What is the essential problem of theatre architecture? Is it design and layout? If this is so, we have to ask which the truly new elements in this design are and to ascertain whether there is anything really new in theatre architecture something which is not merely a duplication of something long forgotten, even if on a higher technical level. Let us, however, concentrate for the time being on the problems resulting from the present situation.
The universal theatre has become a fashion of the past. But has its „universalism" actually been put to use? In practice every multi-purpose theatre changes into a single-purpose one. This is one question which requires an answer. The second question is: small or large theatres? It will be necessary, first of all, to find an economic limit which will move between the short-term amortization of large theatres and a maximal utilization of the technical equipment of small theatres. Is the multi-form theatre space capable of solving these economic problems? For the time being two types exist: the space which can be made smaller while the rest remains unutilized, or a division of the space with sliding walls, thus creating two or more smaller, entirely separated, halls. The first type is evidently uneconomical, while with the other the mobile accustic walls are very expensive.
We have, however, so far not considered the basic problem of theatre space, i. e. the relation between the stage and the auditorium. One can say, in principle, that the disposition of the theatre, if it is not meant to fulfil only its social function, must be the expression of its artistic programme. In this it is functional. In the large opera glass type theatres the first and most pressing problem seems to be the question of acoustics. It is possible to remove the proscenium wall which just out and reduces the space between the stage and the auditorium, it will, however, have to be replaced by a proscenium opening, perhaps a variable one, using reverberating acoustic blocs. A no less important problem is the construction of the curve of visibility with the exclusion of all blind spots on the stage, both on the horizontal and vertical plane. The dimensions of a large opera glass type theatre are defined by its acoustics and by the differentiating ability of the human eye. The size of a theatre with a central stage is limited solely by acoustics: in this case the actor stands with his back only to half of the audience. A large theatre of this type will therefore always have to use amplifiers. This is the first deficiency of the theatre space with a central stage which is to replace the opera glass space. Another problem is the lighting system: how to throw light on the actor without blinding the spectator? How to manipulate with the lights? By stating this problem we do not wish to say that the lighting system of the opera glass type theatre has been definitely solved and has no problems.
After having ascertained the deficiencies of these two types let us consider the small experimental theatre. It seems that this should complete a large theatre. Speaking for it are economic reasons in the first place and the artistic program which gives meaning to the term „experiment". Its function may perfectly correspond with a hall space, where walls, seats, the ceiling as well as the stage would be mobile and the stage space formed in accordance with the requirements of each production. Stage technics would have to be light, mobile having the construction of cranes. In modern world architecture there is a growing tendency to solve the interior soberly, without large plastic decorations. One of the possibilities in this respect is to design the interior of theatres in the form of broadcast studios, where walls are formed by rotable acoustic panels, shields, pylons or cylinders, differently coloured. The turning of the various elements would bring about a different colour scheme and a plastic design of the walls. There would be a simultaneous change of acoustics, necessary for each individual genre. The experience of direct artistic expression will be most intensive in a small theatre seating 300—350. A theatre with a capacity of 500—600 seats will be economically most advantageous. From the point of view of disposition the arena stage seems to be the best type. Acoustically it is the box type large theatre which is most favourable. These are conflicting statements. They may, however, form a basis for general conclusions, and in addition, it is possible to correct them, though not from economic or technical views, but from the points of view of their social function, which the theatre has to fulfil in the first place. Large theatre space is useful and necessary, its dimensions must, however, under all circumstances respect the human standard. As far as the composition of material is concerned, the tendency during the last decades has been to reduce or eliminate the cubus of the ropes from the outline. This tendency has been strongly supported by architects. But why suppress one of the most typical and functional elements of a theatre building?
The size of theatre is determined by its place in the architectonic set-up of a town. Large stages will continue to be the centre of a town's life — the official theatre. New town units, we assume, will prefer small theatres of an experimental nature. This division is closely linked to the structure of the population: it may be assumed that new town units will be inhabited by the younger generation which is ready to accept something modern. A great part in the dislocation of theatres will also be played by transportation which will divide the audience into two further groups: one which will prefer its „local" theatre because it is close, while others will prefer to choose a theatre because of its programme, regardless of where it is located. We hope that these brief remarks on the problems of modern theatre architecture will explain and supplement the exhibits of the Prague Quadrennial.
Ing. Arch. Věroslav Pardyl