In this blog post, we will examine how objects in contemporary theater go beyond mere props to function as vehicles of interpretation and symbolism.
Contemporary theater does not aim to reproduce reality as it is, as it did in the past. While theater in the past focused on reproducing the visible reality, contemporary theater goes beyond the reproduction of reality and moves toward creating a completely different world. This is clearly different from the traditional realist perspective, which accepted only what could be seen with the eyes and expressed in words as objective facts. From this perspective, the world created by contemporary theater can feel both fresh and unfamiliar. The texts of contemporary theater no longer convey fixed meanings.
Rather, their meaning is not limited to a single interpretation, but is presented as an “open text” that the audience must interpret and discover for themselves. This means that each member of the audience must actively engage with the text and construct meaning based on their own experiences and thoughts. Of course, these interpretations do not necessarily correspond to the author’s original intention. However, what is important in contemporary theater is not finding a single correct answer, but the possibility of diverse interpretations. Through interpretation, the text takes on new meanings and gains weight and depth from the meanings given to it by the audience.
In contemporary theater, one of the elements that becomes the subject of such interpretive experiences is the “object.” In the theater of the past, objects were mainly used to embody characters in the play or as props necessary for the development of scenes, and they remained a means of giving a sense of realism. In other words, they played a decorative and auxiliary role in reproducing reality. However, in contemporary theater, objects have come to be regarded as more than mere props. Objects now function as key “symbols” that expand the dramatic imagination and serve as important mediators that make the meaning of the text and the symbolic system of the stage more complex and multi-layered.
In this context, contemporary theater can be described as “play with objects.” The director uses the stage space as a central stage where creative imagination converges and utilizes objects to realize a new spatial aesthetic that transcends the physical limitations of the stage. Objects can create completely different meanings depending on how they are arranged and utilized, and as the entity that plans and coordinates this entire process, the director stands at the center of theatrical meaning creation.
While theater in the past had a playwright-centered structure, contemporary theater has shifted to a director-centered structure. This is because directors have gone beyond simply interpreting scripts to become creators of their own worlds on stage. A representative example of this trend in contemporary theater is the work of Polish playwright and director Tadeusz Kantor.
Written and directed by Kantor himself, The Death of Solzhenitsyn is a “theater of death” that commemorates those who did not return from Auschwitz, and a “theater of ritual” in which the dead and the living meet in a space called “classroom.”
The actors in this play appear on stage as elderly people, carrying or carrying on their backs dolls that are much smaller than themselves, the size of small children. The dolls sitting on chairs in the classroom are not mere props, but symbols of the actors’ childhoods and substitutes for those who lost their lives during the war.
These puppets are metaphors for the pain and wounds of the past and the lost time, and at the same time, they become symbolic objects that invite the audience to interpret them. The elderly people sitting on long chairs on one side of the stage look at these puppets and reminisce about the past, or watch the puppets being massacred. The scenes reenacted by the puppets are sometimes happy childhood memories and sometimes the horrors of war. In this way, the performers were actually the ones who experienced the events in the past, but on stage, they now stand as performers and observers. In other words, they are practicing a kind of distancing by looking back on their own experiences from the stage.
This structure of observation applies equally to the audience in the seats. The events on stage are interpreted anew through the eyes of the performers and the audience. The events reproduced on stage are not simply repetitions of the past, but become a space for interpretive experiences that are projected onto the lives and emotions of the present. Memories of a happy childhood, the horrors of war, and the guilt and sense of victimization that the survivors had to bear are given meaning through a multi-layered perspective. Kantor’s plays provide a space where the past and present, individuals and groups, memories and interpretations are intricately intertwined, presenting the audience with various possibilities for interpretation through objects.
In this play, it is particularly impressive that the director himself appears on stage. He goes beyond the role of a simple director and places his own body on stage as an object. This scene, in which the director himself appears as part of the play, goes beyond a simple performance and contains a message of deep reflection.
The questions, “Why am I on stage?” and “What am I in this play?” reveal the director’s self-reflection, prompting the audience to ask themselves the same questions. Perhaps he is himself, a mirror reflecting himself, and a reflector reflecting the audience. What attitude should the audience take when encountering such a complex and symbolic contemporary play?
Rather than simply watching the stage passively, they must pay attention to the role of objects within the multi-layered and complex meaning structure of the work and use them as clues for interpretation. Objects are no longer mere decorations or props, but symbols that invite interpretation and serve as important bridges connecting the audience and the stage.
Through the objects, the audience becomes active interpreters who reconstruct the meaning of the play and derive new interpretations related to their own lives. In other words, the objects are part of the performance and at the same time function as part of the audience’s experience that touches their lives. This interpretive experience goes beyond simply understanding the play and becomes an opportunity to reflect on life.
The goal of contemporary theater is not simply to “show,” but to “make people think,” and objects serve as the medium for this connection. Through this process, the audience becomes not just ‘consumers’ who appreciate the work, but “participants” who create meaning. Perhaps the true stage of contemporary theater is within the hearts of the audience.
