Robin gave a great example of a show she saw... I can't remember the name, but she said that the puppets were sorted by class. What I mean is that the King was the biggest puppet in the play and the peasants of the play were the smallest puppets in the play. So, they were sorted by class by size if that makes sense! =]
yeah i was going to bring that up too, it seems like an excellent example of class. also i thought about how the social class of the puppeteer would affect the puppet due to the rescorces at hand for the creater. it may also limit the creator to what kind of puppent they could make. it seemes like class could be shown easily as ones having grungy clothes and the others having good clothes, or symbolicly with the color of clothes or the style of the puppets themselves
I had the same idea about the style of clothes or how the puppets were even made. For example the puppeteer could have spent a lot more time on the King puppet and not so much time into making the peasants because then it would then show that the King had a lot more time put into him and not so much the peasant class. The detail would stand out and show.
Not to run off topic on your thread though but something I ran across that I thought was really cool was in the book they were discussing the Song-dynasty in China and saying that puppetry spanned all classes.
It was performed in the streets, in palaces, people homes, any where and everywhere.
I really liked the idea of puppetry for the masses. It being an art form that everyone can appreciate. No matter age, class, or education.
I agree, I think portraying social class through puppetry is an art that could be shown through many different ways. I think the size of the puppets is a good representation. Also, like humans and social class, the clothing that we wear is often times a good representation of our social classes, wealth, income, etc.
Robin gave a great example of a show she saw... I can't remember the name, but she said that the puppets were sorted by class. What I mean is that the King was the biggest puppet in the play and the peasants of the play were the smallest puppets in the play. So, they were sorted by class by size if that makes sense! =]
ReplyDeleteyeah i was going to bring that up too, it seems like an excellent example of class. also i thought about how the social class of the puppeteer would affect the puppet due to the rescorces at hand for the creater. it may also limit the creator to what kind of puppent they could make. it seemes like class could be shown easily as ones having grungy clothes and the others having good clothes, or symbolicly with the color of clothes or the style of the puppets themselves
ReplyDeleteI had the same idea about the style of clothes or how the puppets were even made. For example the puppeteer could have spent a lot more time on the King puppet and not so much time into making the peasants because then it would then show that the King had a lot more time put into him and not so much the peasant class. The detail would stand out and show.
ReplyDeleteGreat thoughts guys.
ReplyDeleteNot to run off topic on your thread though but something I ran across that I thought was really cool was in the book they were discussing the Song-dynasty in China and saying that puppetry spanned all classes.
It was performed in the streets, in palaces, people homes, any where and everywhere.
I really liked the idea of puppetry for the masses. It being an art form that everyone can appreciate. No matter age, class, or education.
I agree, I think portraying social class through puppetry is an art that could be shown through many different ways. I think the size of the puppets is a good representation. Also, like humans and social class, the clothing that we wear is often times a good representation of our social classes, wealth, income, etc.
ReplyDelete