|
By ROBERT W. BETHUNE ART TIMES December, 2005
Is it possible
to radically re-think what we do with costumes in the live theater? In
the late 19th and early 20th century, painters and sculptors found themselves
dealing with a new freedom: the freedom to decide whether or not they
wanted their work to be tied to surface reality. Photography offered
a way to provide accurate representation of appearance; painters and
sculptors no longer needed to do that. Theater
artists have been very slow to come to grips with the freedom offered
to them by film. Like the painters and sculptors, there is no longer
any reason why theater has to reflect a surface reality. It can be whatever
it wants to be. It can be as purely a product of the unfettered imagination
as it can manage, or it can be as concretely photorealistic as it might
wish to be. It has all its options. The
slowest theatrical discipline in this regard is costuming. We see nonrealistic
settings, lighting and makeup; we see some nonrealistic writing; we
sometimes see nonrealistic props; we occasionally see actors who can
break the bounds of realism. How often do we see costumes that are not
naturalistic representations of real clothes? In a theater that no longer
needs to be concerned with period unless it wants to be, we find that
we can’t even put shoes on an actor without invoking a sense of time
and place — which may be the last thing we want to do. There
is another interesting parallel with painting. There are very few ways
to paint without putting color on a surface — very few indeed. Likewise,
it is an inevitable necessity that actors be costumed. Even nudity is,
in essence, a costume; it is the choice of how we have chosen to dress
or not dress. Very
well, then. Since the actor must needs wear something, even if only
one’s birthday suit, what shall the actor wear? What
if acting were a sport? It certainly is an athletic activity; more so,
in fact, than some sports. A vigorous performance of an active part
can leave you just as ready for the showers and even a massage as any
other brisk activity, sporting or esthetic. Well,
it is an interesting fact that almost all sports involve clothing. A
particular kind of clothing is part of the equipment for most sports.
Bicyclists have their Lycra suits; football players have their pads
and helmets; riders have their jodhpurs and boots, and so forth. Dancers
have leotards. Actors have — what? What
indeed? Throw out the idea of representation in clothing. What does
an actor need? What kind of equipment worn on the body would be valuable?
What elements of clothing would help make an actor more expressive,
more evocative, more interesting? What clothing elements would be useful?
In what ways? Could
it be that costuming could stop being a production expense, like paint
and makeup, and become a capital expense, like lighting fixtures and
speakers? Now wouldn’t that be interesting for the bottom line? It
just could be that there is a revolution waiting to happen at the cutting
table. I wonder what it will look like? |