I
found Goldberg’s description of Bauhaus, particularly of Schlemmer’s “theory of
performance,” as puzzling. Goldberg identifies a central problem, which
Schlemmer means to address, as a conflict within the dialectic of the rational
and the emotional. A variety of words are utilized in the chapter to evoke the
sense of both: rational – rigorously intellectual, abstract, geometric, painting-oriented,
philosophical-artistic, Apollo; emotional – practice, theatrical, impulse,
unadulterated pleasure, Dionysian. (102-4, 112)
It seems to me that
Schlemmer experimented with both the two-dimensional plane and
three-dimensional space for the purpose, of which there were others, of
constituting a stronger bond, or bridge, between the two opposing forces of
rational and emotional. This is how I see the Bauhaus notion of Raumempfindung (‘felt volume’). Goldberg
even defines the phases through which the dancers passed, from the
‘mathematical’ to the ‘gestur[al]’, in Schlemmer’s performances, including Figure in Space. (104)
Goldberg identifies the
‘Man and Machine’ theme, which existed in both the “Bauhaus analysis of art and
technology” and the performances by the Italian Futurists and Russian
Constructivists. According to Goldberg, costumes became the transformative
element from man to machine, often constricting the movements of the performer
(106-7). My initial question is: What of Schlemmer’s stage performances
actually emits emotional impulse, let alone Dionysian passion?
No comments:
Post a Comment