The Imagination of Horses… Hang on that s not right…

Dan Rebellato argues in his article, When We Talk of Horses Or, what do we see when we see a play? that within the subject of Theatre Studies “we study not plays on the page but performance itself” (Rebellato, 2009, 17). He states also that in his experience that when he reads a play he does not imagine the performance vividly in his mind, nor does he simply read what is written, it is a cross of the two, only when it is performed in front of you can you full understand what is meant within the text, and in turn the performance.

He also disputes the idea that “dramatic theatre […] is illusionistic” (Rebellato, 2009, 17) which is certainly a view I share when he expresses himself by saying “No sane person watching a play believes that what is being represented before them is actually happening” (Rebellato, 2009, 18) If they did, I’d certainly love to see this person reactions when watching something like Angels in America. Moving on though…

What we imagine and what we see are completely different things, if you are doing one, you cannot be doing the other. If you are to imagine a cow, you will imagine it how you recall seeing a cow, using your memories (ghosting, again, really?) but you will only be able to imagine the cow in part, there will be elements you may not have noticed previously or have simply forgotten the finer details. If though you physically see a cow you will not use your imagination at all, you will see simply see it there as fact, not a memory or a “mistaken belief” (Rebellato, 2009, 18). Either one is creating an image or one is merely seeing one. Moreover, “[w]e don’t always imagine things visually” (Rebellato, 2009, 21), somethings can’t be mentally visualised, Rebellato uses the example of world without loyalty, how can one imagine something that, if it did exist, wasn’t a physical object.

 

Work Cited

Rebellato, D. (2009) When We Talk of Horses Or, what do we see when we see a play?. Performance Research,14(1) 17-28.