Renaud’s vision presented. Levine: so is this guy sympathetic?
Woman 5: no, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t right …
Man 4: are we talking about a city as a thing or city as people? Politics is personal – when we’re yielding power to our rulers, to their vision, are we’re giving our power up to someone like renaud?
Woman 3: aren’t we losing sight of the political theatre aspect – couldn’t this be played more sympathetically? We’re not talking about the mechanics, the esthetics – what if there were costumes, or the actors switched roles.
What is the political valence of costume drama as opposed to naturalism or documentary theatre – are there any contants in there?
Woman 3: I don’t think so. Re: Ionesco’s Exit the King, and the personal interpretation of that piece. To me something like NYTW’s Rachel Corrie – it’s so explicit, so artless. I think about the theatre very differently than how I think about my vote.
Levine: that seems important – the difference between art and politics – that these are different goals. It becomes a question of ends, right?