In many respects, theater is still grappling with problems of reality and representation that the visual art movement realized were unimportant many years ago.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Art cannot be looked at as an elite, sacred event anymore. It has to be embraced as an accessible, popular form, which is what I believe theater is at its roots.
Does art have a future? Performance genres like opera, theater, music and dance are thriving all over the world, but the visual arts have been in slow decline for nearly 40 years. No major figure of profound influence has emerged in painting or sculpture since the waning of Pop Art and the birth of Minimalism in the early 1970s.
Theatre is the art form of the present: it exists only in the present, and then it's gone.
I think cinema is so visually driven now, and people are so taken in by the glamour, gloss and all things good looking that we don't appreciate the craft as much as we used to in the bygone era.
Movies were never an art form, they were entertainment. It just evolved into an art form from there, and it's still evolving in different ways.
When movies first came out, maybe they were in black and white and there wasn't any sound and people were saying the theater is still the place to be. But now movies and theater have found their own place in the world. They are each legitimate art forms.
Cinema is still a very young art form with extraordinary techniques and very impressive special effects but sometimes it seems the soul has been taken out of things.
I think it's sad that movies and television have caused the theatre to fade as a popular art form. I hope to get young people into the theatre and expose them to Shakespeare.
The biggest problem with every art is by the use of appearance to create a loftier reality.
The wonderful thing about theater as an art form is it's a purely empirical art form. It's all about what works. And every show, every production, is created anew right from the moment you go into the rehearsal hall.