Slovenské herectvo na prelome storočí – odklon od mimetického princípu divadelnej tvorby
Slovak dramatic art at the turn of the centuries – a departure from the mimetic principle of theatre production

Summary/Abstract: Over the 20th century, Slovak professional acting, in sense of conscious and purposeful dramatic work, undergone enormous development. It was not yet formed although we can speak about the Slovak theatre, or theatre using Slovak language during their production at the beginning of this historical period. The theatre production was carried by amateur acting companies, trying to imitate the performances known from their visits to big cities of then monarchy or touring professional „comedians”, mostly of Hungarian but also Czech and German origin. For a convinced follower of psychological realism and the founder of Slovak professional theatre Ján Borodáč, , the artistic supreme objective was to teach an actor to understand the inner world of depicted character, use the talent available and the expression of actors to create individualized dramatic character. Borodáč’s successors, the directors Ján Jamnický and Ferdinand Hoffmann exceeded these limits of psycho-realistic theatre and further experimented with stylization, pathos of musical language and speech. In the sixties and seventies already differentiated institutionally, Slovak theatre undergone the period of considerable interest in work in experimental conditions of experimental studio theatre where the audience became a contact eyewitness of the act of transformation of an actor. At the end of the twentieth century, the rapid modernization of means of dramatic expression, showing a maximum concentration on detail, authenticity and spontaneity took place in the Slovak theatrical context. The actor no longer represents only the role assigned, but performs it anti-illusively and brings his own opinions into the interpretation puts and thus participates in dramaturgic and directorial concept of the production. The author of the study perceives this development as contradictory. He draws attention to the risks arising from this fashion acquired even by those actors who are not able to be the intellectual partners of an author, dramatic adviser and director and in such cases are their authorial inputs rather forced and unsubstantial.

• Details
• Contents