The term ‘Physical theatre’ is used today to represent a very wide and extensive range of theatre. According to Darren Stevenson (n.d.), founder of PUSH Physical Theatre company in New York, ‘physical theatre’ incorporates many movement-based theatre forms. It encompasses any form of theatre that can tell a story through the use of primarily just the body. Phillip Zarrilli (2010) believes that “all theatre/performance cannot be but physical” (p.175), however the problem with this, in my opinion, is that it means that the term is being used to describe all theatre, which henceforth means that the term is being highly overused and thus the usefulness of the term is becoming redundant. “Physical Theatre thrives on the fact that a great deal can be said and received through body language, through the sounds rather than the sense of words” (Schechter, 2003, p. 80), therefore, I believe whether it can be considered ‘physical theatre’ or not, is highly dependent on what the focus is when watching the performance. If our focus is on the body telling the story, as opposed to the dialogue telling it, then I believe it can be considered physical theatre. Arguably, whether the term is still useful to describe the theatre style, can be seen through two theatre practitioners whose work can be described as none other than being ‘physical theatre’. They are Ariane Mnouchkine with her company, Theatre du Soleil and Lloyd Newson and his company, DV8 Physical Theatre.
Murray & Keefe (2007), state that the term ‘physical theatre’ was first introduced when director, dancer and choreographer, Lloyd Newson created his dance-theatre company, DV8 Physical Theatre, in 1986. However, it could be argued that although the term was not regularly used prior to that date, the style of physical theatre has been around for many years. Practitioners such as Stanislavski, Lecoq and Artaud had been creating physical theatre pieces pre-dating the 1960’s. Stanislavski created his ‘Stanislavski system’ in the early 1900’s, which later became known as ‘method acting’, a style of acting which provided a “guiding structure for actors to consistently achieve deep, meaningful and disciplined performances” (The Biography, 2016, para. 8). The purpose of this method was to create authentic and realistic portrayals of characters onstage, by way of five methods: the magic ‘if’ – where actors are told to ask themselves what they would do in the given situation, ‘Re-Education’ – where the actor must rethink the way they do ordinary tasks onstage and find ways to “exhibit true-to-life” human nature onstage, ‘Observation’ – where actors must observe everyday people and their physical traits, as each character played will have their own set of unique traits, ‘Motivation’ – understanding what a characters motivation is behind every word, gesture, movement and facial expression, and lastly, ‘Emotional memory’ – the actors must search within themselves to find an experience where the emotion is the same of the character they are portraying, they are required to put themselves in the mindset of their character (Bradford, 2018). This style of acting, although not coined as being physical theatre, was the start of an acting style which we would later identify as being so. Method acting requires a great deal of physicality from the actor, as they are needed to create truthful representations of the character they are playing.
In 1956, physical theatre school, L'École Internationale de Théâtre Jacques Lecoq was founded by Jacques Lecoq and which aimed to “produce a young theatre of new work, generating performance language which emphasise the physical playing of the actor” (Lecoq, 2000, as cited in Evans & Kemp, 2016, p. 9). Lecoq trained students in the ways of Commedia del’arte – mask work, and in the art of mime. Both mask and mime work require a high sense of physicality in the body. The mask is used as an extension of the body or as another self, so therefore the actor must ensure their whole body is being used to show it, so that it does not look disjointed or break the theatrical illusion. Antonin Artaud created the Theatre of Cruelty, a genre of theatre which pushes the body to its absolute physical limit, through its use of highly stylized gestures, movement and dance. The emphasis is less on the spoken word, as Artaud believed that gesture and dance were much more powerful ways of creating messages, stories and standpoints within his performances. The term physical theatre is very useful to describe the work of these practitioners as they were the teachers and influencers for many of the newer practitioners of the 20th century. Their work, which I personally believe to be the epitome of what physical theatre is, has taught us today all the styles, and acting and teaching methods which fit under the label of ‘physical theatre’.
“Physical-theatre is theatre where the primary means of creation occurs through the body rather than through the mind” (Callery, 2001, p. 4). I believe this to be a very true statement as it means for a performance to be labelled as being physical theatre, it means that the story or message will be created, told and received through the body rather than through the spoken word. Therefore, this is a very useful term to describe the work of Ariane Mnouchkine and her company Theatre du Soleil. Their work combines many styles of theatre like oriental and Asian inspired theatre such as Kathakali and Kabuki, with that of mime, commedia del’arte, puppetry, dance and acrobatics as a way of creating political and social theatre. Both Kathakali and Kabuki alone, are both extremely physical forms of dance-drama theatre. They both incorporate “vigorous, strong and energetic dance” (Zarrilli, 2000, p. 70) with highly exaggerated, full-bodied movements in order to tell the story. This, mixed with the intense physicality of acrobatic movements and mime, gives us a clear example of what physical theatre looks like.
In her 2017 production of A Room in India, actors are seen to be leaping across the stage, performing somersaults as well as various dance numbers, all of which require great energy and athletic ability. Puppetry is also used within various productions however, unlike traditional puppetry where the focus is on the puppets, in Mnouchkine's work, the focus is primarily on the actor and their body as they themselves are the puppets and puppeteers – as seen in her production of Tambour sur la Digue (1999). The actors must engage with all muscles and body parts to ensure that the audience believe them to be that of actual puppets. Mnouchkine also uses aspects of Artaud’s ‘Theatre of Cruelty’ as shown in her 1968 performance of Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Her theatre company – Theatre du Soleil, use violent and aggressive dance and movements to shook its audiences and like Artaud, Mnouchkine’s aim was go beyond the words and connect with emotions of the audience. “Like Brecht and Artaud, Mnouchkine sees her actors primarily as storytellers” (Eckersley, 1970, para. 5), and so sees the body as the most important aspect of both storytelling and of theatre. With the inclusion of such styles and techniques, Ariane Mnouchkine’s work, one can simply not describe the work as anything other than being that of physical theatre, therefore this shows that the term still to this day is very useful for describing her work. It is highly physical and requires great athleticism and strength of both mind and body in order to create work which I believe to be a true definition of what physical theatre stands for.
Lloyd Newson’s work with DV8, is considered highly physical, however he prefers not to use the term ‘physical theatre’ due to its “current overuse in describing anything that isn’t traditional dance or theatre” (Newson, n.d., as cited in Murray & Keefe, 2007, p. 14). I disagree with this statement, as DV8’s work is heavily reliant on the body to tell their stories, therefore their work cannot be but described as physical theatre. Their work combines contemporary dance with theatre, over stylized movements and gestures, with lifts, falls and acrobatics. Just like Mnouchkine, Newson sees his actors and their bodies as storytellers, therefore most of his earlier work has less of the spoken word and more movement and dance. A clear example which shows this physicality is in Newson and DV8’s performance of Enter Achilles (1995), which shows a group of males at a bar drinking, dancing and fighting amongst themselves. This performance requires a great deal of physicality from its actors as they each get involved with numerous lifts, falls, choreographed fights and sequences. This type of theatre that Newson and DV8 create together has been labelled as “dancerly, athletic and virtuosic” (Keefe & Murray, 2007, p. 82), as all of their work requires immense strength, stamina, trust and absolute focus. Also, much like that of Artaud’s work, Newson pushes his actors and their bodies to their absolute physical ability. Another of their performances which shows even more physicality is that of Dead Dreams of Monochrome Men (1988), which shows the actors continuously dancing, leaping, jumping and being thrown onto and against each other’s bodies. Although Newson would not describe his work and company as being physical theatre, we see it and view as being none other.
Murray & Keefe (2007), argue that the term physical theatre is over used and it “fails to enjoy the same cultural and theatrical resonance it had in the 1980’s (p. 14). I do agree that the term has become overused, however, I disagree with Murray and Keefe that the term no longer has the same theatrical ‘punch’ that it did in the 80’s. We have been brought up learning that the work of practitioners such as Artaud, Brecht and Lecoq are all that of being physical theatre because their work uses its actor’s bodies as vessels and instruments to tell the stories, rather than relying on the text and spoken word such as that of playwright Oscar Wilde. For a performance to be considered and labelled as physical theatre, means that the main mode of storytelling should be viewed through the body. Sonia Moore (1979) states that “the body must begin the action and it must finish it (as cited in Zarrilli, 1995, p. 11) for it to be a physical theatre piece. Later theatre companies such as Frantic Assembly (England) and Red Leap theatre company (New Zealand), identify as being physical theatre, as each company relies most heavily on their actor’s bodies to express ideas and stories. Both companies are highly physical, much like that of DV8 and Theatre du Soleil, these companies incorporate lifts, falls, dance, acrobatics, masks and puppetry as seen in Red Leaps performance of The Arrival (2009). The work of any/all of these theatre companies simply cannot be described as just theatre because of the emphasis put on the body within each, and thus the term ‘physical theatre’ is perfect for describing the theatre that each practitioner and their company creates.
Goat Island (2002) believe that physical theatre is only created when the body is in full control of the creative process, they argue that:
The physical body is a meeting place of worlds. Spiritual, social, political, emotional, intellectual worlds are all interpreted through this physical body. When we work with our hands and body to create art, or simply to project an idea from within, we imprint the product with a sweat signature, the glisten and odour which only the physical body can produce. These are the by-products of the meeting of worlds through the physical body. It is visible evidence of work to move conception to production. Our bodies are both elements and tools that communicate intuitively (Goat Island, 2002, as cited in Murray & Keefe, 2007, p. 12).
I agree with this quote, as I too believe the body is the main means of creation within physical theatre. Not all theatre can be described as being physical, because not all theatre relies heavily on the body to express ideas, show journeys and tell stories. Newson believes that physical theatre is all about “breaking down the barriers between dance and theatre and, above all, communicating ideas and feelings clearly and unpretentiously” (British Council, 2016, para. 1). This statement shows that the term ‘physical theatre’ is useful for describing any performance that encompasses those types of techniques. If a performance can combine dance and theatre, with that of other high physicality and high energy movements such as lifts, falls, and acrobatics, then it simply cannot be but labelled as Physical theatre. Professor of drama, Franc Chamberlain believes that it “has reached a point of exhaustion” (Chamberlain n.d., as cited in Zarrilli, 2010, p. 175), however I disagree with this. With theatre practitioners and companies such as Mnouchkine (Theatre du Soleil), Lloyd Newson (DV8 Physical Theatre) and Red Leap, still making highly physical pieces where the body is their primary means of communication, the term has not reached a point of exhaustion. It is still a very useful term used to describe these practitioners and many others’ work and it is through these companies that physical theatre still exists and allows for us to learn about the style.