Theater and Performance Response, Reaction Paper Example

Theater performances are created not only to entertain but also to make a distinct implication on what is assumed as the presentation of history. It could be realized that somehow, these performances have a distinct cultural value that has long been understood to reflect the real status of cultural development that societies are made up of. Considerably, through time, theater presentations are often noted to make such a representation that basically imposes a definite insistence on how the culture changes through time, and how such changes affect the overall perception that human societies have towards the things surrounding them.

In the early years, theater was considered to be among the primary sources of entertainment that humans are practically engaging with. Most often than not, it could be realized that it is because of this status of theater as a form of entertainment for the common society that made it as much influential as it has been. Noticeably, this is the reason why it could be understood how theater is the element closest to what modern media is relatively connected to at present. What makes theater performances distinctively effective in representing the world’s most significant culture is the fact that it does affect the audience in as much as the target audience also affects the value of every performance presented on stage. This is why even at present, theater presentations are still understood as distinct elements of representing the actual elements affecting modern living.

Even within the different changes in time, theater acts and performances are all considered to be a definite representation of good essence of human history, culture, tradition and way of living. With the definite implication of how humans lived their lives, it could be understood that theater will retain the value it has at present even beyond the future.

Works Cited

Gordon, Robert. 2006. The Purpose of Playing: Modern Acting Theories in Perspective. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P. Harrison, Martin. 1998. The Language of Theatre. London: Routledge.2.

Hartnoll, Phyllis, ed. 1983. The Oxford Companion to the Theatre. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford UP.

Hodge, Alison, ed. 2000. Twentieth-Century Actor Training. London and New York: Routledge.

Janko, Richard, trans. 1997. Poetics with TractatusCoislinianus, Reconstruction of Poetics II and the Fragments of the On Poets. By Aristotle. Cambridge: Hackett

Johnstone, Keith. 1991. Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre Rev. ed. London: Methuen, 2007.

Jones, John Bush. 2003. Our Musicals, Ourselves: A Social History of the American Musical Theatre. Hanover: Brandeis UP.

Kuritz, Paul. 1998. The Making of Theatre History. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Leach, Robert, and Victor Borovsky, eds. 1999. A History of Russian Theatre. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Meyer-Dinkgräfe, Daniel. 2001. Approaches to Acting: Past and Present. London and New York: Continuum.

Meyerhold, Vsevolod. 1991. Meyerhold on Theatre. Ed. and trans. Edward Braun. Revised edition. London: Methuen.

Milling, Jane, and Graham Ley. 2001. Modern Theories of Performance: From Stanislavski to Boal. Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York: Palgrave.

Moreh, Shmuel. 2001. “Live Theater in Medieval Islam.” In Studies in Islamic History and Civilization in Honour of Professor David Ayalon. Ed. Moshe Sharon. Cana, Leiden: Brill. 565–601.