Thoughts On Burlesque And What It Can Teach The Scenographer

You could say that burlesque moved away from its theatrical origins in the twentieth century. It is right to say that the burlesque world of the nineteenth century or victorian times, when burlesque developed as a form of theatre, was also the theatre world. The world of theatre and the world of burlesque were really one world. The two worlds were very much linked together in victorian times but in the 20th century burlesque became a fragmented and a niche area of entertainment.

The nature of burlesque is parody and in victorian times, burlesque satirised and parodied everything and nothing was outside of its scope. You could ask how this parody was done but this is outside this article. Above all burlesque parodied the main popular theatre and it seems to be close to what is now called ¡®comedy performance¡¯ . In this article I aim to also look at the nature of costume and setting in burlesque. Can burlesque teach anything to scenography?

Say you were trying to design a burlesque show! How would you design for the famous burlesque shows of Linda Thompson, a famous burlesque ninenteenth performer? Or how would you design a parody of Shakespeare's 'Macbeth', for example? Let us say your aims are to entertain but also to parody. Another aim may be to seduce the audience. But let us keep to the original definition of burlesque as something theatrical! How does the burlesque designer work? An important question for the burlesque designer is what is the audience meant to think? What is the audience meant to feel?

What world do they want to be a part of and how do you create this world? And this world must be created physically, as in setting and costume, but also mentally and conceptually. For burlesque aims to entertain, it aims to parody and captivate as per the victorian notion of burlesque. You can ask what is the audience meant to feel. What are they meant to think. What are they meant to see? But this question is not the question. The question is what are the audience meant to feel and think as burlesque like theatre is aimed toward the intellect as well as the senses. As all theatre design is aimed towards the senses. T

In the case of more risque shows, does the audience expect nudity? Does it expect seduction? Indeed does the audience really expect a form of undress as the end product? For burlesque is a show ; it is show, it is theatre. The end is not the aim. There is no aim for the disrobing would be the aim but no! This is not burlesque. Burlesque is theatre. It is a show and the show is the whole seduction.

What is the attraction of burlesque? See the famous burlesque performer, Linda Thompson, dressed in a ballet tutu which is not at all suitable! (picture on this site: http://www.musicals101.com/burlesque.htm) The effect now may approach being fetishist but in the Victorian world, was it really fetischist? Burlesque was a kind of art and Thompson here creates an anti-ballet approach. Her costume and physique, stocky and full-bodied, is anti-ballet; it is a parody of the ballet performer and this parody is done through showing up ballet.

Linda Thompson and her fellow female performers were a successful theatrical troupe in the1860s. They had great success in New York. In one of their performances, Ixion, which was based on greek mythology, the female performer played the male parts wearing tights. This burlesque effect was a great success at the time. The burlesque costume was the antithesis of the world of bustles and crinolines.

In (http://www.musicals101.com/burlesque.htm), there is a picture of Linda Thompson wearing a ballet costume and she uses it to create an effect! She has the parasol while there is also the setting, the poultry farm. The setting is important! And she covers herself with the parasol; it is not because of the weather. She holds the parasol as an effect; it is a burlesque or absurd effect and not at all sophisticated. The overall effect may be lost if she wore another outfit. That is why the victorian notion of burlesque may be lost to-day. Burlesque is a glamorous world today but burlesque as a victorian art form may be lost. It was parody and it was absurd and it was seduction and fetischism but it was ordinary.

It was artistic, and it was not serious, It was not high entertainment and this illustrates that there are different levels of entertainment. Maybe the Victorian world could see this better i.e. the levels of entertainment or the different types of entertainment. And importantly, one level e.g. dramatic theatre is not necessarily better than another level or type of performance/theatre.

The image of Linda Thompson dressed to the knees with her parosol. (http://www.musicals101.com/burlesque.htm) This is a burlesque situation..it is immodest but really it is immodest for those who want it to be. It can be fetichistic and suggestive but what is important is the matching of costume and setting. An overall scenographic effect must be created. There must not just be a matching or correlation between costume and setting. How would this work? There must be a unity and this unity is the scenographic effect. the costumes and setting is a scenographic element where all must match.

Linda Thompson has her parasol. There is a suggestion that her costume doesn't cover all her body and she needs the parasol! She also holds the parasol to effect the full victorian costume. Since a parasol was a common accessory. But the thing is that the parasol is then an accessory to a knee-length almost ballet costume. She has tights too and it is this element that is important. She is not bare-legged. She is also dressed as for ballet but her tutu is longer than a normal tutu. You could say that she is fully dressed in the sense that all body parts such as bust, waist and hip are covered but in another way, she is not fully dressed. There is is the fabric too as well as the hemless shape of the tutu. All this creates a kind of 'burlesque' illusion.

There is certainly a scenographic structure about burlesque. Burlesque can be something ribald and wild. Yes it must be wild and shapeless in some way. This is what burlesque is; something wild and shapeless, something ribald, something restrained and then something outrageous; something lightly fetichistic and then something wildly outrageous, something strangely theatrical and beautiful in its theatricality and then something unrestrained, low and bawdy.

Yes everything from Shakespeare to politics was burlesqued. How would you burlesque Macbeth? How would you create a burlesque for lady Macbeth? You could say that Lady Macbeth is a devil woman but she is also a wife, a queen. She is a woman above all and a foil to Macbeth. The play 'Macbeth' is a black dark world. Maybe Lady Macbeth could wear a dark-colored costume, a short costume to the knees and then black leggings. There must be something mad, something absurd and something strangely fascinating and seductive about her. Maybe long gloves too, a hat of course, a shapeless hat with perhaps a rose attached to the shapeless crown or a hat with roses or a black flower; perhaps a maroon hat with black roses. A tie might complete the look like a secretary. The fitted secretary look might also be an influence. Note that you use illusions, innuendo, fashion effects to accent the burlesque mood and create the overall scenographic effect.

This is the costume and the setting may be the dark night in preparation for the coming dayMaybe she is in a madhouse! But she must also be a seducer. She must be able to attract. She must seduce! She may be mad but she must be in control too! The burlesque woman is always able to control her audience. If one of the aims of the show is to seduce the audience, this aim must not be done wildly and uncontrolledly. Burlesque has a structure. Remember that is is theatre! And sometimes a dramatic form of theatre, sometimes something comic.

Article Source: http://www.content.onlypunjab.com

Please Rate this Article

5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5 

Not yet Rated