Could You Write A Play For A Computer, No Actors, And An Audience Of One?
from the why-so-disturbing? dept
The NY Times is writing about what sounds like a fascinating exhibit of shorts “plays” that were all written to involve no actors, a computer, and performed for an audience of one. Two famous writers were commissioned and then a group of other submissions were added as well. Some of them sound very cool – and many have the single audience member getting involved. To be honest, they’re not so much plays as they are participatory exhibits. One odd thing, though, is that almost all of the plays are “disturbing” in some sense. I’m not sure if that’s a comment on the format or the writers or both.
Comments on “Could You Write A Play For A Computer, No Actors, And An Audience Of One?”
One odd thing, though, is that almost all of the plays are “disturbing” in some sense.
The only reason you’ve noticed this ‘theater’ is because of the computer angle. Interactive theater and ‘local experimental theater’ has topics like this, but because it *IS* disturbing…it doesn’t get “picked up” due to a ‘lack of market’.
I LOVE the idea however, because such plays could reach anyone who is willing to “download” the play.
I don't get it
Granted, I’m just a redneck. But, aren’t these ‘plays’ just movies being played on a computer screen? All of the works described in the article were nothing more than human actors (along with the occasional deer) reading a script. Other than the ATM scenario, I don’t see where the computer became the ‘actor.’ Even at that, the ATM thing was more about the audience response to a computer doing what computers do. The concept is intriguing, I’m looking forward to someone doing something with it one day.