Toronto Press, 1995), I classify the performative text as a macrotext or text-of-the-text produced by variative series of partial performative texts that in the context of the overall performance constitute unique expressive result, a compilatory product of speech, music, costumes, gestures, dance, body sculpturing, etc. Thus, I conclude that the elements of the general performative text interact and they are united in one sense that constructs the theatrical text as performative expression. Theatre semiotics as a general principle, and in particular the ideas of the Prague structuralists, help me to look at theatre performance from the perspective of an interaction between actors and space in their overall verbal/nonverbal communication. In view of my reasoning up to this point I finally confirm the position that the actor and stage space are fundamental components not only of the theatrical text but of the theatrical performativity as a whole.

Here I start out with the belief that if: the text as literature is subject to a hermeneutical treatment, the theatre as action is a consequence of this hermeneutical process, and it is the prime reason for its appearance. Theatrical performance is the product of a triple hermeneutic dependence, in which the audience interprets already interpreted essences, senses and meanings transforming them into other essences, senses and meanings that are already constituted as a theatrical PRESENTATION - a primary text (author), a hermeneutic discourse on this text - interpretation (director), and a secondary hermeneutical discourse on the already presented interpretation - over-interpretation (spectator). I find out that the theatrical act is a variety of sign communication systems that are language constructs. In the course of the reasoning I brought out the idea that each théâtralité is determined by the presence of other components in its distinctiveness - verbal expressions, gestures, facial expressions, mannerisms, physical and psychological conditions, visual imagery, music and sound environment. It is emphasize that this communicative base is seen by the spectator and exists as a reality at a pure psycho-cognitive level, built in the mind of the recipient as text constructed of multiple sign formations.

Portraits in Early Modern English Drama studies the complex web of interconnections that grows out of the presentation of portraits as props in early modern English drama, from the Elizabethan age up to the closing of the theatres. This book examines how the dramatic text and the subjectivities of the dramatis personae are shaped and changed through the process of observation and interpretation of pictures in the dramatic actions and dialogues.
Unlike any previous study, it confronts when a portrait is clearly meant not to be a miniature. This also has bearings on the effect of the picture on the audience and in terms of genre expectation. Two important questions are interrogated in the book: What were the price and value of these portraits? and What were the strategies deployed by the playing companies to show women’s portraits in a theatre without actresses?
This book will be of interest to different areas of research dealing with the history of drama and literature, material and visual culture studies, art history, gender studies, and performance studies.

"The theatricality as a lie-presenting. Phenomenology of the ‘Game-of-Lies’. Constituting of the theatre lie in the aesthetics of the play." >>> This work focuses on the fact that the theatre as artistic expression is a form of play in regulating its own cultural values ​​by showing and expressing "lies." In the course of reasoning I find out that in a theatre situation a lie receives the status of a phenomenon, and, built into the overall cultural (artistic) discourse, unfolds a phenomenological game of recognition of similar entities, as well as the interpretation of meanings in a large-scale corpus of a supra-rational being of the human cultural reflexivity. Adding that in this study the concept of lie is used and interpreted only from a position of an artistic reflection that helps unveil the idea of the ​​performative semiosis of a theatrical spectacle, we described lie as a cultural alternative and as a tool to transform the realities of the real world into art values. Considering the context of the theatre lie, I invoke Eco 1993 (Eco, Umberto. 1979 (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.) and Huizinga 1982 (Huizinga, Johan. 1980. Homo Ludens. Routledge & Kegan Paul. London: Boston and Henley.), and postulate that where by lying ideas and truths are created, as well as signs of true manifestations and each sign acquires the status code in a relative cognitive system, it is namely the game that provokes the desire to create a stage world adequate to reality. Because the lie that the actor sets through playing is a series of codes that can transform a lie it into a truth, only by transformation into viewer's mind into the form of certain meanings. Truth that in the theatre is a result of the decoding of the signs in the space of a stage semiosphere outside of which the semiosis of the theatrical game-of-lies could not take place. Following this line of reasoning, I find out that in the process of building the semantics of the stage language the problem of truth is formulated as central to the understanding of this-what-is-present (drama), as a performance (dromenon) and the main focus clearly falls on the availability of theatrical "text". In this interaction between the text and the addressee, which Lotman (following the logic of Morris) called pragmatics we again found a reason for the existence of a theatrical performance as performative text, where a lie as narrative is the final aspect of the interpretation of a presentation in performance. Finally, I turn to Gadamer and trace his thesis that “the game itself consists in representing something”(Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1993. Truth and Method. London: Sheed&Ward, 108). In the theatre this playing is a playing-of-a-concept-of-a-thing. There, on the stage, everything is a sign connotation, it is semiotics, and each encoding of the flow of information is done solely for the purpose of regulation of this truth on a global scale. So from the beginning to the very end I follow the logic that in a theatrical performance something replaces something else for the audience and for this to happen, as Eco says, it has been structured in a game situation, which stipulates that it must be accepted as a sign (Eco, Umberto. 1977. Semiotics of the Theatrical performance. In: The Drama Review, v.21/n.1, March, 1977, 127). This help me to make sense of the path I have walk along so far and came to the conclusion that the constitution of the drama lies in the aesthetics of game and is probably the most creative factor that has helped transform the theatre from a major religious ritual into a large-scale art in its form and content. The only one of all the arts having preserved the play in terms of gaming performance, the theatre has already approached the disclosure of the nature of the world not just as a subject called only to entertain, but as a subject having transformed the game-of-lies in a complex research discourse.

The perspective of a semiotic analysis and the need for a unifying centre suggest the need to decoding the mechanism of theatrical modelling, and namely, what in theatrical practice has been defined as mise-en-scéne – to-set/embody-something-on-the-stage. I am looking at it as a structuralist formation, a theoretical construct and a radical object of knowledge, and not just as a profane result of director’s (creative) interference with the dramatic and/or performative text. I am viewing the thesis that theatre performance is characterized by a dual function of the actor in the process of production of signs (actor's discourse) and the semiotizing of his very reflection to what is happening in the stage space (stage performance). Reconstructing the performative text in their minds, viewers perceive the whole corpus of the system configured of individual sign subsystems, namely as a theatrical performance, built with all the components surrounding the action - speech, gesture/mimics/movement, mechanization, sound. Theatrical performance is viewed as a semiotic code for the creative world of the creators of the show (director, actor, designer, composer, choreographer) presented as a mise-en-scéne and reproduced as a performative text and as an active matrix for the production of meaning. A more careful scrutinizing of the terms to-set/to-embody-something-on-the-stage revealed the existence of prior knowledge coming from experience, which is transformed by the creator of the show and pre-set as understanding (i.e. what is likely to be understood by the perceiver), following the convention that, in essence, the primary semiotic practice of theatre performance is to transform all objects in obvious signs/sign formations that are suitable to be recognized. Here I consider the role and impact of collective cultural archetypes on individual artistic activity and perception, treating these archetypes from an aesthetic perspective. I am postulatе the idea that the aesthetics of the mise-en-scéne, in contemporary theatre practice, is based precisely on the cultural experience set in personal conscious/unconscious of the theatre artist and of the spectator himself. Which leаds me to the conclusion, that the deep archetypal reflection of mise-en-scéne harmonizes the roles of the individual and the collective unconscious (or conscious) as a set of complementary perspectives of an optimal sign semiosis. This is a semiotic perspective that on the stage, in the flow of coordinated action and strict geometry of movements, in the style of arranged performative articulation and technical vision, emphasizes the signifying nature of the theatrical performance as a process of communication and representation.

The cultural discourse of theatrical performance defines the theatre sign interaction as an active semiosis. This, in turn, specifies the main objective of the study – the formulation of the basic parameters of this architectonics as a fundament of théâtralité. Since the time of Antiquity the theatre has always been discussing general aesthetic, philosophical, ethical and social issues in the context of a visual image of the specific objects of an intellectual discourse. The book takes a close look at this process of signification, formation of meanings, presentation and interpretation on stage: a theatre performance is a product of an intense sign environment and a major symbol of theatricality.

"The book of Ivaylo Alexandrov sound different from many other books that attempt to theorize on the selected topic. Other books stop where the theory starts sounding convincing in its own telos without leaving itself, its language, but for Ivaylo Alexandrov this is just the beginning – a theory should work well in order to convince, and this means it has to leave itself and its language, to be seen from the point of view of the game; on the other side of the theory. I am writing about "Architectonics of Theatricality" and I am actually thinking about semiotics and the ways in which it is conversing with theatre, with the theatricality, with art. From Veltrusky to Ivaylo Alexandrov there is one belief that invisibly unites the semiotic thinkers - semiotics is still potent to talk about theatricality and stories – and stories can still be intriguing."

Prof. Dr. Sc. Miroslav Dachev - National Academy for Theatre and Film Arts, Sofia, Bulgaria

"Undoubtedly we are faced with an extremely professional and precise work, independent study with strongly innovative and original character, paper which is recognizable from afar: semiotic in form and in spirit, logically arranged and stylistically pleasing. It is very important to emphasize that all theses and theoretical constructs in this research were built out and formulated within the logic of a practical experience and with a view to a direct practical use of this work that could constitute a solid theoretical model of each laboratory theatre process on stage or in the style of a direct construction of a theatre performance as a stage product. But this book poses questions which are not only at the level of a professional craft competence, and with remarkable mastery penetrate deeply into the general field of humanities, being own purely existential and philosophical issues."

Prof. Dr. Sc. Maria Popova - New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria


https://www.peterlang.com/view/title/18575

Each theatrical sign (verbal/non-verbal) is associated with the performance itself in the context of large-scale interaction and such a semiotic approach presents to the perceiving spectator a micro-world, constructed by the specific theatrical mechanism of signification in theatre. This significant environment is dominated by the stage figure as a basic constructive component: a complex product, which is a consequence of the interrelation between dramatis personae towards represented character, which the Prague Structuralists define as the basic component of performance (especially in: Veltruský but also in: Mukařovský, dramatic figure; in: Zich, actor’s figure). The stage figure as a constructive element of the actor’s sign is a complex structure, a synthesis of elements, linguistic и paralinguistic signs, which configure a system within the system into a whole corpus of performance. Thus the specifically semiotic perspective is defined by a presented on the stage (regardless of whether we’d call it a dramatic or a stage figure), which in its turn is categorised as transformation or the basic structural element of performance, which by means of theatrical action as a signifier (signatum) leads to producing signification/sense (signantia) (Veltrusky). An actor’s presentation on the stage as sign of the signs, i.e. the foundation of an acting sign generates the construction of veritable thèatralitè. Every thèatralitè develops an open system of transformation/transmutation or the transmutation of something into something else (in Bogatyrev — transformation in a different form) which systematizes the sign components on the stage and organises the creation of stage semiosis by the actor, transformed into an image, through the stage space, costume, musical environment up to the communication with the spectators and their interpretation. The construction of the stage figure and the perceiving of the dramatic character are a direct result of the communication and the creative activity of the binary opposition actor/spectator with the consequently constructed common idea of the audience, perceiving the signifying-in-the-sense of-significant. Here the character is already represented by the sign, typifying a certain code providing insights, which is what converts the represented as sense and meaning in the mind of the recipient. In the triple interdependency between actor/stage figure/dramatis personae, the very creative aesthetics of the stage presentation is configured. The entire system of signs, which sign’s constructions on the stage evince, is fleshed out only as a coherent whole and a final explication of a series of notions in the mind of the perceiving spectator, a figment of their imagination.