Vygotski and Heidegger: A Conversation

Mimesis

Imitation, representation and expression. Like the development of children in their toddler years, trying to imitate those older than they are, mimesis is a source of learning for most. Mimesis is not a new concept. Chimpanzee’s in Africa were using mimesis as a cultural distinction way before humans came around, yet exploration of the idea of mimesis, especially in regards to art, was first consciously developed in pre-Platonic times and enhanced through the ideas of Plato and Aristotle. Throughout discourse, difference scholars have come to offer up their own definitions of mimesis through art, with Aeschylus’s work relating it as representation through dance (which can be supported by the Educational Theatre departments production of “The Eumenides” by Aeschylus with a heavy emphasis on movement as symbolism, representation and story-telling). Gebauer and Wulf then delve into a history of the art of mime, although with a seemingly bias viewpoint. In a modern world, a progressive reader might have difficulty with the concept of mimesis, socially, for it is completely dependent on “the stereotype.” Mimesis is effective when the “relations of similarity he establishes” are correct: “the character traits represented in the coward must correspond to the qualities typical of a coward” (Ferrara, 29). While representation in art can be personalized, mimesis depends on the “universal phenomena” of that being imitated. Plato also uses mimesis as the emulation an object, presupposed that the object is “worth being imitated” (Ferrara 32). This brings up another issues in the modern world, who decides what is worthy? Plato’s views then shift to mimesis and its relation to the goal of society. Realizing the huge effect mimesis has as an education tool, Plato suggests young people should be shielded from unfavorable models, allowing them to access full potential and fulfill their duties to the state. If poetry depicts anything deemed negative or untrue, especially concerning the depiction of Gods as weak, then it will not be allowed. Yet representation of the seemingly “false” would just be fiction, so I suppose Plato was not fond of that genre. If transgression against truth in representation was still frowned upon, acting as an art would not exist, for it is the representation of something else, and in itself, false, for mimesis can never be exact. The power of mimesis can be “seductive” but if used in a positive and enhancing way, can be very effective.

I thought this article was interesting at some points but was very tedious and repetitive until it got into how it actually applies to art. In regards to mimesis through gesture and dance I relate very well to that. I think that is why physical theatre is so compelling and powerful. The body can be a representation of just about anything. Combining forms and employing space, one or a group of people can create constantly living, moving, changing visual representations. Through movement and gesture (Chekhov would argue especially for psychological gesture), there is mimesis with an added metaphorical layer that allows the viewer personal interpretation. And the ability for personal interpretation is the attraction of art.
I was also attracted to the part about mime and how “the mime” depicted human life “as it is.” While it was a historical depiction of the art of mime, I still feel as if it lacked enough background and depth to fully brush upon the art of mime. While still today in many people’s minds, a mime show is not held with “much social prestige nor was the mime highly valued,” but there have been very great achievements and advancements in the art as a modern, respectable art form. In terms of mimesis, mimes were disregarded because of the idea of “fooling someone,” yet that is the whole concept of mimesis. It is an imitation. And if mimes are looked down upon because of their extraordinary ability to re-create in physical form, all of mimesis in art should be shunned. But then again, I’m just bitter at society’s depiction and understanding of the craft.

Love Monkeys

Something I was learning about that I found related in a weird way to PAWC. Bear with me...

So, our closest primate ancestors are the Bonobo's. (I think they are particularly interesting because they are constantly having sex with each other... regardless of male/female, and sex has completely replaced any violence within their culture. Make love not war).

BUT!

one of the signs of cultural similarity between humans and these chimps was their rudimentary "tool" use. The most common example is using a stick to retrieve termites out of a mound. Some different groups of bonobos would take the leaves off of the stick first, and others wouldn't, creating distinctions among group behaviors. The beginning of culture.
It is also suspected that the chimps wouldn't necessarily teach the others how to use the tools. Learning came through immitation. mimesis. Mimesis led to the development of culture!

Think about it.

Courtesy of my lovely roommate and brilliant scholar, Kyla McCracken

this is perfect. Kyla found it, give her all the credit. Cept she posted it on the discussion board which is of course as Dr. MacFarlane puts it, "far too linear for our purposes." SO! because I am certain sooooo many of you read This! Here:





good story Katie Holmes.

Aesthetic Object versus Art Object example

Have you taken Desiree's "Dramatic Activities in the Elementary Classroom?"

If you were in my class, you might remember a potent and spectacular performance by Annaleigh and Katie Pelkey concerning a dorky duck in the classroom. That was part of the lesson "Found Objects." In this lesson, students pass around a "grab bag" of goodies and pull out an object. The objects can be anything, such as a roll of tape, a rubber ducky, stapler, etc. The students get in to groups and create dramatic scenes, creating a character for their object. They can personify the object and use it as it is intended, or imagine it is something else all together. In this case, I would think, an aesthetic object becomes an art object. The objects are manipulated by humans, and the materials have been worked on to create a performance art.

So then I ask, what about the tools one uses to create art? Are an artist's paint brushes or an actors props aesthetic objects turned art? A paint brush is a part of the gesture, does it not perform work?

This leads me to discuss gesture. As we know, gesture is a huge part of theatre, especially the theatre we have created for ourselves within this department. Especially concerning, Chekhov's infamous "Psychological Gesture." After splitting with Stanislavski, Chekhov's METHOD is based on the physical and the imaginative. Working from the outside in, Chekhov's work encourages the expression of a character's internal process or desire in a grand gesture. After physcializing the wants on the character, it can then be internalized, provoking a visceral, trained physical recollection of a particular struggle or feeling. This pyscological gesture is a means of work-ing on art - a character, script, play, performance. Just as displaying a piece of "art" in a museum requires work, simply experiencing the gesture is enough for "art" to take place. (If music should be a verb, why not through art in there as well... I arted. Well, now that just sounds silly).

"What's the thing about the beach...?"

This questions came up in class one day in relation to music in relation to multi-sensorial art. The more senses the better. Personally, that's why I think theatre is the shit, because it can invoke sight, sound, touch (especially in the Ed. Theatre world, our base is contact... and the variation between touch and space), sometimes smell (in the case of...lets say Chekhov's "The Seagull," even though that's a comment on the extremes and failures of "experimental" form in theatre.) Anyway, there is constant involvement in theatre both by the performers and the audience. But I digress. The ocean. Being from San Diego, I have been constantly near the ocean all of my life and it is a HUGE part of my life world and experiences. I have spent many, many hours, here:



Sitting and watching the waves crash and the sun set. And it is an incredible multi-sensorial experience. There is something unitentifiable about the ocean that has attracted humans in inexplicable ways. We are drawn to it. To its beauty, to its vastness, to is smell, feel, taste, its memory. To its "permanence versus change." The ocean was one of the first entities the Earth had to offer. It is ALWAYS there, and its not going anywhere. It is permanent. YET at the same time it is constantly changing. Waves are crashing and the Ebb and Flow of the ocean's tide shows itself in many other aspects in art. It is a basis for music and art, the ebb and flow of character objective achievement and plot, the ebb and flow of uncertainty and melody and dissonance. Humans are mostly water. We are connected. We are one. The ocean IS zen.

Ibsen was obsessed with human's connection to the sea as well. Take "Lady From the Sea." Here are some of Ibsen's first notes:

"The lure of the sea. Longing for the sea. People`s affinity to the sea. Tied to the sea. Dependent on the sea. Compulsion to return to it. A species of fish forming a prototype in the development of species. Are there still rudiments of this in the human mind? In the mind of some individuals?
The images of the turmoil of life in the sea and of «what is eternally lost».
The sea has power over moods, has its own willpower. The sea can hypnotize. Nature can in general. The great secret is the dependency of the human will on «what is without willpower».
She has come from the sea, where her father`s parsonage lay. Grew up out there - by the free, open sea. Became secretly betrothed to the irresponsible young mate - an expelled sea-cadet - , who spent the winter ashore in an outlying harbour on account of a shipwreck. Had to break off the relationship in accordance with her father`s wishes. "

Ellida's obsession with the sea is relatable and beautiful. AND MADE GREAT ART.

Poem Electronique

Here's an interesting "2001-esque" interpretation of "Poem Electronique." I had never heard of it before, so here's a chance for you to hear this "famous" work that has been frequently mentioned. It's kinda creepy.

I think this could be a basis of a unit plan or teaching artist work. Create your own "poem electronique." It seems very sound based, so could be a good intro into students learning instruments. Showing them that, well, just about anything can be interpreted as music. It would be cool to even bring in some sort of electronic devices, have them record or whatnot. It can also be paired with a study about Brussels or World's Faires...

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poème_électronique), 425 different speakers were used for the first "sounding." That is one of the most intriguing aspects about music, live performance. A song, a sound is never, ever the same twice. And in the case of the Grateful Dead, every recording of the same song is different. (<3).