Task:
Peter Brook stands out to be a major contributor of contemporary theatre. Through his production, he played a crucial role in shaping the modern theatre industry. An extraordinary creative mastermind who, through his revolutionary productions, has reconstructed the way players in the industry and directors’ perceptions on the theatre industry. During his career, his production has been appreciatively been celebrated in theatre, opera, film and writing. Peter Brook stands out to be the greatest contributor of contemporary theatre. Through his production, he played a crucial role in shaping the modern theatre industry. An extraordinary creative genius who, through his revolutionary productions, has reconstructed the way players in the industry and directors’ perceptions on the theatre industry. During his career, his production has been appreciatively been celebrated in theatre, opera, film and writing (Inne 354).
The aim in his theatre production is "reconciliation." In his own statement: "The mere fact that you can in the theatre show two divergent points of analysis and the spectators, just by scrutinizing these two, is in a way empathizing and tracing them does reconcile. The purpose of playing something out, a great conflict is reconciled by the event itself." The words echo Brook's wisdom of justice and democracy, as well as conviction that theatre may not present a truth, but can offer "a moment of truth when everybody at that instant is touched in the similar way."
Brook the philosopher devoted his energy and genius into his investigating a theatre that was painless and delicate, direct, and sophisticated, concurrently popular and wealth in the meaning. He has been an energetic force in redefining the way and reasoning of the theatre industry of the second half of the 20th century. Brook has included an idea of productive revolution to theater, showing how to shift from the "deadly," ordinary theater into knowledge that is mutually shared by the diverse actors globally and audience in the uttermost sensitivity of the word. Peter Brook has extremely influenced the future generations of directors and other key players in the industry. His idea of “deadly, holy, uneven, and immediate” theaters has grown to become classic ideas in the investigation of theatrical production. The illogically amalgamating subject of his work has been its irregularity. To cite one of his brilliant observations "Not knowing is not resignation. It is an opening to amazement." The idea of revolution has been replicated in the modern theatres and theatre has undergone numerous changes as per the demands of the audience (Inne 354).
In the work of Peter Brook the element of storytelling, which is linked to the diverse ethnic cultures, has been his keen interest and in his many books, he writes about his significance of travelling to Africa, India and Persia. His continuous devotion to looking for latest meanings enabled him to discover multiculturalism a mark of worldwide communication. Brook in his quest to search for new truth, he made several trips to Asia and Africa appreciate their diverse cultural backgrounds which also enabled him to reach local spectators, and to create a link which will bring the diverse groups through together the power of theatre communication. However, it is his affection of Shakespeare, who has always been his role model that is at the heart of his production, which has enabled him to reinvent and refresh his quest for a theatre industry, which upholds the values of the society. Through believe on the power of communication, it has become a common practice in the theatre rooms to embrace communication as a medium for engaging the audience (Brook 232).
Peter Brook has been in the theatre industry for more than 40 years; his iconoclastic approach to the issues in the theatre industries has remained to be relevant across many cultures of the world. Unlike other artists in the theatre industry in the modern theatre today, Brook has disapproved conservative ideas and which in the end has influenced more generations across the world in the theatre industry especially the performers and the actors and more so changed the perceptions of the audience. Many players in the theatre industry through the influence of Brook’s early many players have changed their perceptions about the industry and this has seen the theater industry get large follow up (Inne 354).
During the ancient time in the Brook lived, there was the element of space which enabled the actors to communicate and meet the expectations of the audience. The space in the past provided a vital link between the audience and performers. Performances always takes place in three-dimensional space. In the modern theatre, industry space has become one of the new methods employed by the producers and the theatre actors to make their performances and the theaters relevant to the needs of this century. In this case, the audience, and acts constituted to the integrated part of the space .This means that the space plays a crucial role in any given performance. Directors who do not embrace the element of space in a performance will not realize the benefits attached to space in the industry and there performances will be poor. In the Brooks work, we encounter the theatre being a field study, which entails movements, energy, and interrelations. In the book, The Space, we find the element of energy, mobility and certain interrelations, which brings out the theatre series of events. This means that in the theatre industries, there exists movement by the actors and the movement of the actors involves the use of energy. The energy and mobility coexists because of the presence of interconnection between the two. In the modern theatre, there are actors and the audience who are in harmony and in touch with one another due to the presence of some links (Kustow 234).
When the work of Peter Brook was released, the sight of the Deadly Theatre was taken for granted as it taken to mean defiant theatre. The theatre has been over time referred as the whore, which means that theatre was impure, but in the contemporary society, the term whore has taken another twist, which mean to take money illegally, and one proceed to short enjoyment. According to the scholars , there need a theatre which is more lively than the perceived dull one of the Deadly theatre .Unfortunately, the scholars apply the weight of their authority to dullness ,and they whisk the Deadly Theatre away. The scholars had a high expectation the theatre work of Brook, but they felled led down, as the theater was dull. They believed that any successful theatre, which is worth watching, would capture the element of curiosity among the audience. The scholars expected which is introduced to the theatres for the first time to brighter, lively, and faster than the, but the Brooks’ work do not capture their aspirations. They feel bored in theatre because the performance by Brook entailed long speeches and unconnected culture in the work. They asserted that the work lack cohesiveness. The class intellengsia wanted something in the theatre, which could offer them ‘better’ than life (Brook 232).
The use of the imperial gestures and royal ethics is slowly fading away from everyday life thus the every new generation finds the older forms of art more and more void as compared to those of the current generation. This, in turn, makes the youthful actors continue searching for what they call the truth. The work of Brook in the theatre, the actors capitalized on explaining themselves most. In theatre, the actors must minimize the use of words and explaining themselves and capitalize on the acting part. The same issue of overusing words should be limited when the author when the work to be produced will be used in the theatre. Brook in his work made many explanations thus making the scholars sees the work of Brook as not best dramatized, and as a result, the work was less dramatized as per the judgment of the scholars. The work of Brook overused the words such as musical, poetic, romantic, and noble materially affected the quality of the work according to the scholars. This are not supposed to be used more often in the classical plays. To the scholars these words represent another classical era in history and attempting to structure a performance with these words in the modern society is a way to the worst performance of the time. The scholars also had an issue, at which the Deadly Theatre approaches the classics from the perspective, which has been already been, used the previous actors. The scholars believe that the Deadly Theatre was exaggerated skipping some details, and imitating some memories from previous works of other artists. They believe that, for effective theatre, there should rehearsal of yesterday’s innovations to the test (Kustow 234).
In ideal theatre, according to scholars must present each form once sired is mortal, and every form must be restructured, and all the structures will reflect the influences that surround it. This means that theatre is comparative. The Deadly Theatre capitalizes on the fashion house, and perpetual issues, which underlie all, the dramatic activity. The scholars also perceive that the Deadly Theatre exposes the artists into severe consequences thereafter (Hunt 124). The theatre sounds overemotional, but it is continuously putting the actors in danger in relation to their jobs and their public image. The scholars view the work by Peter Brook as being relative thus not living to the standards of the theatre. Since the director of the Deadly Theatre is a Briton, the work received critics from the Americans. The Americans refer to the work of the Peter mystery they argued that the theater work was full of imitation of European origin. The movie exposes the Peter Brook work as having odd sensibility. In the perspective of scholars, an intimate theatre will depend on the audience translating that each spectator has the theatre it deserves. The work of Brook lacks the defined responsibilities of the audience. The contradiction in this work is seen in the audience contradiction in this case thus making the work to lose sensitivity. The work of the Peter Brook as observed by the scholars does not take into account the element of the language of theatre. The theatre language is paramount in the developing a lively theatre work. Modern artist employs the use of the theatre language to remain relevant in the performances. Any artist, who does not go by the language of the theatre, will face the wrath of the dramatic utterances. In real play, there must be well articulated sound to make the theatre work worth watching to the audience. The work must embrace the art of simplicity. The Brooks work is receiving critic due to the deadlines, which always brings about unnecessary repetition in the work making it more frustrating. The director employs the use of outdated formulae and systems, and stock beginning in the start of the movie. This also applies to his co-directors and the actors. This made the work of Brook receive early critic (Brook 232).
Since the year 1970, the Brooks’ work has become leading in research among the literature scholars, which is in Paris-based Centre for Theatre Research. The book directly influences and attracts actors as well as sponsorship of the research. The research has provided a basis for solving problems, which affects the society. Brook in his exploration, travelled to countries such as India, Africa, and Asia. The traveling gave a masterly ground for interacting with people with different cultures thus building a rich theater work. He made with audiences who had no or little understanding about the western culture. At this point, Brook was able to learn the diverse cultures and the audiences benefited from Brook by learning the western cultures. Brook in his contribution to the theatre industry believed that there should be one language in the theater so that it cuts across all the cultures. He argued that different cultures should translate their theater work into a common understanding. He also observes that language is not a roadblock towards merging different culture (Kustow 234).
Brook was also involved in search of truth that was sacred, metaphysical in nature and takes the element of universality. Brook wanted to create in the modern society what Shakespeare achieved during his days. In his work, he ensures that he removes all the theoretically irrelevant issues until he believes that he remains with what is relevant to the theatre industry. He ensured that the final work has coherency and could speak for itself. He realized by ensuring that he worked with other actors practically, and he makes sure start from a physical point. This involved intense examination and research. He uses the elements of mobility, gestures, visuals, and sounds which at the end assemble them to come up with a complete picture. This enables him to illustrate the essence of a play through gestures, signs, image, and visuals. This contribution by Brook has found its place in the modern theatre industry. Many industries use the four components they come out with final theatric art or play. Brook has always given his critic field day. This will enable the critics to critic his work before he does a new production. Because of, embracing interculturalism, Brook work goes beyond the borders to be read and used by different actors across the world (Brook 232).
Works Cited
Brook, Peter. The empty space. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.1996, Print .
Inne, Cornnelius. Holy Theatre: Ritual and the Avant Garde. Chicago, CA: CUP
Archive.1984,
Print.
Hunt, Albert. Peter Brook. Chicago, CA: Cambridge University Press.1995, Print.
Loney, Maid. Peter Brook: Oxford to Orghast. New York, NY: Routledge. 1998, Print.
Kustow, Michael. Peter Brook: A biography. London: St. Martin's Press. 2005, Print.
