Do we know how they acted? Did they act as naturally as possible? (what we consider modern acting), was it chanted? ritualistic? did they memorize all their lines? were there stage props? anyone knowledgeable on this subject?
oh shit a pleb who didn't read nietzsche, the imgur invasion is real
i actually do know about this, only about greek drama.
>Do we know how they acted? Did they act as naturally as possible?
No, they didn't, they had to project their voice quite a lot more than current actors do.
>was it chanted?
No, but some parts were sung. If you read them in greek it might sound more 'chanty' than verse in modern languages but afawk it wasn't chanted.
>ritualistic
wtf no. It was a civil occasion, the whole city paid for it and the males and some women came to watch. It was a very social event.
>did they memorize all their lines? were there stage props?
Yes and yes.
>>7500772
fuck off shitposter
>>7500790
It was a religious event, maybe that's what OP meant.
>>7500790
>No, they didn't, they had to project their voice quite a lot more than current actors do.
u sure about that my nig? the greek amphitheater was a hell of a lot better designed for acoustics than some big old wooden concert hall filled with carpet designed for faggity violins and oboes n shit
>>7500790
Fuck off shitposter
>>7500798
if u wanna kno some shit about greek tragedy maybe u wanna read the book on the subject by the premiere classicist of the 19th century? stay pleb shitlord
>>7500814
>the greek amphitheater was a hell of a lot better designed for acoustics
Yes, yes, we all know the meme, but they were wearing heavy masks and the plays were in verse which requires a bit of a grave register. I meant they were projecting their voice instead of acting naturally, despite the well built theaters. Acting was much more focused on voice and gestures than it is now.
>>7500838
well ya of course, back then theater wasn't about the illusion of reality or "naturalism" the same way greek sculpture was, which is why greek theater often seems heavy handed or has some queer deus ex machina involved. this is why film tends to suck because people always want it to be "realistic", save that shit for escapism, narrative art isn't about tricking you into believing some fantastic story really happened, it's to explore different facets ofthe human conditionetc.
>>7500853
Fred N. already covered this
>>7500862
the plebop probably thought since the greek chorus is "dionysian" that it's some kind of religious shit, but if you ever read even any tragedy u can clearly see the shit ain't religious...it's like saying if u go to a block buster oscarbait movie like star wars or something on christmas that it's "religious" since u going on a holiday, man can we just ban plebs, we can't move forward when we have to keep correcting the errors of shit
>>7500853
>which is why greek theater often seems heavy handed or has some queer deus ex machina involved.
I have to say Greek Theater only seems heavy handed only at cursory glances. The Sophocles and Euripides I have read all seemed easy to parse at the start, but in actuality they're fairly complex and as psychologically full as any Strindberg or whatever.
how different would the roman theater been? ive read seneca and his plays seem a bit more violent than the greek ones i remember, more descriptive.
>>7500874
meh, i donno dude, the shit is all to "hegelian" for me...like it's always just contrived situation were both sides are right thus producing "tragedy"...you always see statements like "so and so greek guy had 140 plays but all we have are these two" well, to bee honest, those were probably the only two good ones...they're just not that great, Homer vastly superior. Tragedy has a smell of "ideology" rising from it, which i find unpleasant.
>>7500887
by the time you get to rome the veil of maya has fallen over europe, rome is shit
>>7500911
plz no bully
