What else can we call the process that is taking place in the contemporary theatre, in its topographical and time strata, and which is the most striking trait dividing the present from the past, than the unification process? Great historical cycles were locaily autonomous; today the European theatre reaches out, almost in the form of an invasion, to other continents: to South America, Australia, to the East and on the other hand, theatre artists come from those parts of the world to the European centres bringing with them many new inspirations.
The time of the exchange of values, the creation of a uniform style as far as the forms, methods and opinions are concerned, has arrived. Stanislavski has gained the right of domicile on most of the stages of the world, the opinions of Gordon Craig and Bauhaus are revived. The representative of the modern unification process is, mainly, the staging method and scenography, as it is more tangible, as it is verbally a picture of the opinion and a specific element resulting from it. It therefore stands here as the first — even though one-sided — proof of this process. Such is the situation if we look at it from the topographical aspect; as far as time is concerned then it is the theatre architecture, influenced by the opinions of directors and stage designers, which shows us that nothing that had been discovered by the history of the theatre has been forgotten. All types of theatres, amphitheatre, the circular stage, the Elizabethan stage have been modernized in new designs and constructions, which doubtlessly influence the new staging methods.
Let us, however, continue with the stage design. Its development took place in repeated waves from the romantic tension to the realistic search for firm soil underfoot. The wholen sphere of art actually went through those cycles. Action and reaction could be placed instead of romantism - realism and illusionism and anti-illusionism are their further synonyms. Illusionism, however, has long ago stopped to mean magie and trieks, but stands for suggestion — and anti-illusionism does no longer try to anti-theatralize the theatre or for its paradoxical theatralization: the center of their interest is the uncovering of the aesthetic function and bearing capacity of the object, be it the thinking of the autor or a thing and mainly that property which we most precisely call the creation in the proper sense of the word, as it considers the analytical oeuverture and synthetic final stage of completion, the process that takes place openly in front of the spectators. And this, I think, is decisive. It is of no importance, whether the stage designing which takes an aktive part in this process and creates a basis for it, as it gives the object its form — moves in the sphere of architecture or painting. These differentiation signs, demarking until recently two different, even antithetic development trends, have been removed. They have been removed mainly because also in this field a synthesis has been reached.
The stage designer of today is not forced, for the sake of creative purity, to renounce any effective means. Their choice is subject to kinetics (not in the mechanical sense, but in the dramatic unsubstantial movement), light as a shapable element, which has its dramatic hue, dispersion and formable substance and time, which has another law in the sphere of a dramatic work than in life. The point is to find those means which can function as the boundary between life and art and prove their inexchangeability. And if there will be no unnecessary confusion between painting and architecture and stage design, which would today be a clear anachronism, stage design will use only its specific means.
The stage design of today which is based mainly on the dramatic text is the foundation of the finál concrete shape of the drama. From this aspect it finds its place in the context and the relation to other components and reaches a univocal conclusion: in itself it can take its share only to a limited extent in the contents of the play, it has, however, besides the acting component, the strongest influence on its finál form and on the establishing of a basis for the spectator. As at the moment of the existence of the play it dominates the dramatic area by its means, which are not withln the reach of any other component of the theatre, it contributes to the conception of the director and helps to express those ideas which are above the dramatic text and outside the sphere of the actoťs possibilities. This is the statě of today. The works collected at this exhibition can only complement it.
dr. Vladimír Jindra