Abstract
Many elements of spectatorship are so basic that we tend to overlook them when analyzing what audiences do while engaged in a performance. We take it for granted that spectators will usually pay attention to what is happening on the stage, that they will be able to understand the sounds coming out of the actors’ mouths as intelligible communication, and that they will know what they are seeing when they perceive inanimate objects as well as live actors as they watch the show. We also assume that audience members understand that the actors are not really the characters they are playing, even though spectators will often respond to the actor/characters’ actions in the drama as though they were. These elements seem like commonplaces of theatrical spectatorship, but they hide a myriad of general cognitive operations that must occur before audiences can begin to engage with performances as social animals and culturally situated individuals. Accordingly, we must begin at this basic level to lay the foundation for subsequent investigations of more complex spectatorial engagements. Though foundational, the cognitive processes of attention, memory, visual perception, and imaginative play are far from simple and cognitive scientists continue to disagree about what they are and how they work. We will pick our way through some of the competing theories to arrive at one perspective about these general operations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
See J. Palmer, “Attentional Limits on the Perception and Memory of Visual Information,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 16 (1990): 332–350.
J.C. Johnston, R.S. McCann, and R.W. Remington, “Chronometric Evidence for Two Types of Attention,” Psychological Science 6 (1995): 365–369.
G.M. Edelman, Bright Air, Brilliant Fire: On the Matter of the Mind ( New York: Basic Books, 1992 )
Daniel Dennett, Consciousness Explained (Boston: Little, Brown, 1991 )
Elizabeth Wilson, Neural Geographies: Feminism and the Microstructure of Cognition ( New York: Routledge, 1998 ), 6
Richard P. Honeck, A Proverb in Mind: The Cognitive Science of Proverbial Wit and Wisdom ( Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997 ), 264
Jeffrey S. Ravel, The Contested Parterre: Public Theater and French Political Culture, 1680–1791 ( Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1999 ), 54.
Melissa Hines, Brain Gender ( Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2004 ), 4.
Gerald Edelman and Guilio Tononi, A Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination ( New York: Basic Books, 2000 ), 26.
Samuel Beckett, Waiting for Godot ( New York: Grove Press, 1954 ), 40.
John Tulloch, Shakespeare and Chekhov in Production and Reception ( Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 2005 ), 142–146.
E. Eich, “Memory for Unattended Events: Remembering With and Without Awareness,” Memory and Cognition 12 (1984): 105–111.
Marvin Carlson, The Haunted Stage: The Theatre as Memory Machine ( Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2001 ), 7.
Mark Johnson, The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human Understanding ( Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2007 ), 157.
See Gerald Edelman, Neural Darwinism: The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection ( New York: Basic Books, 1987 ).
See Daniel N. Stern, The Interpersonal World of the Infant: A View from Psychoanalysis and Developmental Psychology ( New York: Basic Books, 1985 ).
David R. Olson and Ellen Bialystock, Spatial Cognition: The Structure and Development of Mental Representations of Spatial Relations ( Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1983 ).
Eleanor Rosch, “Principles of Category Formation,” in Cognition and Categorization, ed. Eleanor Rosch and Barbara B. Lloyd ( Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1978 ), 27–48.
Julia Walker, “The Text/Performance Split across the Analytic/Continental Divide,” in Staging Philosophy: Intersections of Theater, Performance, and Philosophy, ed. David Krasner and David Z. Saltz ( Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006 ), 36–37.
Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner, The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 179–180, 266–267.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, “Biographia Literaria,” in Samuel Taylor Coleridge: The Major Works, ed. H.J. Jackson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985 ), 314.
Jacqueline Martin and Willmar Sauter, Understanding Theatre: Performance Analysis in Theory and Practice ( Stockholm: Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, 1995 ), 34.
See Bert O. States, Great Reckonings in Little Rooms: On the Phenomenology of Theater ( Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985 ), 157–197.
Susan Bennett, Theatre Audiences: A Theory of Production and Reception, 2nd ed. ( London and New York: Routledge, 1997 ), 140.
Paul Martin, “The Whys and Wherefores of Play in Cats,” in Play in Animals and Humans, ed. Peter K. Smith ( New York: Basil Blackwell, 1984 ), 87.
Michael Ellis, Why People Play ( Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973 ), 92.
Peter Eversmann, “The Experience of the Theatrical Event,” in Theatrical Events: Borders, Dynamics, Frames, ed. Vicky Ann Cremona, Peter Eversmann, Hans van Maanen, Willmar Sauter, and John Tulloch ( Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, 2004 ), 155.
John Tulloch, Shakespeare and Chekhov in Production and Reception: Theatrical Events and Their Audiences ( Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2005 ), 295.
James H. Johnson, Listening in Paris: A Cultural History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995 ), 120, 121–122.
Gregory Bateson, Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Evolution, and Epistemology ( San Francisco: Chandler, 1972 ), 187.
See Erving Goffman, Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience ( New York: Harper and Row, 1974 ).
Erving Goffman, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life ( Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1959 ).
David Z. Saltz, “Infiction and Outfiction: The Role of Theatrical Fiction in Theatrical Performance,” in Staging Philosophy, 203–220.
Pierre Jacob and Marc Jeannerod, Ways of Seeing: The Scope and Limits of Visual Cognition ( Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003 ).
Alain Berthoz, The Brain’s Sense of Movement, trans. by Giselle Weiss (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000 ), 1.
Alva Noë, Action in Perception (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004)
See Eleanor Rosch, “Human Categorization,” in Advances in Cross-Cultural Psychology, ed. N. Warren, vol. I ( London: Academic Press, 1977 ), 177–206
Eleanor Rosch, Mervis, C.B., Gray, W.D., Johnson, D.M., and Boyes-Braem, P., “Basic Objects in Natural Categories,” Cognitive Psychology 8 (1976): 382–439.
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Desire ( 1951; New York: Signet, 1975 ), 45.
Thomas C. Daddesio, On Minds and Symbols: The Relevance of Cognitive Science for Semiotics ( New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1995 ).
Copyright information
© 2008 Bruce McConachie
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McConachie, B. (2008). General Cognition for Theatre Audiences. In: Engaging Audiences. Cognitive Studies in Literature and Performance. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230617025_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230617025_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-37639-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-61702-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Literature & Performing Arts CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)