Book in Focus: Looking into the Abyss by Arnold Aronson

Curated by theatre historian Arnold Aronson, Looking into the Abyss is a collection of essays on Scenography in theatrical arts. A professor of theatre at Columbia University, Aronson, specializes in scenography and avant-garde theatre. The book was originally published in 2005 by the University of Michigan Press and holds an overall rating of 4 out of 5 on major online cataloging platforms like Goodreads2 and AbeBooks.3 

The book contains a total of sixteen essays that focus on two different yet intertwined sides of scenography in theatre: Thinking About Scenography, and Scenography in Context. In the introductory chapter, Aronson establishes the thought process behind the selection of essays that have been published in this book, as well as his understanding of scenography and the humanized perceptions of it. To quote Freidrich Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil, which is where the title of this book comes from, “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not himself become a monster. When you look long into the abyss, the abyss also looks back into you.”4 Essentially, that’s what theatre as a whole entails as well – as another form of storytelling, theatre expresses values, history, and dreams and allows its audience to find a piece of themselves in it, find something to learn, and if nothing else, find a way to be lead through a different realm.

Introduction: What Scenography Means and Where Context Matters

As put together by Aronson, Scenography is at once an ancient and recent term. Aristotle simplifies scenography as scenic design, the tool through which a play finds its footing on stage while keeping authenticity with the story and the perspectives. It is a small yet prime factor in the process of bringing a story on stage. With refined designs and intervention of various skills, the director portrays their interpretation of the script on stage through scenography. It helps give depth to the illusion being created on stage, which is simulated through a series of technical and perspective specters.

Theatrical performances are social activities that are not to be separated from the community. Also known as “Roopak” in Sanskrit, which directly translates to “that which has a visual form”, drama and its various types of presentations have been entangled with society and its progress in terms of the thinking process and immediate surroundings. From historical and religiously respected plays like Ramleela to street plays done by the youth of colleges to bring awareness to social issues like misogyny and corruption – theater does more than just story-telling. It is a way of expressing things that aren’t easily spoken and involving the audience no matter how difficult it may be.5

In street plays, specifically in mobile processional performances, the audience moves along as well. They keep shifting and always find new positions and perspectives. Even in stagnant plays, while the audience remains in one spot, the actors move around freely and the dramatic space ends up decreasing and increasing according to their requirements. More often than not, you get to see the audience moving back and making a place for artists on instinct, which is how scenography works in such cases – based on pure instinct, from the artists and the audience. That is how scenography gets determined when thought of in abstract terms – with the non-realistic, conceptual treatment of time and space. The stage is bare, and the scenic effect is created by the artist’s systematic gait, choreographic and symbolic hand gestures, along with the costume and makeup that add to the conveying of the central emotion of the story.

Thinking About Scenography

In the first half of the book, Aronson builds the premise through essays that explain the basics, the need, and the role of scenography on and off the stage. From the importance of storytelling being done right to using tricky architecture to its best to receive the perfect responses; scenography connects playwrights, directing cast, actors as well as the rest of the crew in a way that promises exemplary synergy between the artists and the audience.

In one of the essays named Behind the Screen Door, Aronson dives into the concept of how complex theatrical spaces can be, once subjected to analysis. The audience perceives the surrounding space according to perspectives that are physiological to us – the artificial perspectives on the stage support and accelerate the intended vision to bring the highest effect of illusion. The most apparent difference between space on stage and space off stage is based on what is shown and what is not. The dramatic tension in theater, regardless of genre, has to do with the visible space (represented) and invisible space (described). In general, space is a direct narrative. But on stage, space is not one-dimensional and is perceived according to story and references. 

A great example of understanding this paradox situation is explained in this essay by taking a door as a metaphor for understanding space and its complexity. The author mentions how theater itself works as a door into the soul of humankind. The audience observes the transformations on the stage in multiple ways, while a lot of it is happening simultaneously. Even space transforms into unexpected possibilities – from vast fields to a narrow room – and all that is achieved because theater works on powerful symbolism which implies a world beyond that is unseen, yet present. When an actor enters on stage, it is understood that they are coming from outside to inside. Unlike in real life, stage doors are not literal – they become a symbol for paths and journeys, and carry a different meaning than in reality.

A door is a boundary – a threshold, a liminal space that differentiates two spaces but belongs to neither. It carries the possibility of the unknown, the potential, the terrifying, the endless. On media screens, doors represent what they mean in real life – just doors. But in theater, they become vast yet unimaginable, scary but thrilling. It goes to show the power of symbolism that theater holds and the endless influence that can be brought through the stage.

Conclusive Assessment: Credits and Censure

Although the skepticism brimming through Aronson’s observations in this book is rather warranted, it remains well-articulated and piercing still. This collection has the potential – and has proven – to be highly informative and, more than that, is credible enough to lead students and genuine readers alike toward simplifying the complex and distinct presence of scenography in theatre. With new waves of producers and artists flowing into the scene, it is understandable to expect them to alternate some of his perceptions; but as explained by the author himself – the charm of scenography revolves around the freedom that comes with developing individual perspectives. Ultimately, Aronson’s words persist on being liable while still opening the doors to further imagination left to be discovered by each new reader.

REFERENCE LIST

IMAGES :

1. Matsubara, M., BOZZO. (2014). Seeing Red [scenography]. [Photograph]. (https://www.withassistant.net/projects/scenography-for-seeing-red/)
2. Petit, A. [Illustration]. (https://aurorepetit.com/)

BIBLIOGRAPHY/EXTERNAL LINKS :

1. Aronsons, A. (2005). Looking Into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography. Michigan : University of Michigan Press.
2. Looking Into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography. Goodreads. Available at: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1455940.Looking_Into_the_Abyss [Accessed 15 August 2024.]
3. Looking Into the Abyss: Essays on Scenography. AbeBooks. Available at: https://www.abebooks.com/9780472068883/Looking-Abyss-Essays-Scenography-Theater-0472068881/plp [Accessed 15 August 2024.]
4. Nietzsche, F. (1996). Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future. New York : Vintage.
5. Awasthi, S. (1974). Scenography of the Traditional Theatre of India. Cambridge : MIT Press.