Philosophy of the Performing Arts

theater, dance, and literature 117
on Brechtian devices might not preserve the point of Ibsen’s play. Hamilton,
however, thinks that, rather than focusing on these kinds of considerations,
we should be more impressed by continuities in the way in which the three
productions were put together. His descriptions stress the elements of delib-
eration, extemporization, experimentation, and discovery that enter into the
preparatory process, the choices open to the director and performers, and
the fact that the text is always used by the performers to realize the general
performative goals of the company – it is always a means to an independent
performance, rather than something that, in itself, imposes any constraints
on performance. As Hamilton characterizes this general feature of theatrical
productions, “a company arrive at the first rehearsal and are given a script.
There is no logically predetermined way for them to use the script. There is
not even a requirement, of logic or of art, that they actually do use it. This is
a situation in which a number of things can be decided” (J. Hamilton 2007,
203). This supports the further claim that where, as in Hedda-to-Hedda , we
have the appearance of a theatrical performance falling under the classical
paradigm, the performers are merely exercising one among a number of pos-
sible options as to how to use the script as an ingredient in a production.
Do these kinds of considerations support the claim that the history of
theater establishes the general applicability of the ingredients model to the-
atrical performance? We should note two things. First, the argument as I
have presented it assumes that, whatever their other differences, theatrical
productions conform to a particular model of how public performances
issue from the improvisatory and exploratory activity of an ensemble in
rehearsal. In the tradition of preparing for theatrical performances with
which we are familiar, the final form of a theatrical performance usually
reflects changes made as a result of innovations introduced in rehearsal.
This applies even to performances that seem to conform to the classical
paradigm in striving, among other things, to facilitate the appreciation of
a performable work. Furthermore, in theatrical practice, improvisations
by performers in rehearsal may result in new constraints on subsequent
performances.^8 We may term this the “ensemble revision” model of the
genesis of theatrical performance. This model is widely acknowledged by
contemporary playwrights and actors alike. Tom Stoppard, for example,
thanks the director of Jumpers for “insights and inventiveness ... throughout
rehearsals,” and Peggy Ashcroft characterizes rehearsal as “the giving birth”
of performance. Preparation for the initial performance of a modern pro-
duction, whether the germinating text is contemporary or historical, typi-
cally involves between 120 and 160 hours of rehearsals, the vast majority of
these either partial rehearsals, attended by those actors involved in a given
segment of the performance, or, more usually, group rehearsals involving
the entire company.^9