No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Sidnell's argument turns on sets of relations between the terms ‘semiotic,’ ‘theatre,’ and ‘art.’ He proposes that while theatre and other arts became ever more self-consciously semiotic, semiotic analysis became progressively more remote from the arts from which it took its objects of study, and tautological in its expression. The tentative approaches of semiotics to the arts were vitiated by the science of aesthetics and its focus on supposedly autonomous artworks, which obscured semiotic art as praxis. Three remedial steps are proposed: a review, from a semiotic point of view, of the concept of the autonomous artwork; the abandonment of the concept of the ‘performance text’; and attention to the making of signs rather than their interpretation. The final section is concerned with the recognition of semiotic art in the theatre by such premodern theorists as Robortello, Castelvetro, and Shakespeare, and in the work of such modern practitioners as Evreinov, Meyerhold, and Laban, which takes into account psycho-semiotic and biosemiotic origins of theatrical practice. Finally, Sidnell raises the central question of qualitative judgements of the execution of theatrical signs — their grace, beauty, effectiveness.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.