Contentious lecture

Press, 7 July 1977, Page 6

Contentious lecture

By HOWARD McNAUGHTON “The Alien Art” was Elric Hooper’s provocative title ! for the first of three lectures • on the New Zealand theatre,; (which he is giving at 12.151: p.m. daily at The Court : Theatre. j Drawing on his extensive; experience as an actor ini: Britain, Europe, and New’ Zealand, Mr Hooper offered; a stimulating brief survey ofj the qualities which had con-p tributed to the great ages of|: theatre in Greece, France, |1 Spain, Germany, Russia, |i Japan, Britain, and Ireland.:' The theatre, he argued, is!’ the total work of art, and;i thus the best means of nat-li iional expression; so that I i when a nation is conscious i< (of achieving some kind of < peak or watershed, a rheatri-i cal golden age is likely to I i reflect this feeling. ji Similarly, he suggested,/ 'theatre gives a nation a / fictive concept of itself, so/ that it is a sign of national I < (maturity when a countrycan create its own fiction; the Dublin of Yeats andif O’Casey was the example i< offered, but it would not be t idifficult to find a dozen posi-'l

Jive and negative illustra-' itions of this contention. i That Mr Hooper was' deliberately playing Devil’s • Advocate in the case against; the New Zealand Theatre! was obvious from his open-1 ling remarks. But he struck a ; Imore fundamentally pessi-l mistic chord when he' pointed out that theatre,; being an urban activity, has, (flourished historically only; (in cities which are of a cen-j • tripetal proclivity, cultural; | nuclei as well as economic; (ones. By contrast, it is easy! I to agree with him in seeing; 'the New Zealand city as I centrifugal in nature, a I “commercial convenience” I 'which operates during work-! ling hours, and then becomes! (the impetus to “get away; (from it all, into the wide open spaces.” Comparing Christchurch with Paris, it 'is not difficult to see which !is the “mosaic of non-com-imunicating family modules” and which the “legendary city with its own myth,! ;where you go to the city' 'centre for refreshment.” I; The question of how| i“Homo economicus” can be" 'eeucated to converge for; 'Other than economic reasonsj admits no easy answer. The;' •pivotal dogma of the con-'

(sumer society is that “The (container is more important 'than the content,” so that • the consumer will go to the Theatre building but not to 'the dramatic event. j That it is easy to fantasise : about the ideal New Zealand • theatre of the future was apparent from the audience (debate which followed Elric (Hooper’s deliberately contentious lecture. But for the (specifics of our present and (future theatre it will be nec(essary to attend Mr Hoo(per’s lunch-time lectures (today and tomorrow (and (later at the Students' Associ(ation). Such stimulating lectures, without admission (charge, surely demand full 'houses.