Öz
Summary :
In 1950's theatre criticism became geared towards theatre practice. Theatre was being treated, discussed and questioned as multi-dimesional art form. One of these dimensions was the issue of national plays. There were very few private theatres in the early 1950s and the two subsidised theatres had a polemical and rather negative relationship with the playwrights. The Reportary Boards and thus the selection of plays were critical in harsh terms and these criticisms met with intense reaction. The essays written at that time display a great deal of enthusiasm and perhaps some naivite . Enthusiasm, frankness, audicity...This brought about criticim on text analysis. Weaker aspects of plays were questioned down to the smallest details. This was taken to be a question with a lot of priority for the development of Turkish theatre. Such criticisms can be grouped under two headings:
There is a need for native writers for the development of Turkish theatre. Yet the Repertory Boards of subsidised theatres discourage the Turkish playwrights
It is clear that there is need for native plays for the development of Turkish theatre, however, playwrights who do not know the art of play writing and the techniques, fail to create successful plays. So; theatre education and in this respect continious workshops are necessary .
Anahtar Kelimeler
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
|---|---|
| Bölüm | Makaleler |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 30 Aralık 2011 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2003 Sayı: 2 |