The Actor as Scenographic Instrument: Robert Wilson's Vision

Introduction: From Naturalism to Scenographic Expression

The concept of the actor as a scenographic instrument is often associated with the new perceptions and expressionism that stem from modern and contemporary theatre, probably because it represents such an antithetical approach to the naturalistic perspective of 19th-century theatre.

In this context, perhaps the individual who has done most to define and propose this new concept was Robert Wilson. His complex combination of language, movement, and lighting into a unitary support framework for the artist was a cornerstone of what the concept stands for. This paper aims both to examine the concept itself and to present Robert Wilson's vision of it.

The first notable element of this new concept, pertaining to the role and expression of the artist, is that it comes to oppose the "naturalistic concept of the actor as imitator of human behavior" [1]. The emphasis previously placed on physical characteristics and elements — deriving from the need to relate closely to the character being played, with the actor's body as the only tool used to denote expression on stage — is now successfully complemented by other elements.

The interest is no longer solely in reproducing the character played, but moves toward placing the actor in a more collective reality and, thus, amplifying his capacity for expression through additional means. The belief underlying the concept of the actor as a scenographic instrument is that placing him within this larger framework will maximize his representation on stage.

Symbolism and the Expanded Role of the Actor

This new perspective on the artist goes hand in hand with the idea of symbolism. In its simplest form, the artist no longer bases his performance solely on his own person, but uses auxiliary elements to move the representation to a different, more integrative level. In order to do that, he draws on symbols and allusions, innuendos and objects on the stage — all within a symbolist framework. This is why the new concept transforms the actor's representation from a linear one into a complex, more detailed performance.

Ultimately, the difference between a naturalistic artistic performance and the concept of the actor as a scenographic instrument is also the difference between two distinct perceptions of reality. One is the realist, naturalist perception, which is meant to capture in detail the elements of reality, emphasizing the way these are reflected in physical or psychological terms. The other is a symbolic interpretation, according to which there does not need to be a naturalistic connection, as long as there is another element that can offer that connection on a symbolist level, based on individual perception.

The Director's Role in a Multi-Element Stage

Because of the need for higher integration of different elements — in 1915, Craig mentioned no fewer than eight such compositional elements, including movement, light, painted faces, and facial expressions [2] — into a unitary stage representation, the role of the director increases compared to the naturalistic approach. The director takes over the task of assembling all the elements, placing them alongside the actor's performance, and ensuring that the synergistic effect of this action is a positive one. If the actor's role is complemented by props, music, stage effects, or dance, one must ensure that all of these come together not necessarily in a strictly logical way, but in a way through which the audience receives the appropriate message that the artist and the director wish to convey.

Robert Wilson and the Centrality of Movement

Against this theoretical backdrop, the work of director and playwright Robert Wilson stands out. Considered by many one of the leading theatre artists of the 20th century, Wilson offers a vivid illustration of how the concept of the actor as a scenographic instrument operates in practice. The following sections address how specific elements discussed above are used by Wilson to realize this concept.

The best place to start is with the actor's movement or, as Wilson occasionally frames it, with the absence of speech or language. Contrary to the naturalist concept of artistic expression, other elements play an equally important — if not more important — expressionistic role. In this case, it is the actor's movement on stage that can express feelings, denote sensations, convey states of mind, or carry dramatic meaning. As Holmberg points out in reference to Wilson's concept, "they don't understand the weight of a gesture in space. A good actor can command an audience by moving one finger" [3].

It is important to note that reference to movement and language includes reference to the lack of movement or language, to which Wilson adheres repeatedly in his work. There is no dichotomy here between the two concepts. Wilson perceives language and movement in their entirety, with different particular values — including the presence of such actions or, if the work requires it, their absence. In both cases, he grounds the artistic act on the expressive capacity that these additional elements bring to the stage.

Conclusion

The concept of the actor as a scenographic instrument moves the focus from the actor, as the central element of dramatic interpretation, to a consistent set of elements that includes those related to the actor's own interpretation — movement and language — as well as an additional set, such as lighting and props. All of these come together to create a synergistic effect on the actor's performance: amplifying it and supporting it throughout the representation. Through these additional elements, the director is able to complete the expression of the artist and give it entirely new dimensions, depending on what needs to be communicated to the viewer.

Robert Wilson was probably one of the foremost practitioners of this new concept. For him, movement and language are often at the center of artistic interpretation, even when this means, on occasion, no movement or no speech at all — for even these silences and stillnesses constitute a means of expression. His theatre fully embodies the concept of the actor as a scenographic instrument.

Bibliography

Gordon, Robert. The Purpose of Playing: Modern Acting Theories in Perspective. University of Michigan Press, 2006.

Holmberg, Arthur. The Theatre of Robert Wilson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Robert Wilson on movement. Robert Wilson official website. Last retrieved June 13, 2010.