Abstract
This paper uses Michael Kirby's structuralist theatre and its tendency to be nonsemiotic as a point of departure to address various aspects of structuralist performance including its resistance to meaning and participation in a communication process, its metatheatrical dimensions, and its defamiliarization quality. Although in a ‘pure’ structuralist theatre semiotics should become obsolete, the question is whether structuralist theatre is able to fully resist the process of semiosis. Is it possible for nonsemiotic performance to stay out of semiotic space, which constantly adapts and renews its codes to accommodate new and emerging structures? Examining the scope and ability of structuralist performance to encompass both semiotic and nonsemiotic tendencies in theatre, this work tries to demonstrate that the nonsemiotic quality of structuralist performance is indeed grounded in a suppressed semiotic approach.
About the author
Her research interests include theatre and performance theory, avant-garde theatre, exilic drama and theatre, and performance and the city. Her recent publications include ‘Body and machine: Extending the codes in theatre of Laurie Anderson and Robert Wilson’ (2004); ‘Laurie Anderson: From the ice-cube stage to virtual performance’ (2005); ‘The theatrical memory of space: From Brecht and Piscator to Belgrade’ (2005); and Theatre of Estrangement: Theory, Practice, Ideology (2006).
© Walter de Gruyter
