Light Cue 23

The production of The Crucible that I am currently working on is a Directing Thesis at Columbia University. Last night at the Dress rehearsal Anne Bogart came by to observe the work. She made some interesting comments about the show that really got me thinking.

Talking about the play she mentioned how it is filled with these very strong emotional scenes and interactions set within a framework of formal intellectualism. The drama is very real. The emotions are palpable and alive. The power, and the potential weakness, of the script, she said, was to weigh emotion over thought, or vice versa. That the power of the play really comes out in the intersection of these two dynamic forces. Heart and mind. “You are all filled with emotion, so let the thought lead and see where it takes you.”

Let the thought lead.

There is an interesting discussion going on, in comments, about the role of the so called ‘Fourth Wall’ in theatre. For those of you not familiar with this piece of theatre terminology, the ‘Fourth Wall’ is a reference to convention of assuming that the audience is looking in on a slice of life where the fourth wall of the living room or whatever has been removed and the audience gets to voyeuristically peek in on the goings on.

That discussion as well as the rehearsal last night got me to thinking about this idea of the ‘fourth wall’ and what is means. George Hunka and Alison Croggon both make interesting points about the use of direct address in film and theatre respectively. The point they make essentially comes down to the idea that ‘breaking the fourth wall’ is so ubiquitous that it is not a radical or revolutionary thought to try and break it.

I would take this line of thinking one step further and argue that the very concept of the fourth wall does not contain any useful discursive weight. That the very existence of the term only clouds and confuses the issue and lead us down pathways that can do no more than hinder free thought.

A few days ago I said:

The Crucible is very much a play that benefits from the proverbial fourth wall. The message is so clear and Miller’s use of language and construction of relationships so complex that the message is clearer if the illusion is maintained. When we let ourselves be observers of this slice of 17th century colonial American life the play’s real power comes about. John Proctor could makes his speech, on the sanctity of his good name, to the audience. Reverend Hale could let us all in on the secrets of the witches. But when he simply addresses the judge and his fellow citizens we hear his words more strongly.

Yet framing this in the language of the ‘Fourth Wall’ only confuses the matter. The emotions and relationships are real. But the ideas are self consciously constructed. The thought containing the emotion leads us away from voyeurism and towards an exploration of our own role as audience. We sit back and watch these events. Are there any parallels between these actions and events going on today? How would we feel as real participants in that courtroom today? And then the emotion hits us again.

Direct address in this case might not be a tactic that would lead us to draw useful conclusions about the piece. But that does not mean the play does not make us aware of our role as observers in this drama and consequently that it breaks the traditionally conceived ‘Fourth Wall.’ In a conventional way of thinking The Crucible is a good example of a ‘Fourth Wall’ play. But when we step away and look anew, when we set aside those old discursive tools, we see a radical reinvention of theatrical form.

The shifting emotions and ideas of character and audience creates a dynamic matrix or Network of experience. It is this shifting relational event that makes live performance so engaging. The performers do not need to look at you or ever acknowledge your presence, but by virtue of being in the same space you share energy and experience and feed off one another. The breaking of the fourth wall that Theatre does best is not the academic cliche of the space surrounded by the proscenium arch, it is the wall between self and other. And it is the dissolving of this barrier through shared experience that makes live performance necessary and vital.