Článek
| Název: | The Prague School's contribution to the theory of intermediality |
| Autor: | |
| Zdrojový dokument: | Theatralia. 2014, roč. 17, č. 2, s. 41-49 |
| Rozsah: | 41-49 |
| ISSN: | 1803-845X (print); 2336-4548 (online) |
| Typ: | Článek (anglicky) |
| Trvalý odkaz: | http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/130876 |
| Licence: |
PDF
Abstrakt(y):
This paper explores the contributions of the Prague School scholars to the theory of intermediality. Although the theory of intermediality did not yet exist in the 1930s, scholars of the Prague School presented a number of ideas that today would certainly be understood within the scope of the theory. They perceived what we now call intermediality as part of a comparative exploration of arts, and aimed to establish a comparative semiology of arts. In their articles, these scholars touched upon two important relationships between arts, which are discussed in contemporary theories of intermediality as transmediality and plurimediality/multimediality. With regard to transmediality, this study looks at the broad interest of the Prague scholars' in the interchange of formal and thematic components between various arts, such as painting and literature or film and theatre, and presents their thoughts on the nature of these inter-art relationships. Regarding plurimediality, the Prague School scholars focused mainly on theatre, which they considered one of the most complicated artistic branches. Comparing their thoughts on theatre with those of Wagner, Brecht, Kandinsky and others, this study reveals the uniqueness and complexity of the Prague School's approach to theatre and points to its potential for contemporary intermedial theatre studies.
Klíčová slova:
Prague School; comparative semiology of arts; intermediality; transmediality; plurimediality; Gesamtkunstwerk; theatre
Reference:
[1] BAY-CHENG, Sarah, Chiel KATTENBELT, Andy LAVENDER et al. (eds.). 2010. Mapping Intermediality in Performance. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2010.
[2] BOGATYREV, Petr. 1971a [1923]. Chaplin falešným hrabětem [Chaplin as a False Count]. In Jaroslav Kolár (ed.). Souvislosti tvorby. Prague: Odeon, 1971: 14‒9.
[3] BOGATYREV, Petr. 1971b [1931]. K problému rozhraničení folkloristiky a literární vědy [On the Boundaries between Studies of Folklore and Literature]. In Jaroslav Kolár (ed.). Souvislosti tvorby. Prague: Odeon, 1971: 58‒9.
[4] BRUŠÁK, Karel. 1991. Imaginary Actional Space in Drama. In Herta Schmidt and Hedwig Král (eds.). Drama und Theater: Theorie, Methode, Geschichte. München: O. Sagner, 1991: 144‒61.
[5] CHAPPLE, Freda and Chiel KATTENBELT (eds.). 2006. Intermediality in Theatre and Performance. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006.
[6] CHAPPLE, Freda and Chiel KATTENBELT. 2006. Key Issues in Intermediality in Theatre and Performance. In id (eds.). Intermediality in Theatre and Performance. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006: 11‒27.
[7] DEÁK. František. 1982. Meyerhold's Staging of "Sister Beatrice". The Drama Review: TDR26 (1982): 1: 41‒50.
[8] ELLESTRÖM, Lars. 2010. The Modalities of Media: A Model for Understanding Intermedial Relations. Media borders, multimodality and intermediality. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010: 11‒48.
[9] GRYGAR, Mojmír. 2008. O srovnávací sémiotice umění [On Comparative Semiotics of Art]. In Jan Schneider and Lenka Krausová (eds.). Vybrané kapitoly z intermediality [Selected Chapters in Intermediality]. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého, 2008: 33‒48.
[10] HONZL, Jindřich. 1956a [1927]. Osvobozené divadlo ve frontě [The Liberated Theatre in the Queue]. K novému významu umění: Divadelní úvahy a programy 1920‒1952. Prague : Orbis, 1956: 135‒7.
[11] HONZL, Jindřich. 1956b [1940]. Pohyb divadelního znaku [Dynamics of Sign in the Theater]. In Jaroslav Pokorný (ed).K novému významu umění: divadelní úvahy a programy 1920‒1952. Prague: Orbis, 1956: 246‒60.
[12] JAKOBSON. Roman. 1933. Úpadek filmu? [Is the Cinema in Decline?]. Listy pro umění a kritiku 1 (1933): 45‒59.
[13] JAKOBSON, Roman. 1937. Socha v symbolice Puškinově [The Statue in Pushkin's Poetic Mythology]. Slovo a slovesnost 3 (1937): 1: 2‒24.
[14] JAKOBSON, Roman. 1971 [1959]. On Linguistic Aspects of Translations. In id. Selected Writings II. Word and Language. The Hague/Paris: Mouton, 1971: 260‒6.
[15] KATTENBELT, Chiel. 2006. Theatre as Art of the Performer and the Stage of Intermediality. In Freda Chapple and Chiel Kattenbelt (eds.). Intermediality in Theatre and Performance. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006: 29‒39.
[16] KATTENBELT, Chiel. 2008. Intermediality in Theatre and Performance: Definitions, Perceptions and Medial Relationships. Cultura, Lenguaje y Representación / Culture, Language and Representation 6 (2008): 19‒29.
[17] LEHMANN, Hans-Thies. 2006. Postdramatic theatre. London: Routledge, 2006.
[18] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1948a [1940]. Dvě studie o dialogu. Dialog a monolog [Two Studies on Dialogue. Dialogue and Monologue]. In Jan Mukařovský. Kapitoly z české poetiky I [Chapters in Czech Poetics I]. Prague: Svoboda, 1948: 129‒53.
[19] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1948b [1937]. Dvě studie o dialogu. K jevištnímu dialogu [Two Studies on Dialogue. On Stage Dialogue]. In Jan Mukařovský. Kapitoly z české poetiky I [Chapters in Czech Poetics I]. Prague: Svoboda, 1948: 154‒6.
[20] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1948c [1941]. Mezi poesií a výtvarnictvím [Between Poetry and Visual Arts]. In Jan Mukařovský. Kapitoly z české poetiky I [Chapters in Czech Poetics I]. Prague: Svoboda, 1948: 253‒74.
[21] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1948d [1940]. O jazyce básnickém [On Poetic Language]. In Jan Mukařovský. Kapitoly z české poetiky I [Chapters in Czech Poetics I]. Prague: Svoboda, 1948: 78‒128.
[22] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1948e [1938]. Sémantický rozbor básnického díla: Nezvalův "Absolutní hrobař" [Semantic Analysis of a Poetic Work: Nezval's "Absolute Gravedigger"]. In Jan Mukařovský. Kapitoly z české poetiky II [Chapters in Czech Poetics II]. Prague: Svoboda, 1948: 269‒89.
[23] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1948f [1940]. Strukturalismus v estetice a ve vědě o literatuře [Structuralism in Aesthetics and Studies on Literature]. In Jan Mukařovský. Kapitoly z české poetiky I [Chapters in Czech Poetics I]. Prague: Svoboda, 1948: 13‒28.
[24] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. §§1966a. Čas ve filmu [Time in Film]. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 237‒46.
[25] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1966b [1948]. D34–D48 ve vývoji českého divadla [Theatre D34–D48 in the development of Czech Theatre]. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 458‒61.
[26] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1966c [1937]. Jevištní řeč v avantgardním divadle [Stage Language in Avant-Garde Theatre]. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 220‒3.
[27] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1966d [1936]. Josef Šíma. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 426‒34.
[28] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1966e [1941b]. K dnešnímu stavu teorie divadla [On the Current State of the Theory of Theatre]. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 223‒36.
[29] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1966f [1933]. K estetice filmu [A Note on the Aesthetics of Film]. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 237‒46.
[30] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1966g [1938]. K noetice a poetice surrealismu v malířství [On Noetics and Poetics of Surrealism in Visual Arts]. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Estetiky [Essays on Aesthetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1966: 434‒38.
[31] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1982 [1932]. Jazyk spisovný a jazyk básnický [Standard Language and Poetic Language]. In Jan Mukařovský. Studie z Poetiky [Essays on Poetics]. Prague: Odeon, 1982: 34–54.
[32] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1970 [1936]. Aesthetic Function, Norm and Value as Social Facts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1970.
[33] MURPHY, Richard. 1999. Theorizing the Avantgarde: Modernism, Expressionism, and the Problem of Postmodernity. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
[34] RAJEWSKY, Irina O. 2005. Intermediality, Intertextuality and Remediation: A Literary Perspective on Intermediality [online]. Intermédialités(2005): 6: 43‒64 [accessed on Dec 5, 2013]. Available online at http://cri.histart.umontreal.ca/cri/fr/intermedialites/p6/pdfs/p6_rajewsky_text.pdf.
[35] SCHNEIDER, Jan. 2008. Intermedialita: Malá vstupní inventura [Intermediality: A Little Introductory Inventory Check]. In Jan Schneider and Lenka Krausová (eds.). Vybrané kapitoly z intermediality [Selected Chapters in Intermediality]. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého, 2008: 5‒15.
[36] STEINER, Wendy. 1982. The colors of rhetoric: problems in the relation between modern literature and painting. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1982.
[37] VELTRUSKÝ, Jiří. 1981. Comparative semiotics of art. In Wendy Steiner (ed.). Image and Code. Ann Argot: University of Michigan, 1981: 109‒32.
[38] VELTRUSKÝ, Jiří. 1994 [1940]. Člověk a předmět na divadle [Man and Object in the Theatre]. In id. Příspěvky k teorii divadla. Prague: Divadelní ústav, 1994: 43‒50.
[39] VELTRUSKÝ, Jiří. 2012. An Approach to the Semiotics of Theatre. Jarmila F. Veltrusky, Tomáš Hoskovec and David Drozd (eds.). Brno: Department of Theatre Studies, Faculty of Arts, Masaryk University, 2012.
[40] WAGNER, Richard. 1849. The Art-Work of the Future [online]. Transl. William Ashton Ellis. The Wagner Library [accessed on Apr 10, 2013]. Available online at http://users.belgacom.net/wagnerlibrary/prose/wagartfut.htm.
[41] WOLF, Werner. 2002. Intermediality Revisited: Reflections on Word and Music Relations in the Context of a General Typology of Intermediality [online]. Word and Music Studies 4 (2002): 1: 13‒34. MLA International Bibliography [accessed on May 30, 2012]. | DOI 10.1163/9789004334069_003
[42] ZICH, Otakar. 1931. Estetika dramatického umění [Aesthetics of the Dramatic Arts]. Prague: Melantrich, 1931.
