International Association of Libraries and Museums of the Performing Arts

Société Internationale des Bibliothèques et des Musées des Arts du Spectacle

Stage Models as a Scientific Source

Kari Gaarder Losnedahl (Bergen)

17. Internationaler SIBMAS-Kongreß / 17ème Congrès International de la SIBMAS / 17th International SIBMAS Congress, 1.-9. September 1988, Mannheim

Bericht / Actes / Documentation. Red.: Liselotte Homering. Mannheim : Städtisches Reiß-Museum, 1990. pp. 153-156

Material evidence is the basis of all museums, and the visual nature of this is highly appreciated by the personnel of museums. We should acknowledge, however, that the objects in themselves are only a part of an act, we may call it a frozen act. This term indicates the importance of presenting the non-visible cultural expressions associated with the object in question. Today an important aspect of conveyance is considered to be the display of an object in its correct context, so that its use is obvious. Context and function are two main key terms. These should also be key terms in research.

If we accept that these key terms are decisive for our understanding of an object, we will realize the necessity of looking for information about the object, so that we can obtain the best possible knowledge of the function which the object is the concrete and visual expression of. This does not mean that the object is not in itself a potential source of knowledge. It is, above all, the primary source. But the potential of such primary sources is often limited and dependent upon relevant secondary sources. Context is, therefore, important. If the object cannot be displayed in its correct functional connection, its function can be made clear by informative documentation. To me documentation is an aspect of conveyance equally important to the actual exhibition. It is also a part of scientific research, or should be so.

It is, however, obvious that there is a limit to the amount of information which can be included in the documentation. The selection will be subjective and based on an interpretation of what is considered more or less important. Of prime interest is also the reason for acquisition, registration and conveyance, and, thus, for any further research. In addition the background, education and interests of the researcher are decisive factors as to the selection made.

All the same, the documentation must be a reflected one because inadequacy can in fact provide an erroneous basis for scientific research. I will try and show what I mean by an example from my own work.

The theatre consists of a complex structure of material and immaterial elements. According to its nature the theatre museum will focus the acquisition on the material evidence for the purposes of studying the theatre and theatre-actions. An important part of the theatre is its visual expression which to a large extent consists of material elements. It seems natural, therefore, that this should be a field of great interest to a museum.

However, if we look closer at the elements which make up the visual expression, we soon discover that the possibility of acquiring objects for a museum will be incidental, sporadic as well as sparse. The props are, for example, a permanent part of the inventory of the theatre and will be used again and again in different plays. Or they may be completely worn out after use. The same applies to costumes. They may be worn, dirty, damaged, or are to be redesigned for other productions. In the majority of cases the costumes and props will, therefore, remain in the theatre.

As for the decorations of today's theatre, most of them are thrown away after use. Each new production requires its own scenography which is built anew. Certain elements may be retained and used again in other productions, but mostly the decorations disappear for ever as soon as the playbill is taken down.

Instead of throwing them away there seems to be no reason why a museum could not take over the decorations used. But if we calculate that any single theatre puts on about 10 productions per year, it is obvious that this would present practical problems. Also the size and three-dimensional form of the sets make them hard to store.

As regards authentic material it would seem that we are in a worse position for documenting the scene-decorations today than in previous times when the wings were the part of the inventory and were used repeatedly. They were easier to store, and there were, in addition, fixed rules and methods for placing wings on stage so that reconstructions seem to have been simpler and practicable.

What we do have today, though, are scene-models. They are authentic insofar as they are designed and made by the responsible scenographer. Moreover, they are three-dimensional and thus satisfy our need for material evidence.

Bergens Teatermuseum (The Bergen Theatre Museum) which is where I work, is primarily the museum for Den Nationale Scene (The Bergen Theatre). I have a standing agreement with the theatre workshops that all stage (scene)-models which the scenographer does not want to keep shall be given to the museum. The models are stored in the museum after registration. Today Bergen Theatre Museum has about 150 models, and I vary the models on display according to the exhibition theme. (Between 10 and 20 models are on display at a time.) The museum and the Institute for Drama and Theatre Research are in the same building, so all the models - both those on display and those that are stored - can be used in connection with teaching whenever desirable.

When I started to work at the museum none of the models were registered. Hordaland County provided funds which permitted me to engage two students who started the work on registration. It was most important for me to get the work going because of a time-limit labelled to the project, and in such a manner that the students could work independently. Thus I worked out registration-cards consisting of 10 headings:

1. Title (of the play the model is made for)
2. Author
3. Scenographer
4. Instructor (Director)
5. Place
6. Year/date
7. Size of model
8. Type (kind of model) (Models of theatre buildings may be included)
9. Condition
10. Date of cataloguing

On the cards there is also room for additional comments as well as a photograph of the model.

The reason for collecting models is their ability to convey a feeling of space and an understanding of the physical size in a manner quite different from that of any two-dimensional documentation. That is why they are popular objects both in an exhibition and in a teaching situation, and from this point of view they are an excellent basis for research, as well. In this connection I will refer to the SIBMAS-Congress in New York in 1982 where the importance of collecting and preserving stage (scene-)models was stressed due to their unique source of evidence with regard to scientific research in the field of theatre.

What is often left out of the discussion, however, is how the models measure with the final stage-setting. Many models are more or less sketches, whereas others are full of detail and very accurately made. The extent to which the finished stage settings are copies of the model (and vice versa) varies considerably. If the models are to have value as basis for research into the setting of a production this factor - the model contra the final result on stage - must be clarified.

Most often we focus on the model itself - that is the concrete object we are faced with. Little emphasis is given to its relation to the process of work in the theatre. We might think that we look at a copy of the stage-setting, whereas what we actually see may deviate considerably from the real and final decoration. We tend to emphasize the aesthetic forms of the models considering them in relation to display and pay less attention to their authenticity in relation to the final stage product.

If models and the documentation of models are to be sources of genuine scientific research one vital question ought to be asked: What does the model in question really convey?

It seems to me that it is even more important for theatre collections that the documentation is as exact as possible, because the object of drama and theatre research, theatre art - or "theatre-action" as I prefer to call it since that implies mobility -, has as its purpose the creation of a mock world of often unreal things where the aspect of adventure and experience is brief and fleeting. In this connection a theatre museum can seem to be a paradox, as the general function of a museum is to administer historical source material subject to protection and preservation. The objects in a "theatre-action", however, are often as "fleeting" as the work of art they are part of. In addition they belong to a fictive world. That means we collect and preserve mock-things in order to keep evidence of a mock-world!

But if our items are to function as genuine sources, careful documentation is of vital importance because the potential information provided by a theatre object can be so accidental. The purpose of collecting stage models must be twofold:

1.  to document a part of the work process by attaching importance to all the preparatory work which goes into every theatre production,
2.  to document the visual expression of the theatre.

Therefore it is important that information as to what extent the final stage setting is comparable to the stage-model, and in case of variation how great that variation is, and if possible, the reasons for those variations must be included in the registration, as well as the type of material used in the decorations, and preferably with examples. Unfortunately these informations are often missing in the registration. This applies also to the registration cards I presented to you. They are examples of the general tendency of focusing on the model itself and overlooking its function.

Since I have to do with both, documentation and scientific research, I have become increasingly aware of the importance of adequate documentation. My purpose with this paper is to stress this fact and to point out the importance of conveying the function of the object in question. The models I have dealt with are all "working models", and represent the starting point in the process of making a theatre production. This has to be made quite clear in the registration and documentation, as it forms the basis of scientific research. They provide authenticity of some preparatory work, not necessarily of the final production. The cards, then, need headings which include such informations.

The other keyterm I mentioned in the beginning was context. Context often goes with function. I will, however, point to one special aspect concerning context.

The display of models in a theatre museum will immediately connect the models with the theatre, making them a part of the theatre. Exhibited in an art-gallery, however, the models become a piece of art with no immediate or natural link to the theatre. They become autonomous pieces of art. Their value in this connection is quite independent of their relationship to the theatre and how the scenic solution was solved. The audience/public will seek quite different information in an object displayed in an art-gallery than of one in a theatre museum. In this context - displaying the model as an autonomous piece of art - the genuine function of it is of less importance.

SIBMAS Home

HOME-BIENVENUE

Rules
Statuts

Executive Committee
Comité exécutif

Institutional Members
Membres institutionnels

Joining SIBMAS
Adhérer à la SIBMAS

International Directory
Répertoire international

Congresses
Congrès

National Collections
Collections nationales

Research Sites
Sites de recherche

Partner Organisations
Organisations soeurs

WHAT'S NEW
NOUVEAUTÉS

FORUM