scholarly journals المسرح العبثي المعاصر عند "נעם גיל نوعام جيل" مسرحية "צעצועים دُمى" (2018م) أنموذجا Noam Gil’s Contemporary Theater of the Absurd His play “Pawns” (2018) צעצועיםas a model

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 2219-2280
Author(s):  
شيماء مصطفى محمد سيد موسى
PMLA ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-189
Author(s):  
Alan E. Knight

The sottie is a popular dramatic genre of the late Middle Ages which seems to have developed from the comic debates that players often used to gather an audience. In its developed form it resembles the contemporary Theater of the Absurd. The most meaningful approach to a comparison of the two theaters is by way of the thought embodied in the plays. They are both to a certain extent didactic, though they represent different outlooks and value systems. Both theaters utilize clowns and clowning techniques, and both are closely linked to the dream. The two historical periods concerned are presented in the plays as times when cultural ideals have become illusions out of tune with reality, and the accompanying alienation is expressed in powerful images of waiting. One of the most suggestive areas of resemblance is language, which has been cut from its rational moorings. The language of the sottie still has a creative vigor, while that of the Theater of the Absurd is moribund. Both, however, are languages of protest. Each theater creates a new norm against which to judge its society, thereby exposing those who would mask their venality with pretense.


2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 18-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxwell A. Cameron ◽  
Jason Tockman

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 197
Author(s):  
Jing Wang

Waiting for Godot is one of the classic works of theater of the absurd. The play seems absurd but with a deep religious meaning. This text tries to explore the theme in four parts of God and man, breaking the agreement, repentance and imprecation and waiting for salvation. 


TURBA ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-102

It is perhaps more relevant now than ever before to prepare the ground for a pedagogical discussion on theater curation. Theater festivals have recently become prominent in India. It is true that India has cherished a ubiquitous tradition of festivals—utsavs and mahotsavs—for hundreds of years. Take, for example, the staging of Kudiyattam at ancient Sanskrit koothambalams, which would last several weeks in a festival atmosphere; the touring circuit of Assam mobile theater, which has created festival-like events since the 1950s; or the Marathi (political) theater, which has an active culture of more than a century of traveling and festival-like events. These are not the kind of festivals I am interested in for the purpose of this article—they have a “traditional” logic built into their purpose—but the kind that have emerged along secular lines in post-independent and urban India. These “new” theater festivals are primarily sponsored by the state, are supported by public funds at the regional and national level, and are therefore open to public participation and scrutiny. These festivals, wherever they are held, commonly include a multilingual and multicultural itinerary of plays. The intent behind the selection is largely driven by the post-colonial project, which is to “put together” an idea of modern India by including plays that have a critical outlook—these could be contemporary scripts, modern adaptations of classical plays, and works that explore contemporary vocabularies of performance (body-based, post-dramatic, experimental, etc.). Currently, India has over a dozen of these new theater festivals of varying scale; each running annually, each claiming to show the best of contemporary theater. In the absence of a touring circuit, these festivals provide artists with the opportunity to travel, to seek new audiences, to mingle with peers and masters, to be written about, and to woo award committees. Festivals are now doing for theater what exhibitions have done for visual art; they are highly visible events that offer immense resources and the promise of further influence. Festivals seem to bestow legitimacy on artistic work of a kind not seen before.


2020 ◽  
pp. 140-153
Author(s):  
Duncan McCargo

This chapter explains how not everyone accused of trying to bring down the monarchy—lom jao—ended up charged with lèse-majesté. It explores another case brought under a different law that illustrates similar issues to the Somyot case. The national security provisions of the 2007 Computer Crime Act offer an alternative means of prosecuting the allegedly disloyal, another notch along the treason spectrum. An illustrative example is the case of former broker Katha Pajariyapong, who was accused of making two web-board postings critical of royalty on the web board of Fa Diao Kan, a critical journal that featured on the April 2010 antimonarchy organogram. The Katha case frequently resembled a theater of the absurd: laughable charges, inept lawyers who wanted to quit, bungling prosecution witnesses, and a presiding judge who claimed to be on the side of the defendant before sending him to jail. Yet the consequences of these farcical proceedings were very real: Katha ultimately served a couple of years behind bars for a meaningless “crime” that brought the law into disrepute. The chapter then argues that judges again allowed their misguided understandings concerning how to show loyalty to the monarchy to take precedence over common sense. Katha's alleged actions had no effect on the country's national security, and no criminal intent was demonstrated during the trial.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document