Theatre and Violence
Violence in the theatre is controlled by directors to give spectators something close to real-life experience. Despite everyone watching the act being well aware that it is not real, the film director manages to touch the feelings of the viewers and bring out the intended emotions. Directors control the actions and guide the players to ensure the spectator gets the same illusion created by the director. Directors and video game players have to understand an aspect of violence to direct and control the actors and players. They know the impact of what a particular action results to.
However, real-life violence and that shown in violent video games intend to harm the opponent, unlike in the theatre. The image created does not mean it is what the actors are doing. The act is done in reverse and involves trickery of the mind. The person acting as the victim controls the attacker’s actions, but at the same time, the attacker has to show the power exerted to the victim at that point, making it look as real as possible. These scenes give the spectators something close to real-life experience using trickery, but they can tolerate it because they are aware this is not entirely real.
Theatres enact real-life situations and historical events but twist the plots a little. The changes made are to ensure the act serves as both educational and entertaining. In the past, violence was seen as a necessary evil, and as a result, most people used to settle their differences using war and violence. Movies reenact these as themes to compel people but twist it to create a different perception. Directors justify using such extreme violence as necessary in showing the history and educating the people. This information brings a contradiction since the data is acquired from history and education and twisted.
If an investigation was carried out based on the effect of these violent acts on spectators’ minds through interviews and experimentally, only then will the outcome be seen. Imagination and, in most cases, people are tempted to try out these acts in real life. As a result, someone who watches violent video games is likely to be good at video games since they can transfer the knowledge learned and get the urge to harm others. If the spectators were given the chance to interact with the actors and do whatever they wanted, the same desire would manifest. In the act, people watch as the actors’ fight hurt each other, but as said, this uses trickery. But what if the spectators were allowed to take part in the play? There is no control over what they can do, and only then can their real desires be seen.
There are still debates on whether depicted violence in the theatre affects people’s real lives. The act of simulation in acting does not mean that these events do not disturb the viewer’s mind. A good example is one leaving a theatre after watching an act with extreme violence. The details of the action will disturb your mind, especially the violent bits. This is likely to be in your mind for quite some time. One cannot determine how an individual can reacts based on their understanding of these scenes. I think proper research on the mental effects of viewing violent action and its manifests in people’s lives.
Despite the scenes being hidden under political, social, and historical issues, it is essential to understand that it also affects how individuals react in certain situations. Despite being well aware that these acts are not real, people may be affected mentally by these scenes, even without being aware of it. Acting and real-life violence are like pretense and reality. The two are never far apart since a third party can be misinterpreted. I believe the director of the acts can control what you see by acting a certain way, but they cannot determine how it affects the viewer afterward. One question left is, could there be a way of showing the same acts and control the effects this has on the viewer?