Theatrical Architecture in the Andrzej Pronaszko’s Conception of Stage Space.

Popova Alexandra ORCID: 0009-0001-2772-459X Postgraduate student, Russian State University of Performing Arts 191028, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Mokhovaya str., 33-35 Alexandrapopova.online@gmail.com

Andrzej Pronashko (1888-1961) – an innovator, stage enthusiast, enfant terrible of Polish scenography, an artist closely associated with trends that define themselves as avant–garde – in the history of Polish scenography occupies the same place in importance as Leon Schiller - in the history of Polish directing: "between these two artists (...) was distributed in XX responsibility for the artistic form of theatrical performance" ^{[1, p. 9]} – writes Wojciech Dudzik and adds that modern Polish stage artists, experimenting with space, taking the performance outside the box stage, should remember that they follow the road that Andrzej Pronashko paved a hundred years ago ^{[1, p. 11]}.

Viktor Berezkin, however, presents the heroes of his monograph dedicated to Polish theater artists of the second half of the XX century, as if they became pioneers of the art of modern spatial expression of the performance in Poland, where it began to take shape only in the mid-1950s. Only in connection with the work of Tadeusz Kantor, who studied scenography in the 1930s., the author stipulates in passing that this artist "seemed to directly embody continuity in relation to pre–war theatrical experiments (from K. Malevich to the Italian futurists and the German Bauhaus), not to mention the experiments of the Polish stage itself (director's – L. Schiller, decorative - A. Pronashko and especially the performances of Crico-1 ...)" ^{[2, p. 11]}. To what extent Kantor succeeded Schiller and Pronashko is a moot point. But it is no coincidence that Berezkin mentions Pronashko in this context (and not, for example, Karol Frych, whose pupil Kantor was): it was his artistic searches that largely determined the appearance of the Polish scene of the interwar period and it was during this period that the practice of modern scenography developed.

Not all of Pronashko's ideas came to the time – some of them remained in the status of projects for the "theater of the future" ^[3], in the creation of which the artist sought to take a direct part. But this theater should have been born from the theater of today, receptive to modern trends in art and innovative technical capabilities. The artist was convinced that the way to transform the theater lies through a new understanding of the stage space.

The rapid development of technology opened up technological prospects for the theater that could not have been imagined before, but now had to be mastered. The issue of revising the theater's attitude to the stage space and its boundaries concerned both directing, acting, and even drama, but the responsibility for new solutions fell on the set design. It demanded unknown – avant-garde – solutions. The position of the avant-garde, as a rule, implies the desire to apply new opportunities with unpredictable results. In this case, the viewer gets some unexpected experience – one that the theater could not offer him before.

In the interwar twenties, the entire cultural and cognitive structure was determined by the rapid mechanization of reality. This tendency was also manifested in avant-garde attempts to turn the theater into a "machine" that captures a person. "The theater is not a cradle with a squeaking baby. This is a hellish thinking machine that disturbs the sense of balance of a person trapped between its gears" ^{[3, p. 225]}, postulated Andrzej Pronashko in 1928.

Pronashko discussed the principles of the new theatrical art with Leon Schiller in Krakow between 1911 and 1913, formulating his concept of stage space. Pronashko defined the key points as follows: "1. The indissoluble unity of content and form; 2. The inseparability and complete interdependence of the actions of the director, artist and actor; 3. The rejection of all descriptive and its replacement by dramatic, synthetic and syntonic ways of creating decorative forms, characters, gesture and stage action; 4. The costume that participates in the formation of a stage character (in according to the theory of costume design), should be born from the imagination of the artist, it should be a sculpture (...), a sculpture elastic, but strictly defining the framework of the movement and gesture of the actor; 5. Light focuses mainly on the figures of the actors, and its source is only reflectors, which, excluding from the stage means the light of the footlights, replace in many cases, the curtain; 6. The stage action goes to the proscenium; 7. The last postulate (of the more distant future) is the unification of the stage and the auditorium into a single whole (Mickiewicz's postulate), that is, the theater of spatial unity" ^{[4, pp. 160-161]}. In his subsequent scenographic work, Pronashko will strive to adhere to this set of rules, and only the last postulate will have to be postponed every now and then.

These principles of the "Polish theatrical reform" (this is how Pronashko defined them) were not only formulated in a discussion with Leon Schiller – they were first put into practice in collaboration with Schiller, forming the basis of the plastic method of visual expression of the performance of the monumental theater.

The director's direction, known as the Polish Monumental Theater, was developed by Leon Schiller in 1924-1926 at the Warsaw Theater. Wojciech Boguslavsky, not only inspired by the ideas of A. Mickiewicz, S. Vyspiansky, T. Michinsky, O. Ortwin, R. Wagner and E. G. Craig, but also relying on the scenographic practice of Pronashko. During this period, Schiller also worked with other artists who created scenography for his monumental performances (in particular, with Zbigniew Pronashko and Vincenty Drabik), but it was the developments of Andrzej Pronashko that determined the spatial style of performances. In his concept, scenography, as an activity aimed at the artistic production of stage and dramatic space, acquired key importance for the performance, it was inextricably linked with the dramaturgy of the performance and with the director's decision and affected the perception of the viewer.

Incompatible with the conditions of the box stage, the seventh postulate of his reform - the "theater of spatial unity", Pronashko tried to embody in innovative projects carried out in collaboration with architects, mainly with Shimon Syrkus. Such works were: a stage space for the play "Golem" (premiere May 26, 1928), a project of a Simultaneous theater (1928-1929) and a Mobile Theater (1934, together with architect Stefon Bryla). 

Theater at the circus arena: the play "Golem"

Directors Andrzej Marek and Jerzy Walden staged a spectacular performance "Golem", unique for the Polish theater, based on the dramatic poem by G. Leivik (1921) with a set design by Pronashko and Syrkus at the Warsaw Circus arena.

The thirteen-meter arena was surrounded by parterre boxes lined with velvet, several rows of upholstered chairs, boxes on the first floor, a balcony and a gallery. Above the exit for the artists there was a platform for the orchestra, opposite – a gilded governor's box. In the center, the artists built a constructivist space in which a tragedy was played out according to an ancient Hebrew legend.

The drama is based on the plot of the Prague Rabbi Maharal, who, in an effort to protect Jews from unfair accusations of ritual murders of Christians, creates a Golem out of clay – a creature resembling a man, but devoid of a soul. However, his creation, instead of serving the interests of the people, begins to destroy man. Marek adapted Leivik's text to the scene, taking only those fragments of it that are directly related to the action, to the logic of the scene and adding other versions of the legend of the Golem to them, but at the same time preserving the fundamental conflict of the drama – the conflict between the creator and his creation. The director excluded a deep philosophical context from the play and expanded the romantic, erotic motive. In Marek's version, the Golem was until then a calm instrument in the hands of Maharal, until he acted according to the rules prescribed by people, until he encountered love for a woman, for the rabbi's granddaughter Deborah: "At the very moment when the Golem fell in love with Deborah, Maharal lost" ^[5] – Marek commented on his interpretation. Golem's love is brutal and vulgar. He shouts to Deborah, "I'm ready to kill all people for you."^[5] Such is the love of a being who has no soul.

The image of the scenography project ^{[6, p. 158]} in combination with reviews in the press allows you to get an idea of the visual expression of the performance. The reviewer, who signed himself with the initials B. R., who was present at one of the rehearsals of the play, excitingly describes his impressions: "It was the morning hour. As soon as I entered the circus hall, I was immediately shaken by a frantic cry that burst from a couple of hundred strong throats, like the roar of a maddened crowd: "Blood is pouring! Jewish blood!"And then another exclamation, even more grandiose: "Rebbe! Punish the insolent man!"Several hundred clenched, formidable fists rose up, and a third cry shook the air: "Stone him! Get stoned!”. My legs gave out from fear. The arena was filled to the very edges with a huge crowd of students and female students, and in front of them on the dais stood our outstanding tragedian Karol Adventovich, who with his delightful metallic and profoundly exciting voice asked and at the same time ordered the crowd: "Calm down and go to the synagogue. I ask you... I order you!”. The students hardly allowed themselves to be persuaded, and – along the multicolored staircase, rustling in a whisper, they went to the synagogue, which was located high above the gates of the Circus. The arena remained empty. I looked around and couldn't believe my eyes. How this arena has been transformed, usually so gray and dirty!" ^[7].

An impressive constructivist system of blocks, ladders, platforms and pillars formed separate scenes of action that remained on stage throughout the performance. The flat surface of the arena was transformed into a multi–level space, as it always happens in a circus - artists used the space under the dome. The architectonic composition of Pronashko and Syrkus was complemented by blocks, columns, arches, pillars, steps and stairs of various shapes and colors installed in the arena and suspended above it. Expressive constructions grew up before the eyes of the audience – a synagogue, a courtyard, wells, platforms, a castle of Five towers, gates, roads winding upwards. The mass scenes looked impressive. The multidimensional space of the perfectly mounted (according to the critic Tadeusz Boy Zhelensky ^[8]) performance opened up great opportunities for working with the dynamics of the performance, for connecting and diluting different events of the action. The majestic Golem with its heavy movements towered over the floating, rustling, trembling crowd with its monumental body. Bulky structures, on, under, inside which both he and the people moved, made up his space, he became the ruler of the world. The whole space was filled with the polyphonic singing of the choir of the Great Warsaw Synagogue of one hundred and fifty people under the direction of David Eisenstadt, who wrote the music for the performance. The choir echoed the words of the rabbi or quietly hummed songs of sadness ^[9] – in the play he played the role of a collective participant in events, similar to the role in which the choir performed in ancient Greek tragedy.

"Golem" became the only Polish performance of the interwar period staged at the circus arena. Referring to the ancient Jewish legend about a man who wanted to become the master of life, but lost to a creature that he created with his own hands, the authors of the play sought to shock the viewer, to cause him a sense of anxiety, an experience of the Sublime, but also reflection on the troubled world that will again embrace them upon leaving the theater. The spatial scene of the Golem, which combined a constructivist approach to the design of the performance, monumental structures that organize the movements of the actors, and elements of ancient Greek tragedy, obeyed this goal.

Designing the "theater of the future"

The simultaneous Pronashko and Syrkus theater was developed by order of the Warsaw government, however, like many other European and Soviet architectural projects of the 1920s and 1930s, it was not implemented and remained only on paper. The authors were building a theater project in which it would be possible to reach a new level of perception of the performance. They tried to achieve this by using the elasticity of the scene. Pronashko called the elasticity of the stage the mobility of its form, the malleability to transformations, the possibility of a quick change of scenery without compromising the continuity of the performance [see: 10, pp. 244-245]. The simultaneous theater of Pronashko and Syrkus assumed a constant "flow" of space from one form to another, incessant movement. The principle of simultaneity and the rejection of the box-scene made it possible to actualize the experience of being present inside the narrative.

In the design of the theater building, the authors started from the thesis of the Dutch architect, a member of the De Steil group and one of the main representatives of functionalism in architecture, Jacobus Johannes Peter Aud (1890-1963). Aud wrote in 1926 that architecture had made a flaw in the practice of construction since its inception: it consisted in the fact that during the construction of the building, the beautiful turned out to be separated from the practical: first the object was built, and then decorated, as a result of which "an erroneous formula was created: beautiful = decorated" [cit. according to: 11, p. 29]. This formula, according to Aud, becomes an obstacle in the emergence of the pure art of construction. In 1928, Vladislav Strzeminski developed this idea: "Structural thinking is the most essential feature of modern art. In this regard, there is a change in the very concept of beauty. Beauty is a system that connects and subordinates all parts of the structure. (...) We declare a plan, a system, an organization as an expression of beauty more perfect than the beauty of sentimental-romantic anarchy and destruction" ^{[12, p. 2]}. Theater artists were guided by similar conclusions when they postulated the rejection of the concepts of "decoration" and "decorator" in the theater, declaring their activity not the decoration (decoration, decoration) of the performance, but the creation of its visual expression.

Like Strzeminski, Syrkus criticized the incorrect, outdated understanding of architecture, which seemed to be something bifurcated, consisting of unrelated elements of utilitarianism and aesthetics. Syrkus considered this a sign of the decline of the art of construction, which "could not keep up with the development of industry and social movement" ^{[11, p. 29]}. The movement itself as an element of time, Syrkus thought of as part of modern architecture. For him, architecture, which contains only space, is not complete and is not able to satisfy the desire to overcome time, whereas modern man is obsessed with this desire, along with the desire to overcome space: "the element of time, the basis of functionalism and dynamism, complements spatial architecture and makes up with it a living thing, a complete thing, the art of operating with space and time" ^{[11, p. 31]}. Syrkus' approach coincided with how Pronashko saw his theater of the future.

By 1928, projects were already known in Europe in which the architectonics of the theater space were radically revised and the swirling movement of the modern world was glorified: the Theater of the Champs-Elysees by Auguste Perret with a triple stage (1913); the Large Schauspielhaus in Berlin by Hans Pelzig (1919); the circular stage by Oscar Strnad (1922); the Endless Theater and the stage of spaces by Frederick Kislera with a spiral stage (1923-1924); the Liberated Theater of Josef Khokhol and Jiri Freika with a round stage, with a system of bridges, elevators and crossings (1926-1927); the Total Theater of Erwin Piscator, designed by Walter Gropius. Artists, critics, theater theorists (Gunther Hirschel-Protsch, El Lissitzky, Enrico Prampolini) wrote about the theater of the movement.

In the analytical text "Description of the simultaneous theater by Andrzej Pronashko and Shimon Syrkus with the participation of Zygmunt Leski" ^[13], illustrated with diagrams and photographs of layouts, published on the pages of the second issue of the magazine of architects and avant-garde artists "Presentation" in 1930, as a source of inspiration for the concept of a Simultaneous theater, Shimon and Helena Syrkus indicated Total Theater Piscator and Gropius, also based on the principles of functionalism. Developing a project of a Simultaneous Theater, Pronashko – like Piscator – sought to overcome the division of the theater space into a stage and an auditorium. In both cases, the stage space was a complex movable structure consisting of several stages connected to each other. According to the plan of Pronashko and Syrkus, an amphitheater podium with spectator seats and several stages were combined in a single space: two ring stages with movable platforms on them passed around a static proscenium. The scenery on the ring stages could be changed in the room under the podium through which they were stretched. There, under the spectator seats, there were workshops and dressing rooms and offices.

The acoustic qualities of the halls largely depend on the height of the ceiling. At high altitude, single and multiple sound reflections from the ceiling and other surfaces of the hall may not reach the listener sitting in the hall or lag in comparison with direct sound from the source (this sound path is the shortest), as a result, the sound quality decreases, an echo occurs. The delay time of the reflected sound paths in relation to the direct sound path is determined by the difference of these paths, i.e. the delay time can be obtained by dividing this difference by the speed of sound. In the project of Pronashko and Syrkus, the single space of the stage and the auditorium in the acoustic sense was a huge shell, the bend of which was borrowed from acoustic calculations performed according to the Gustave Lyon method used in the New Pleyel Hall in Paris (1927). Certain architectural and construction parameters of the hall, accurate calculation of the reverberation time and geometric reflections were supposed to enhance the sound of the actor's voice, ensure a low noise level, absence of echo and sound distortion. Based on Lyon's calculations, the authors designed a ceiling of a special irregular shape, which served as a reflector reflecting voice waves. The curvature of the ceiling was calculated so that the difference between the sum of the paths of the reflected voice from the surface and the direct path from the source was always less than 22 meters, which allowed to avoid distortion of the voice and echo, as well as strengthen the sound of the voice.

Light became an important element of the Simultaneous Theater. He had to separate the stage from the audience or connect it with them, he could indicate to the viewer the place of the stage to which attention should be paid. The importance of lighting experienced its first rise in the entire European theater of the first decades of the XX century . For example, Adolf Appiah called the two main elements of his synthetic concept space and lighting. In "A Work of Living Art" (1917-1919), Appiah wrote that the stage space should be equipped for constant changes, and the objects placed on it require lighting. The movement of the actor's living plastic body takes place in space, which interacts with objects and thereby enters into direct connection with architecture ^{[14, p. 110]}.  Experiments with the stage space captured the most advanced artists of the theater during this period.

The simultaneous theater made it possible to enhance the expressiveness of the performance, adapt it to modern reality, to new forms of communication, to technological progress, the pace and rhythm of life. Syrkus described the feeling of life they were trying to achieve in a Simultaneous Theater through their experiences of the atmosphere of a modern city: "One day I was standing near the Zoological Garden station in Berlin, caught up in the pace of life in a big city. Cars, buses and trams were darting around me. Intercity trains and the city surface railway passed over my head. Somewhere even higher – airplanes. And under his feet, in the tunnels, the underground transport thundered. In this multidirectional network of motor vehicles, continuous streams of people moved. Every minute the burrows connecting the different levels of the station threw out new crowds of people, new waves of air – already a different temperature. At that moment, I imagined a slice of a modern city with its heterogeneous planes of multidirectional movements, with all the channels connecting the stations of all these roads and queues. And I realized that this simultaneity, the simultaneity of diverse phenomena, is a sign of the time in which we live. A person who once discovered simultaneity somewhere in the heart of a big city simply cannot think otherwise" ^{[11, p. 32]}. It is noteworthy that Gropius, describing his Total Theater, also referred to similar impressions: "Everything in general can be comparable in organization to the latest design of railway stations" ^{[15, p. 70]}.

The simultaneous theater acted as a harbinger of a new dramatic art and opened up new opportunities for performing arts and the artistic existence of the body in space. Pronashko wrote about the artist of the theater of the future, who "by launching signal systems from the cockpit, sets in motion voices, [bodies] of characters, light" ^{[3, p. 229]}. However, in the theater of the future, according to Pronashko, there may not be any actors at all: "in the theater I need the last cry of life, the one that dies in agony every day and is born with pain every day. No actor gives this and cannot give it. The most powerful word, the most powerful idea of a gesture, dies when an actor becomes its interpreter. An actor on a huge, spectacular stage looks like a sparrow who sat down on a pulsating, breathing huge lungs modern locomotive. I prefer a gigantophone that can speak instead of it, I prefer a machine that can appear instead of it" ^{[3, p. 227]}. The design of the theater building, proposed by Pronashko and Syrkus, was designed to make the movement of the stage an independent element of the spectacle, which became a theatrical analogue of the movement of life. Pronashko believed that the theater, which takes into account the nature of the movement of life at the level of the organization of the stage space, is much closer to the truth: "instead of the illusion of reality that the box-stage brought to the theater, artistic truth returns to its rights, expressing reality, its slice" ^{[10, p. 237]}. This new constructivist migration of the city into the theater space, the creation of a space-time slice of the city in the theater, is close to modern game design.

In a commentary on the 1929 project, Zygmunt Tonetsky wrote that the implementation of the Pronashko and Syrkus project is necessary for the theater, because thanks to such a space, the theater can stand in competition with the cinema gaining momentum, becoming "a talking film, while three-dimensional and color" ^{[16, p. 212]}. The spatial theater creates a kind of reality model into which it integrates the viewer, it is an invitation to the viewer to experience the seething reality in an artistic form. Getting into the theater, the viewer finds himself in a world outside of which there is nothing. Reality takes place only where sensory experience unfolds.

Pronashko admitted that the disadvantage of the Simultaneous Theater project with Syrkus was too much distance between the immovable audience and the elastic stage [see: 10, pp. 242-243]. He attempted to solve this problem in another project, which he called a Mobile Theater. In 1934, he developed a project for a Mobile theater together with engineer and architect Stefan Bryla. In the mid-1930s. Pronashko actively promoted this project, his public lectures and presentations of the theater model were held in Warsaw, Krakow and Lviv in 1935, in addition, materials were published in the press: interview with Mieczyslaw Bronzel ^[17], article by Tymon Terletsky ^[18], article "Theater on wheels", published in the popular illustrated weekly "As" ^[19].

The idea of the Mobile Theater was to fit the entire performance in a small space and without voluminous wings taking up too much space. The building contained only one hall and was a cube (18 x 18 meters). The center of the hall was reserved for the public: a round rotating inclined platform thirteen meters in diameter could accommodate three hundred and sixty spectators. The rest of the space became a stage. The decorations of individual acts were installed along the walls. With the help of a special mechanism, the platform with the audience had to turn in the direction of the desired place of action. The light of the reflectors also turned there. The role of the curtain was performed by the mobility of the auditorium and the light. An actor in such a space could move from one set design to another (pass the room around) and at the same time remain in the visibility of the audience, who, together with the platform, turned to the desired place of action. The spectator experience, which such an organization of space suggested, approached the experience of film viewing by the continuity of movement: "in my mobile theater, the action takes place like in a movie, without interruptions. (...) The performance constantly keeps the viewer in suspense. For an hour and a half or two, the viewer lives in the world of art" ^{[17, p. 255]}, Pronashko emphasized in an interview with Bronzel.

The construction of the Mobile Theater consisted of separate elements and could be disassembled, the stage and spectator seats sector had to be made of steel, and the walls were made of tarpaulin, following the example of circus tents (According to Stefan Bryla's calculations, the entire structure could be transported by four trucks, and the installation time would be about eight hours [see: 19, p. 7]).  Mounting the theater, it was possible to immediately put all the elements of the space in their places. The tasks of the scenography here would always include the tasks of construction.

The main functional difference between the two projects was that in a Simultaneous theater, the scenery moved relative to the audience, and in a Mobile Theater, the audience moved relative to the scenery. The main artistic provisions in both cases remained unchanged. Both architectural and scenographic experiments somehow followed the same aspiration: each of them was an attempt to radically change the nature of a theatrical event at the level of the architectonics of space and thereby enrich the perceptual experience of the viewer.

The artistic organization of space became the area of the most concrete changes in the Polish theatrical avant-garde between the two World Wars, set design, in addition, was a special area of avant-garde activism, manifesting the emergence of the "theater of the future", which promises some exceptional perceptual experience. Pronashko, like other most advanced theatrical artists of the first decades of the XX century, turned to the search for ways to create a space that does not exist in the register of the real, and with which the viewer can interact only with the help of his imagination and only in the theater. In his scenography and theatrical and architectural projects, his concept of stage space was expressed, associated with going beyond the boundaries of the usual theater and using modern technical achievements.