Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku
Međunarodni znanstveni skup
EUROPSKE ODREDNICE POJMA LUTKE I STRUČNO LUTKARSKO NAZIVLJE
Zbornik radova
EUROPSKE ODREDNICE POJMA LUTKE I STRUČNO LUTKARSKO NAZIVLJE
Nakladnik: Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku Za nakladnika: prof. dr. sc. Helena Sablić Tomić Urednica: doc. dr. sc. Livija Kroflin Recenzenti: prof. dr. sc. Henryk Jurkowski prof. dr. sc. Radoslav Lazić Lektura engleskih tekstova: Nina H. Kay-Antoljak Likovno oblikovanje i tisak: Teovizija, Zagreb Na naslovnoj stranici: studenti i lutka Umjetničke akademije u Osijeku Naklada: 100 primjeraka © Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku, 2014.
ISBN 978-953-58055-4-0
Besplatni primjerak. Izdavanje zbornika financiralo je Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku. 2
Međunarodni znanstveni skup
EUROPSKE ODREDNICE POJMA LUTKE I STRUČNO LUTKARSKO NAZIVLJE
Zbornik radova Priredila Livija Kroflin
Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku Osijek, 2014. 3
Međunarodni znanstveni skup „Europske odrednice pojma lutke i stručno lutkarsko nazivlje“ održan je u okviru znanstvenoistraživačkog projekta Sveučilišta J.J.Strossmayera „Istraživanje lutkarskog nazivlja“. Međunarodni programsko-znanstveni odbor: prof. dr. sc. Helena Sablić Tomić prof. dr. sc. Sanja Nikčević doc. dr. sc. Livija Kroflin prof. dr. sc. Henryk Jurkowski prof. dr. sc. Radoslav Lazić
IZ RECENZIJA: Ugledna stručna imena nauke i umetnosti dala su svojim saopštenjima vredan doprinos teatrološkim istraživanjima odrednice pojma lutke i stručnog lutkarskog nazivlja u različitim teatarskim kulturama. Neka naučna saopštenja posvetila su se i antropološkim, fenomenološkim, filozofskim, a najčešće umetničko-estetičkim aspektima lutkarstva kao umetnosti. (...) Lingvističko-teatrološki pojmovi ovde se sistematski obrazlažu i bogate nacionalne i internacionalne terminološke pojmovnike literature o lutkarstvu kao umetnosti. Objavljivanje ovog Zbornika predstavlja datum u nacionalnoj i svetskoj teatrologiji. Prof. dr Radoslav Lazić, Beograd
The theme of the conference was well chosen, making a significant contribution to the knowledge of puppetry. All the papers possessed scientific value and I am recommending their publication. Prof. dr hab. Henryk Jurkowski, Warszawa 4
PREDGOVOR U ovome zborniku okupljena su izlaganja održana na međunarodnom znanstvenom skupu „Europske odrednice pojma lutke i stručno lutkarsko nazivlje“ (Osijek, 19.11.2014.). Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku raspisalo je 2013. godine natječaj za prijavu znanstvenoistraživačkih projekata te, među ostalima, prihvatilo i projekt „Istraživanje lutkarskog nazivlja”, kojemu je cilj bio dati prvi prilog u sustavnom izgrađivanju hrvatskoga lutkarskog nazivlja. Održavanjem međunarodnog znanstvenog skupa htjelo se hrvatsko lutkarsko nazivlje staviti u širi (europski pa i svjetski) kontekst. Pozivu na sudjelovanje odazvali su se eminentni stručnjaci iz područja teatrologije, filologije i lutkarske umjetnosti. Henryk Jurkowski, danas najveći autoritet na području lutkarstva, daje širok prikaz naziva koji se koriste za lutku koja predstavlja lik u lutkarskoj predstavi te govori o najvažnijem obilježju suvremene lutkarske umjetnosti – o kazališnom subjektu u lutkarskom kazalištu koji se sastoji od dva elementa: lutke i lutkara. Radoslav Lazić, polazeći od Rječnika lutkarstva A.R. Philpotta, Rječnika umjetnosti spektakla Cecilea Giteaua i Lutkarskog teatra u Japanu A. C. Scotta, uspoređuje srpske i južnoslavenske lutkarske termine s tradicionalnim i suvremenim svjetskim pojmovnikom lutkarstva. Rita Fleis daje lingvističko-teatrološko tumačenje termina lutka u starogrčkom, latinskom, srpskom, hrvatskom i mađarskom jeziku, dok Jelena Sitar Cvetko istražuje lutkarsku terminologiju u Sloveniji. Siniša Jelušić bavi se promišljanjem mogućih odgovora na pitanje odnosa bîti fenomena lutke prema transcendentnim značenjima, s osobitim osvrtom na nauk P. A. Florenskog. U fokusu interesa Marijane Petrović je fenomen animacije te suodnos glumca i lutke, s naglaskom na usporednom postojanju (živoga) glumca i oblikovanog i/ili neoblikovanog materijala (neživa priroda) koji se kreću u svojim određenim prostorima. Matt Smith bavi se definicijom pojma „primijenjeno lutkarstvo“ (applied puppetry) u odnosu na kontekst obrazovanja i društvene zajednice te svoje tvrdnje povezuje s temama terminologije, etike i primijenjenoga kazališta. Jasminka Mesarić prikazuje djelovanje dvojice slovačkih umjetnika, Jana Ozábala i Bohdana Slavíka, u Osijeku. Zdenka Đerđ, polazeći od semioloških razlika glumačkog ili dramskog i lutkarskog kazališta, prati lutkarske nazive zabilježene u hrvatskim znan5
stveno-stručnim izvorima i leksikografskoj literaturi te ih povezuje u lutkarski tezaurus. Teodora Vigato proučava lutkarsko nazivlje koje se koristilo u recepciji lutkarstva u Hrvatskoj u drugoj polovici 20. stoljeća, ograničivši se na istraživanje zadarskoga lutkarstva, gdje prepoznaje lutkarske škole istovjetne ostalim hrvatskim lutkarskim središtima. Posebno analizira nazive koji se vezuju za animaciju. Livija Kroflin i Igor Tretinjak istražuju koji se nazivi lutaka, dijelova lutaka i animacijskih tehnika koriste u knjigama o lutkarstvu koje su napisali hrvatski autori, od najstarije, izdane 1951. godine, do današnjih dana te navode prve pokušaje sistematizacije lutkarskoga nazivlja. Svi se radovi objavljuju na izvornim jezicima autora, ne samo zbog nedostatka financijskih sredstava za prijevod, nego i zbog specifičnosti tematike. Jedino je Henryk Jurkowski učinio ustupak široj čitalačkoj publici te svoj rad napisao na engleskom a ne na svom rodnom poljskom jeziku. Radovi su popraćeni sažetkom i ključnim riječima na izvornom i na engleskom jeziku (u slučaju tekstova napisanih na engleskom sažetak i ključne riječi su na engleskom i hrvatskom jeziku). Također se donose kratke bio-bibliografije autorā. Istraživanja objavljena u ovome zborniku važan su doprinos teatrološkom proučavanju lutkarske umjetnosti, a rezultati primjenjivi u studiju lutkarstva i kazališnog oblikovanja (kakav zasad postoji na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku) i drugim srodnim studijima, također na svim učiteljskim fakultetima (na kolegijima iz kazališne umjetnosti i lutkarstva) te na studiju teatrologije. Rezultatima istraživanja moći će se služiti studenti, predavači, odgajatelji, učitelji, nastavnici, teatrolozi, kazališni kritičari, znanstvenici, umjetnici (glumci lutkari, redatelji, scenografi, kreatori lutaka, lutkarski tehnolozi) i svi koji se na bilo koji način bave lutkarstvom. Ovi radovi također daju podlogu za daljnja istraživanja i pisanje novih znanstvenih radova. Livija Kroflin urednica zbornika
6
Henryk Jurkowski
TERMS IN PUPPETRY AND THEIR LINGUISTIC AND RESEARCH CONTEXT ABSTRACT: The paper enumerates all possible terms regarding the puppet as a figure presenting characters in puppet performances. It is differentiated depending on the cultural territory from all over the world. In the majority of cases, these terms are connected with the ritual functions of puppets: in some cases they refer to god – as it is in the situation in which the marionette is manipulated from above; in others it might be the devil in the situation of puppets manipulated from below. Today the situation has changed since we look at the puppet in its function of anthropomorphisation and animisation to serve the stage character. The puppet is the material vehicle of some senses (ideas), which make us think about Plato’s idea of the visible and ideal world. It is only a step from this theory to contemporary semiotics research, which tells us about material vehicles of meaning and of meanings themselves. The semiotic research of puppetry points to the fact that, in relation to its theatre audience, the puppet in a state of “opalisation”, or “double vision”, that is, in the form of its materiality and in the form of a sign delivering the meaning to the spectator. Modern aesthetics takes this duality of perception as a value of the puppet theatre. The theatre subject in the puppet theatre is composed of two elements: the puppet and the puppet player. If they are seen on stage together they produce the distancing effect (Brechtian Verfremdungseffekt). And this is the contemporary characteristic of the puppetry art. Keywords: the puppet, transcendence, animisation, alienation effect, opalisation SAŽETAK: Rad „Nazivi u lutkarstvu i njihov lingvistički i znanstveni kontekst“ nabraja različite nazive koji se odnose na lutku kao figuru koja predstavlja lik u lutkarskoj predstavi. To se razlikuje u različitim kulturnim područjima širom svijeta. U većini slučajeva ti su termini povezani s ritualnim funkcijama lutke: u nekim se slučajevima odnose na boga – kao kod marionete, animirane odozgo, a u drugima bi to mogao biti vrag – kad se radi o lutkama animiranima odozdo. Danas je situacija drukčija, jer na lutku gledamo u njezinoj funkciji antropomorfizacije i animizacije, koje preuzima kako bi izgradila scenski lik. Lutka je materijalno sredstvo izražavanja nekih shva7
ćanja koja nas navode na razmišljanje o Platonovoj ideji o vidljivom i idealnom svijetu. Od ove teorije samo je korak do suvremenih semiotičkih istraživanja, koja nam govore o materijalnim sredstvima iskazivanja značenja i značenju samom. Semiotičko istraživanje lutkarstva ističe činjenicu da lutka u odnosu na svoju kazališnu publiku postoji u stanju „opalizacije“ ili „dvostruke slike“ te gledatelju prenosi značenje i u formi svoje materijalnosti i u formi znaka. Moderna estetika tu dvojnost percepcije vidi kao vrijednost kazališta lutaka. Kazališni subjekt u lutkarskom kazalištu sastoji se od dva elementa: lutke i lutkara. Ako se oni oboje vide na pozornici, proizvode učinak začudnosti (brehtijanski Verfremdungseffekt). I to je suvremeno obilježje lutkarske umjetnosti. Ključne riječi: lutka, transcendencija, animizacija, efekt začudnosti, opalizacija The word puppet as such is not unequivocal. Its equivalents in other languages do not cover the same meaning, even when we deal only with European countries. Starting from the name of divine or human images such as neurospaston, European languages finally settled on two meanings: the child puppet and the theatre puppet. We can see that precisely in contemporary terminologies. The Anglo-Saxons have two words: the puppet means the theatrical puppet in opposition to the doll, which is the name of a children’s toy. Frenchmen say la marionette and la poupée. Germans are more precise; they have Puppenspiel for the puppet theatre and die Puppe for the doll. In Italy, they have fantoccini, bambocci, pupi and marionette. In Russia and Bulgaria the word kukla is used, serving to describe both: puppets and dolls. In Poland, the word lalka also serves as the name of two types of puppets similarly as in the Slavic countries, in which such names as lutka and loutka rule. There are many other names for puppets depending on the local tradition and the puppetry technique. In XVI century Poland, we knew a puppet called łątka. Later on, one applied the word osóbka, which means the little person, certainly originated from the persona in mystery plays. We also know the name kukła and kukiełka in Poland, but they are stick puppets similar to the French marotte. In each country, no doubt, there are many names for puppets besides marionette, glove puppets and stick puppets, popular all over the world. A certain number of names had clear signification. The Greek neurospaston seems to be description of the puppet mechanism. The Indian sutradhara meant somebody pulling the strings. The early Polish łątka shared its name 8
with a flying insect, so it could well have been associated with the marionette. However, all these names exhausted their metaphoric potential and sank into oblivion. There are still major differences between the names in the non-European countries, especially in the part of the world where the puppets’ names originated form the local tribal traditions. The Hopi Indians from Arizona call their puppets kachinas, but their names are names of divinities, not puppets. Kachinas take care of their believers. The African names for puppets such as niombo or illit also belong more to the ritual rather than to the puppet world. The Japanese call their puppet ningyo, adding some adjectives to make the information more precise. So we have ningyo joruri, which tell the story of Princess Joruri. We have karakuri ningyo, which are mechanical puppets with a long tradition. The bunraku puppets, employed in the Bunraku Theatre in Osaka, hold a special position. In China, due to the vast territory and various peoples living there, one finds dozens of names for the puppet. Certainly names such as rensheng (live victim) and renxun (after-death companion) belonged to the most ancient times and expressed ancient puppet functions. Some puppets took their names from the material they were made of, such as zhouling (the straw figure). Yong is the name of a puppet used in contemporary China. It has dozens of regional and technical variations. Among these names, the most intriguing and respected are the oldest ones, which originate from the Sanskrit time and culture. They became the subject of various interpretations and discussions. They are sutradhara (the manipulator of puppets, but also a story teller and theatre director) as well as sutraprota (a puppet hanging on strings). Many scholars have considered that a hidden model of the relationship between the player and his theatre director is included in these names. The German scholar, Richard Pischel, stated that sutradhara was born in the puppet theatre. From this theatre, it moved on to drama with live actors. Thus, Pischel was convinced that the first form of theatre art was puppet theatre in India and in the whole world.1 His declaration from 1902 might have influenced E.G. Craig’s imagination, who accepted this point of view in his treatise Actor and ßbermarionette2 some years later. Indian puppets of our time have names depending on genres and the regions to which they belong. In general, the basic stem of names is chhau or Pischel, Richard, The Home of Puppet-Play, Luzac & Co., London, 1902, pp. 7-8. Craig, Edward Gordon, On the Art of the Theatre, Heinemann, London, 1911.
1 2
9
chhaya, which can signify a man, his shadow or a dramatic performance. As an example, we have the shadow show called ravanachhaya, which refers to the participation of the demon Ravana. Other forms have their local roots such as kathputli in Radjastan, putul nauch in Bengal or yakshagana in Karnataka. The puppet show in Indonesia – wayang – has many variants such as wayang beber (illustrated story telling), wayang purwa (the most ancient shadow wayang), and wayang golek with three dimensional wooden puppets. By the way, it influenced the European puppet technique supplying us with a puppet called the jawajka3. Among other genres there are also wayang wahyu, introduced by European missionaries aiming at evangelization of the Indonesian peoples. In Europe, due to the rapid secularization, puppets lost their sacred importance and entered the world of children and popular culture, turning into guignols, polichinelles, kasperles and other characters – mainly hand puppets. That was the reason for which puppeteers in some countries abandoned the old names, replacing them by the teatro di figura in Italy, Figurentheater in Germany or theatre of animation in Poland. Naturally, all these various names serve as a description of artefacts, which differ very much. As a matter of fact, it is not enough to say marionette, hand puppet, stick puppet or marotte to have the right description of them. In each of these species, very important differences exist in construction and manipulation technique. Students and researchers of the puppet theatre did not formerly know these details and often their opinions and syntheses are based on their imagination beyond the theatre reality. Naturally, it would be wonderful if an international dictionary of puppet names and terminology appeared one day. It would enrich our linguistic knowledge and it would also demonstrate various puppet functions concealed up to now, which have not yet been studied. Through the ages, puppets have participated in rituals showing veneration for the gods or serving in funerals of the dead. This was the basis of their strong links with transcendence. The ancient metaphor presenting the human’s dependence on the gods confirms it. Many people in India believe that Brahma should be considered the first sutradhara, who created the world as well as human beings. Human beings in his hands are simple sutraprotas (marionettes). That metaphor underwent certain changes in some countries: Christians replace Brahma by Jehovah or Jesus Christ, secular people replace God by the notion of Destiny. The puppets’ relationship with supernatural powers is very complicated. One can detect it looking at all types of puppets. They have equal contacts
3
10
In Croatian, the javajka or javanka (ed. note).
with God and the Devil. If a marionette received its impulses from Heaven, the glove puppet has its impulses from the Netherworld. The tree of life represents this cosmic model in three parts: the heavenly world of gods, the real world of human beings and underground world of demons. People of primary cultures could imagine that the god – from the branches of a tree – pulled the strings of human beings, who lived at ground level. They could also imagine that gods entered the earth in the shape of the glove puppets, helped by priests and their acolytes. However, evidences for gods as hand puppets are modest, if we exclude the puppets in India and Mesoamerica. The hand puppets in Europe had divine and, at the same time, diabolic origins. The permanent Kasper figure in Germany, similarly to Dionysus, experienced a host of adventures and served various purposes. In the Middle Ages, according to Elke Blattmann4, Kasper was named Meister Hämmerlein and was an offspring of the god Thor from Gods’ pantheon. Hans Purschke has stated that Meister Hämmerlein was a demonic, comic figure as he carried his hideous devilish face on the screen of portable theatre, still appearing in Germany in 1674.5 Hämmerlein landed later in the mystery theatre called Himmelreich (the Heavenly Kingdom), where he certainly became baptised and, as such, found the way to the screens of the plebeian puppet theatre as a smart popular hero, that is, Kasperle with his sharp tongue. There was no way for Kasperle to be dependent on the gods, for he was a god himself. All marionettes, as well as hand puppets and puppets of other kinds, are manipulated by human puppeteers, accordingly to the words of Protagoras: Man is the measure of all things. People used to invent metaphors and retained those that were the most attractive. The marionette metaphor dismissed that of the glove puppet, which had no chance to develop properly. In spite of that, puppets have still used notions from the spiritual world. Why? The puppet pretends to be alive, due to the impulses received from its human manipulator. What is more, our logic prompts us to say that it has a soul. The soul means anima in the language of our Latin religion. That is why we speak about the animated puppet. The puppet is endowed with anima. The profane tradition ignores anima and the word animation is replaced by the word manipulation. Never mind. Manipulation is another aspect of God’s domination over the human race.
4
5
Blattmann, Elke, „Märchenspiel mit Handpuppen?“, in: Puppen- und Figurenspiel. Arbeitsheft 2. Goetheanum-Dornach, 1991, p. 33. Purschke, Hans R, Die Entwicklung des Puppenspiels in den klassischen Ursprungsländern Europas, H. R. Purschke, Frankfurt, 1984, p. 31. 11
Let us remain with the word animation as we intend to describe additional aspects of the puppet presence in the theatrical show. Animation means the puppet’s endowment with motion which, at the transcendent level, means endowment with a soul. However, another notion exists next to animation, coming from the same family: animisation. What does it mean? The Polish philosopher, R.F. Muniak, who did some research on puppet phenomenology, declared that animisation belongs to the puppet’s attributes. He wrote: First of all, I understand the puppet as the material object – the artefact which, from the formal point of view, is characterised by anthromorphisation and in respect of its function – by animisation.6 It is difficult to accept without comment the thesis that animisation is the puppet property. Dictionaries present animisation as a metaphor of sorts, which allows us to speak about dead things as living things, endowed with feeling and will (flowers fall asleep, the day starts early). This is often encountered in poetry, but also in everyday language, especially in the expressions of small children (the train moves forward). This metaphor appears in poetic and naïve linguistic construction. It also has wider ritual meaning, as a result of a magical or sacral power for giving life to idols and to religious images. The primary societies venerated them as if they were alive and imbued with divine power. They really believed in the idol’s life. Today also, the yearly pilgrimages to Lourdes and the Shining Mountain (in Poland) prove the faith of the pilgrims in the spiritual powers of the Saints presented in their material images. In fact, they are not figures and pictures that carry sacred energy; the crowds of believers endow them with this property. And that is the act which should be called animisation. Animisation of figures and toys (in the case of children) is a signal of the twofold nature of the theatrical puppet, due to the fact that the man may change its dead status into a temporary and apparently live existence in the parallel world of theatre, thanks to animation purposefully applied. Animation and animisation are a reflex of ancient intuitions, confirmed by the philosophical Platonic visions, consisting of seeing the real world as a projection of the more perfect world of ideas. This also concerns the human being, whose body is a temporary place for the existence of his soul, which is more perfect than his material body. It also concerns the puppet, which is the material basis for the ideal world presented in the theatre – meaning people, animals and fantastic creatures.
6
12
Muniak, Radosław Fillip, Efekt lalki / lalka jako obraz i rzecz, Universitas, Kraków, 2010, p. 20.
Can we consider the puppet as a material basis of various representations? In some way: yes, but with certain limits. The material basis, as it says itself, is the material basis, it belongs to the world of matter. The puppet is made of matter, but it is matter that is already shaped. The puppet consists of the matter and its shape. Generally, the matter is a vehicle that transmits the meaning of the puppet’s shape. The shape represents the puppet’s signification. And so we have entered into the scientific branch called semiotics. The puppet as shaped matter carries signification, ergo: it is a sign. It enters into various relationships with people and other puppets, creating a distinctive system of signs, typical for puppets and only for puppets. In the XX century, semiotics became very popular thanks to the works of many scholars, among whom the American philosopher Charles Sanders Pierce (1839-1914) and the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (18571913) hold the most important position. The first used the name semiotics, the second semiology, the first developed the three parts sign’s structure, the second the two parts structure of the sign. Scholars, however, have no problem in using or even mixing the two of them. A very important publication for the semiotic studies of puppet theatre was a special 300 pages issue of the magazine “Semiotica” (1983), from Texas University, named: Puppet, Masks, and Performing Objects from Semiotic Perspectives. It presents various approaches in puppetry studies employing new, scientific terminology. The range of the semiotic studies is enormous. As an example, we shall discuss here the issue of a division of the character’s image and the character’s source of voice. In the most remote times, the puppets in puppet shows were mute. Players suggested their thought and wishes by means of narration or reported speech. Frequently there was a narrator in front of the screen, who told the story illustrated by the puppets. Next, players suggested to the spectators that puppets could themselves speak. At the beginning of this process, one employed a small whistle called a swazzle – pivetta – which deformed the puppets’ voices. Later, the swazzle was abandoned and puppets pretended to have their own voices. It is clear that mute puppets, swazzle speaking puppets and live voice speaking puppets bring different signification of the nature of these puppets. This has had semiotic importance. The Bunraku theatre gives us a very good example in this respect. The separation of voice and image is essential for this theatre. Puppets, each manipulated by three players, act out the scene but their voice is given by a singer (tayu), sitting at the side and visible to the audience. The Belgian practice is also significant. In the Toone Theatre the speaker delivers text for 13
all the puppets, showing his face through a special window in the theatre curtain. In such situations, the audience know that the show is nothing more but an artificially created act. We can say the same about the separation of the puppet (the acting subject) and the physical source of its movement. In the actors’ theatre, there is full unity. An actor himself satisfies the motor needs of the stage character. The puppet depends on the source of energy that exists beyond it, that is, it depends on human mechanical energy. Display of the relationship between the puppet (the acting subject) and the sources of its speech and motor energy is also a very significant element from the semiotic point of view. What spectators see on the stage is important for the meaning of the show. Who manipulates the puppets and who speaks in their name? Through the ages, puppeteers pretended that their puppets were alive. They hid the animation’s technique. In our time, the display of all the puppet’s theatrical secrets, including the work of animator and speaker, have become the leading mode. It happens now that the puppeteer animator appears on stage next to the puppet, which in past times was an acting subject, and presents it as an obedient object, while the player is a demiurge of all happenings. I wrote about this in the 1970s: Puppet theatre is a theatre art: the main and basic features that differentiate it from live theatre is that the speaking and performing object makes temporal use of the physical sources of its vocal and driving powers, which are present beyond the object. The relationship between the object (the puppet) and the power sources changes all the time and these variations are of great semiological and aesthetic significance.7 This variability of relations reminds us of similar phenomena in the actors’ theatre. An actor may identify with a stage character but he may also speak to the audience in his own name. Naturally, I am talking here about the Brechtian Verfremdungseffekt, that is a phenomenon important for the puppet theatre, too. Very often one asked the question of whether Verfremdungseffekt is possible in puppet theatre and what is the particular form in which it appears. In general, scholars agree on its presence in all type of art but its form differs from one case to another. Peter Waschinsky from East Germany presented a meaningful paradox in this respect during the 1980s:
7
14
Jurkowski, Henryk, “The language of the contemporary puppet theatre”, in: UNIMA Information, Warsaw, 1978, p. 8.
Let us come back to “Verfremdungseffekt” in the puppet theatre. It is its immanent part and, in principle, it is always present. Puppets are material only. Let us discuss a little Chekhov’ show [“The Witch” at the Neubrandenburg Puppet Theatre – H.J.]. The characters are true and realistic. Thus their movements and words should be also very “natural” in the human sense of the word. But what does this word “natural” mean in relation to the puppets? It means that they are behaving as an inert material, that is, they are completely motionless or they produce as best they can sweeping movements. However, the matter of the puppet acted upon externally imitates human movements and becomes alien to it. This is exactly the alienation effect. The most naturalistic puppet creates the strongest alienation effect.8 This is a point for further discussion. The distancing or alienation effect appears as a result of stressing alternately one of two elements joined together: a player or a stage character. In contemporary puppet theatre we see another situation. The player and the character (the puppet) are seen together permanently on stage. Is that really a typical alienation effect? May we accept it in this form in the theatre, which is an art of process and not a presentation of a constant state of affairs? It seems that the permanent presence of two cooperating elements in the puppet theatre demands a new definition. It was Otakar Zich who tried, at the beginning of XX century, to define the twofold nature of the puppet theatre.9 Analyzing the perception by spectators of puppet shows, he saw two possibilities: a spectator might see the magical character of the puppets, or might see their artificiality and their plastic values. On the basis of his deliberations, I tried to examine this duality in the work of the puppet player, who also has two possibilities: to present the puppet’s magic or its artificiality. I called the effect of his acting opalisation, stressing the flickering of the puppet image equally in the puppeteers’ acting as in the perception of the spectators.10 The American researcher Steve Tillis did not agree with my proposition and offered his own suggestion: to replace opalisation by double vision.11 This proposal certainly agrees with
Waschinsky, Peter, “Théâtre des marionettes entre illusionisme et distanciation”, in: Théâtre public, Gennevilliers, 1980, p. 57. 9 Zich, Otakar, “Loutkové divadlo”, in: Drobné umění, IV, Praha, 1923, pp. 8-9. 10 Jurkowski, Henryk, Aspects of Puppet Theatre, Puppet Centre Trust, London, 1988, p. 41. 11 Tillis, Steve, Toward an Aesthetic of the Puppet. Puppetry as a Theatrical Art, Greenwood Press, New York, 1992, p. 65. 8
15
the picture of contemporary puppet theatre, in which the acting subject (the player) and obedient object (the puppet) act on the stage together, presenting the same scenic character. The existing variability of opinions concerning the puppet theatre attracted the attention of the Polish philosopher, Radosław F. Muniak, in analysing the puppet’s nature once more. So he did his own research, publishing the book Efekt lalki. Lalka jako obraz i rzecz (The Puppet’s Effect. Puppet as an Image and Thing) in 2010, drawing support from the rich philosophic literature.12 After his studies he recognized that the essence of the puppet lies in its suspension between matter and life, between death and existence. The effect of Muniak’s studies fixing the existence of the puppet between life and death is no surprise. The question had been discussed among many other theatre theoreticians. However, Muniak goes farther. To him, the puppet concept is a “mental construct” and the “puppet’s effect” relates to all figures, that favoured anthropomorphisation and their capacity of animation and animisation. That is: idols, sculptures, golems, robots and androids. In particular situations, all of them might be considered to be puppets. Thus, Muniak only confirms the intuitions of many authors who, before his time, studied the puppet and puppet theatre. He did it wearing his philosophic aureole that, fortunately, promotes the puppet as a precious element of human culture. So scientific terminology has entered into the puppet theatre’s descriptions and analysis. For lack of space in my presentation, I have omitted many scientific branches that develop puppetry studies applying their own terminology. That relates to linguistics that studies poetic – word and pectoral – construction within the puppet show such as metaphor, synecdoche or metonymy. It also concerns psychoanalysis, which finds a huge field for the interpretation of human behaviour within puppetry. It concerns fine art, and also informatics and robotic experiments and theory. Let us hope that the Osijek conference will provide an impulse for further puppet theatre research executed from the perspective of all interested branches of science.
REFERENCES: • Pischel, Richard, The Home of Puppet-Play, Luzac & co., London, 1902. • Craig, Edward Gordon, On the Art of the Theatre, Heinemann, London, 1911. 12
16
Muniak, Radosław Fillip, Efekt lalki / lalka jako obraz i rzecz, Universitas, Kraków, 2010.
• Blattmann, Elke, „Märchenspiel mit Handpuppen?“, in: Puppen- und Figurenspiel; Arbeitsheft 2, Goetheanum-Dornach, 1991. • Purschke, Hans R, Die Entwicklung des Puppenspiels in den klassischen Ursprungsländern Europas, H. R. Purschke, Frankfurt, 1984. • Muniak, Radosław Fillip, Efekt lalki / lalka jako obraz i rzecz, Universitas, Kraków, 2010. • Jurkowski, Henryk, “The language of the contemporary puppet theatre”, in: UNIMA Information, Warsaw, 1978. • Waschinsky, Peter, “Théâtre des marionettes entre illusionisme et distanciation”, in: Théâtre public, Gennevilliers, 1980. • Zich, Otakar, “Loutkové divadlo”, in: Drobné umění, IV, Praha, 1923, pp. 8-9. • Jurkowski, Henryk, Aspects of Puppet Theatre, Puppet Centre Trust, London, 1988. • Tillis, Steve, Toward an Aesthetic of the Puppet. Puppetry as a theatrical art, Greenwood Press, New York, 1992.
Prof. dr hab. Henryk Jurkowski ul Krucza 5/11 m.49, 00548 Warszawa, Poland hzjurkov@gmail.com
Born in Warsaw, 19 January 1927. Citizen activities: underground soldier of the Home Army 1943-1944, participation in the Warsaw Uprising, 1944. Member of the first “Solidarity” organisation. Schools and degrees: MA degree in Polish philology at Warsaw University 1947-1951; PhD degree from the Institute of Arts of the Polish Academy of Science in 1969; Habilitation at the Institute of Arts of the Polish Academy of Science in 1991; Professorship at the Academy of Theatre, Warsaw 1991; Professor’s degree delivered by the President of the Polish Republic 2001. Employment: 1973-2001 professor in the superior schools of theatre (Krakow and Warsaw);1976-1979 dean of the puppetry department at the Krakow Superior School of Theatre; 1980-1983 founder and dean of the directing (puppet theatre) department at the Warsaw Superior School of Theatre; 1990-1993 vice-rector at the Warsaw Superior School of Theatre. 17
Other activities: literary adviser in TV puppet theatre (1974-1976); literary adviser in several puppet theatres; editor-in-chief of the magazine “Puppet Theatre”; guest director in the puppet theatre and TV. Guest professor in the École nationale supérieure des arts de la marionnette, Instituto del Teatro, Sevilla, London Central School of Speech and Drama, Akademie der darstellende Kunst, Stuttgart, Akademie múzických umění, Prague, Higher Institute of Theater Art, Sofia, Art Institute of Chicago. Teacher at the advanced courses of puppetry in London, Charleville-Mézières, Barcelona and other places. Author and executor of courses: Dramaturgy within puppet theatre, Cuarnavaca Mexico (1994), Cultural context of puppetry, Santa Fe, Argentina (2000). Expert editor of the World Encyclopedia of the Contemporary Theatre (ITI, UNESCO). Editor-in-chief of the World Encyclopaedia of Puppetry Art (UNIMA, UNESCO, 1995-2000). Secretary General of UNIMA (1972-1980); president of UNIMA (1984-1992); president of honour of UNIMA from 1992. Research and writings: hundreds of critiques and essays in the field of puppetry, folklore, semiotics; books on history, dramaturgy and aesthetics of the puppet theatre, published in Polish, Czech, German, Croatian, Serbian, Russian, Japanese, Spanish, English and French.
Most important books: • Aspects of Puppet Theatre, Puppet Centre Trust, London, 1988. • Ecrivains et marionnettes. Quatre siecles de litterature dramatique, Institut International de la Marionnette, Charleville- Mézières, 1991. • History of the European Puppet Theatre, vol. 1, The Edwin Mellen Press, Lampeter, USA, Great Britain, 1996. • History of the European Puppet Theatre, vol. II, The Edwin Mellen Press, Leviston, USA, Lampeter, Great Britain, 1998. • Metamorphoses. La marionnette au XXe siecle, Institut International de la Marionette, Charleville-Mézières, 2000. • Antologia klasycznych tekstów teatru lalek, vol. I, PWST, Wrocław, 1999. • Antologia klasycznych tekstów teatru lalek, vol. II. (Modernizm i Postmodernizm) ze wstępem i w opracowaniu...., PWST, Wroclaw, Poland, 2001. • Antologia klasycznych tekstów teatru lalek. W kręgu polskich tradycji (wybór i opracowanie), PWST w Krakowie, Wydział Lalkarski we Wrocławiu, Wrocław, 2003. 18
• Aktor w roli demiurga, Akademia Teatralna im. Aleksandra Zelwerowicza, Warszawa, 2006. • Moje pokolenie, POLUNIMA, Łódź, 2006. • Svet Edvarda Gordona Krega. Prilog istoriji ideje, s poljskog prevela Biserka Rajčić, Otvoreni univerzitet, Subotica, Međunarodni festival pozorišta za decu, Subotica, Subotica, 2008. • Przemiany ikonosfery. Wizualny kontekst teatru, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław, 2009. • Materiał jako wehikuł treści rytuału, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa, 2011. • Teorija lutkarstva II. Ogledi iz istorije, teorije i estetike lutkarskog teatra, prevod s poljskog Zoran Đerić, Otvoreni univerzitet, Subotica, Međunarodni festival pozorišta za decu, Subotica, Pozorišni muzej Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Novi Sad, 2013. • Lalka w kulturze (publication in train of preparation by Otvoreni univerzitet, Subotica, Međunarodni festival pozorišta za decu, Subotica, Pozorišni muzej Vojvodine, Novi Sad)
19
Radoslav Lazić
ETIMOLOGIJA I SEMAZIOLOGIJA POJMA LUTKE U ISTORIJI SRPSKOG LUTKARSTVA, S POSEBNIM OSVRTOM NA SAVREMENE MEĐUNARODNE REČNIKE POJMOVA KLASIČNOG I MODERNOG LUTKARSKOG TEATRA Pojam, etimologija, semantika lutke i lutkarstva, animacije i animatora; komparativno proučavaje u nacionalnim, evropskim i svetskim kulturama kao i stručni lutkarski teatrološki termini
SAŽETAK: U etimološkoj potrazi za naučnim teatrološko-lingvističko-antropološkim istraživanjima porekla i osnovnog značenja termina lutke i lutkarstva autor polazi od ideje da se u pojmu krije semantička označavajuća suština semaziologije, kao nauke o značenju reči. Ova svojevrsna filozofija jezika vodi nas odgonetanju fenomena lutke, lutkarstva i lutkarskog teatra, koji je u XX veku svojim visokim umetničkim i estetskim dometima ostvario reprezentativno mesto i ulogu u sistemu dramskih umetnosti. Polazeći od oksfordskog Rečnika lutkarstva A.R. Filpota (A.R. Philpott, Dictionary of Puppetry, Macdonald, London, 1969.), Rečnika umetnosti spektakla Sesil Žitua (Cecile Giteau, Dictionnaire des arts du spectacle, Dunod, Paris, 1980.) – francuskog dramskog terminologa, i Lutkarskog teatra u Japanu A. C. Skota (A.C. Scott, The Puppet Theatre of Japan, Charles R. Tuttle Comp., Tokio, 1984.), autor poredi srpske i južnoslovenske lutkarske termine sa tradicionalnim i savremenim svetskim pojmovnikom lutkarstva. Ključne reči: lutka, lutkarstvo, lutkarski teatar, etimologija pojma lutka, semaziologija pojma lutka, semantika lutkarstva ABSTRACT: In this paper, entitled “Etymology and Semasiology of the Puppet Concept in the History of the Serbian Puppetry, with Special Emphasis on the Contemporary International Glossary of the Puppet Theatre”, the author bases his etymological search for scientific research on the origin and basic meaning of the terms puppet and puppetry in the history of the Serbian puppetry on the idea that the semantic signifying essence of semasiology, being the study of meaning of words, lies in the 20
concept itself. This kind of language philosophy leads us to unravelling the phenomena of puppet, puppetry and puppetry theatre, which has occupied a significant place and role in the dramatic arts system in the XX century, thanks to its high aesthetic and artistic achievements. Starting from the Oxford Dictionary of Puppetry by A.R. Philpott, London, 1969, Dictionnaire des arts du spectacle by Cécile Giteau, Dunod, Paris, 1980 (the French drama terminologist) and A.C. Scott, The Puppet Theatre of Japan, Charles R. Tuttle Comp., Tokyo, 1984, the author compares the Serbian puppetry terms with the traditional and contemporary global puppetry glossary. Keywords: puppet, puppetry, puppetry theatre, etymology of the puppet concept, semasiology of the puppet concept, semantics of puppetry
Dakle, želiš li cvet spoznati, najpre seme njegovo prouči. Cvet se u vladanju duhom nalazi; veština glume seme je njegovo.13 U početku bijaše riječ! O terminologiji pojma lutke i stručnih lutkarskih naziva mogla bi se napisati lingvističko-filološka, teatrološko-etnološko-antropološka doktorska disertacija. Verujem da negde u svetu postoji takva sistematska naučna studija. Zato je hvalevredan naučni skup Europske odrednice pojma lutke i stručno lutkarsko nazivlje, koji organizuje Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku, 19. novembra 2014. * * * U klasičnoj grčkoj tradiciji za lutku je postojao pojam ko-wa, korwa. Platon u Zakonima, IV vek pre Hrista, beleži: Svakoga od nas, predstavnika živih bića, treba da smatramo kao lutku božanskog porekla, bilo da su je bogovi stvorili isključivo radi svoje igre i zabave, ili da su pri tom imali neku ozbiljnu nameru, jer to, naravno, uopšte ne možemo znati.14 Tako govori Zeami Za, otac japanskog pozorišta, u svom delu Fušikaden o prenošenju cveta glume u knj. III. Zeami, Kanze Motokijo, Cvet glume. Fušikaden, priredio Radoslav Lazić, izd. Radoslav Lazić, Beograd, 2006., str. 26. 14 Platon, Zakoni, u: Radoslav Lazić (priredio), Estetika lutkarstva, izd. Radoslav Lazić, Beograd, 2002., str. 12. 13
21
U Državi, knjiga sedma, Platon govori o ljudskom svetu kao svetu senki i silueta. Tako Platon otvara beskrajno polje metafizike u kojoj „neko nam vuče konce“, a mi smo samo senke senki…15 Latini su lutku i lutka nazivali pupa, ali postoji i pojam cuculla, što znači kukla i predstavlja ljudsku figuru u formi čoveka, a često se tako nazivaju deca i bebe. Mogu da budu od porcelana, drvene marionete, matrijoške, babuke, zatim lutke od stakla, plastike, papirmašea itd. Kuklom se oslovljavaju i lepe devojke. Bharata Muni u Natjašastri – Priručniku za glumce – svojevrsnoj „pozorišnoj Bibliji“, beleži, na sanskrtu, pojam Sutradara – umeće kako vući konce, kao što je Kamasutra – umeće vođenja ljubavi.16 Veliki persijski pesnik Omar Hajam, u Rubaijama, beleži, slično Platonu: - Mi smo poslušne lutke u rukama tvorca! - Svevišnji nas po sceni vodi pomoću konca. * * * Južnoslovenski termin lutka, lutak, označava isti fenomen u srpskom, hrvatskom i slovenačkom lutkarskom teatru. U staroslovenačkom jeziku, prelinhartovskom dobu, postojao je termin lilka, lilek. I kod nekih drugih slovenskih naroda postoji srodan termin: napr. kod Poljaka bio je drevni termin latka i novije lalka, lalek, a kod Čeha loutka, a u staroruskom postojao je naziv lutk. Danas je u ruskim zemljama odomaćen pojam za lutku kukla, kuklen teatr, a tako lutku označavaju i Bugari, Makedonci, Grci, Turci... Mađari za lutku imaju termin bab, banszinhaz, baba, babu. Slično svoju lutku označavaju i Slovaci: bab, a lutkarsko pozorište – Babkovo divadlo… Španci lutku nazivaju titero, Rumuni papuš, a u Meksiku Indijanosi za lutkara kažu šamanos teokiklixkli – onaj koji čini da bogovi plešu... * * * Dakle, za južnoslovenski prostor istorodni pojam lutka znači predmet, dečiju igračku, a u pozorištu, kazalištu, gledališču predstavlja, u različitim tehnikama, umetnički oblik izražavanja lutkarskih igara ili lutkarskih dramoleta u svim žanrovima. Vidi: Platon, Država, u: Radoslav Lazić (priredio), Estetika lutkarstva, izd. Radoslav Lazić, Beograd, 2002., str. 12. 16 Vidi: Muni, Bharata, Natjašastra. Postanak pozorišta, priredio Radoslav Lazić, izd. Radoslav Lazić, Beograd, 2003. 15
22
Ako bismo i prihvatili tumačenje etimologije praslovenske reči lutka – „liko od lipe, kora, prut, sve što se od tog lika dade napraviti“ – kako razumeti činjenicu da su prvobitne lutke bile napravljene od blata, sukna, od vune, pa čak i od hleba, a u novije doba, nema materijala od kojega se lutke nisu pravile? * * * Vuk Stefanović Karadžić (Tršić, 26.X/6.XI 1787. – Beč, 7.II 1864.), otac srpskog narodnog jezika, u svome Srpskom Riječniku (1847.) beleži pojam lutka – nem. Puppe. Lutkarsko pozorište Vuk ne pominje. * * * Petar Skok u svome Etimološkom rječniku tumači pojam lutka: - Lutka, f. (Vuk), tak. češ., polj., praslav. (*lǫtъ), „pupa, marioneta“ = lutak, gen. -tka m. Taj se lik poklapa sa strus. lutъkъ „histrio“. To je bilo i prvobitno značenje. U praslavenskom riječ je bila prema tome radna imenica sa značenjem „igrač, mimičar koji nešto prikazuje“. Odatle Vukov deminutiv luče, gen. -eta. Vokal u je nastao iz velarnog nazala, upor. polj. lątka. Korijen bez -ъka očuvan je u polj. lęt = rus. lut „liko od lipe, kora, prut, sve što se od tog lika dade napraviti“. Prema toj poljskoj riječi pretpostavlja se prasrodstvo s njem. Linde i lat. lentus.17 * * * Poznato je srpsko narodno prezime Lutkić, kako se upravo i preziva glumac Lutkić, Dejan (Vrbas, 1974.), prvak Dečjeg pozorišta „Boško Buha“ iz Beograda. U Vukovom Jadru, tačnije u selu Korenita, pored Tršića, blizu manastira Tronoša, prema svedočenju Rajne Mićić (1936.) udate Lazić, do danas se održala dečja pesma : Lutko moja, lutkice, Od čađava platna, Ti si za me, Lukice, Od srebra i zlata. * * * Uslovno rečeno prva lutka na ovim prostorima je ribolika skulptura iz Lepenskog vira; potiče iz neolitskog praistorijskog doba tzv. Lepenac. Ot Skok, Petar, Etimologijski rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika, JAZU, Zagreb, 1971.
17
23
kriće akademika arheologa prof. dr Dragoslava Srejovića iz 1967. možemo uzeti kao istorijski datum savremene arheologije, ali i otkriće Lepenca kao drevne kamene lutke-skulpture iz neolita, mlađeg kamenog doba, na podunavskom prostoru Đerdapske klisure. Ovo epohalno arheološko otkriće nas upućuje na najstarija evropska staništa pračoveka starog više od 9000 godina. Neolitski Lepenci bili su inspiracija reditelju Srboljubu Luletu Stankoviću (1921.-2000.) za njegove Mitove Balkana (1991.), jednu od najboljih predstava savremenog srpskog lutkarstva na kraju XX veka, koja je tu dramaturško-režijski ostvarena kao svojevrsni obredni etnoteatar, kao visoko stilizovano totalno ritualno-foklorno pozorište, kao visoko estetsko postignuće sa višeslojnim značenjima. * * * U Rečniku književnih termina D. M. (Dušanka Maricki) piše u odrednici Lutkarsko pozorište da je to „vrsta pozorišta u kojoj likove na sceni umesto glumaca predstavljaju lutke“18. Ova definicija samo do pola svedoči suštinu lutkarskog teatra u kome su glumac-animator i lutka jedinstvena nevidljivo-vidljiva celina. Ona dalje obrazlaže da glumci-lutkari na razne načine (prstima ruke – noge, stopala, glavu, vrat, nos, usta, čelo, zadnjicu i celo telo ne pominje – dugim i kratkim štapovima umesto prstiju i različitim poteznim sistemima) pokreću lutke, a sami izgovaraju tekst. Ona ne pominje da u Bunraku teatru narator – đoruri recituje, peva i skandira tekst, a glumci-animatori vode lutke – ninđo. Autorka koristi samo jedno delo iz lutkarske literature: C. Beaumont, Puppets and the Puppet Stage, 1938. U Rečniku lutkarstva autor A.R. Filpot piše o pojmu Lutka (Puppet), posebno ukazujući na etimologiju.19 On kaže da je srednjevekovni pojam bio popet ili poppet. Verovatno je došao preko francuskog pupette (za koji se znalo 1538.) iz zajedničkog latinskog izvora: Pupa, devojčica, lutka, naročito se odnosilo na lutku koja se pokreće pomoću kanapa (kurziv R.L.). U engleskom jeziku postoje varijante poopet, poppette i poppit. Oblici u dijalektu često imaju značenje koje se ne odnosi na lutke za igru ili pozorišne lutke. * * * Ugledni leksikograf svetskog glasa Patris (Patrice) Pavis, pisac Pojmovnika teatra20, nema odrednicu posvećenu lutki i lutkarstvu, već samo odred Rečnik književnih termina, Institut za književnost i umetnost, Nolit, Beograd, 1986., str. 404. 19 A.R. Philpott, Dictionary of Puppetry, Macdonald, London, 1969., str. 209-215. 20 Pavis, Patrice, Dictionnaire du Théâtre, Dunod, Paris, 1996. Citat preuzet iz Pojmovnika teatra, Antibarbarus, Zagreb, 2004., str. 214. 18
24
nicu u kojoj referiše u tekst Marioneta (i glumac) mišljenje Didroa (Diderot) u Paradoksu o glumcu, koji zamišlja „velikog glumca“ kao „prekrasnu lutku, čije konce drži pesnik i kojoj on u svakom retku naznačuje pravi oblik koji treba da poprimi“. Srpski reditelj Bojan Barić, osnivač Lutkarskog teatra (Nukketeatteri) SAMPO u Helsinkiju, ukazuje na zanimljivo mišljenje finskog lingviste Veijo Meri o poreklu reči lutka – nukke – u finskoj terminologiji: Veijo Meri (Veijo Väinö Valvo Meri (rođ. 31.12.1928., Viipuri) u svojoj knjizi Poreklo reči,21 1982.) iznosi dve pretpostavke. Reč Lutka (nukke) može poticati od reči Nukka, tj. mekane dlačice tkanine ili zakrpa od koje su izrađene lutke. Takođe se mogu izvesti iz glagola „nukertaa“ koji je okretanje prstima i pakovanje. U švedskom i nemačkom reč docka i Docke je značila izvorno umotana ili zamotan. Druga postavka je da nukke verovatno potiče iz glagola „nukkua“ što znači u prevodu spavati.22 * * * SESIL ŽITU – REČNIK UMETNOSTI SPEKTAKLA LUTKARSTVO Sesil Žitu (Cecile Giteau) u svom komparativnom Rečniku umetnosti spektakla23 lutkarskom pozorištu daje jednaku pažnju kao što to čini i drugim oblicima umetnosti spektakla. Ona ne pominje etimologiju niti semaziologiju pojma lutka, niti lutkarstvo, niti lutkarski teatar. Lutke uopšte Tipovi lutkarskih predstava: Umetnost/umjetnost lutaka, Pozorište lutaka, Stalno pozorište lutaka, Pokretno pozorište/kazalište lutaka, Putujuće pozorište lutaka, Lutkarska predstava, Lutka na filmu, TV lutka emisija, Kabaretska lutka predstava, Pozorište senki, Ritualne lutke, Tradicionalne lutke, Narodne lutke, Umetničke lutke, Muzičke lutke, Književne lutke, Lutke za igru, Filmske lutke, Lutka za trbuhozborca Lutkarska zanimanja: Marionetista, kreator lutaka, voditelj lutaka, manipulator, voditelj ručne lutke, ginjolist, narator, glumac senki, dalang (u indonežanskom Wajang-kulit, teatru senki – prim. R.L.) Meri, Veijo: Sanojen synty: Etymologinen sanakirja, Gummerus, Jyväskylä, 1982. Iz pisma Bojana Barića Radoslavu Laziću, Helsinki, oktobar 2014. 23 Giteau, Cecile, Dictionnaire des arts du spectacle, Dunod, Paris, 1980. 21 22
25
171
172
173
174
175
doc. dr. sc. Livija Kroflin Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku Kralja Petra Svačića 1/F, 31000 Osijek, Hrvatska livijakroflin@hotmail.com Dr. sc. Livija Kroflin docentica je na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku. Diplomirala je komparativnu književnost i engleski jezik na Filozofskom fakultetu u Zagrebu, gdje je i magistrirala s temom iz lutkarstva („Kazalište lutaka u Zagrebu 1945.-1985.“) te doktorirala na temu „Međunarodni festival kazališta lutaka PIF 1968.-2007. godine u kontekstu europskoga lutkarstva“. Radila je kao književna prevoditeljica, urednica u Nakladnom zavodu Globus te u Međunarodnom centru za usluge u kulturi u Zagrebu kao umjetnička voditeljica PIF-a (međunarodnog festivala kazališta lutaka) i ravnateljica Centra. Od 2007. zaposlena je na Odsjeku za kazališnu umjetnost Umjetničke akademije u Osijeku, gdje je voditeljica programa za lutkarstvo i predaje kolegije iz povijesti i estetike lutkarstva. Selektorica je predstava za PIF te pokretačica i glavna urednica biblioteka „Lutkanija“ i „Velika Lutkanija“ pri Međunarodnom centru za usluge u kulturi. Uredila je više knjiga iz područja lutkarstva. Glavna je tajnica Hrvatskoga centra UNIMA, a 2000.-2012. bila je članica međunarodnog Izvršnog odbora svjetske UNIMA-e i predsjednica međunarodne UNIMA-ine komisije „Lutka u obrazovanju, razvoju i terapiji“. Osnivačica je i voditeljica Lutkarske družine „Lutkobus“. Uredila je monografije Hrvatsko lutkarstvo i 30 godina PIF-a te knjigu The Power of the Puppet, za koje je napisala i posebna poglavlja. Autorica je brojnih članaka o lutkarstvu objavljenih u časopisima Umjetnost i dijete, Gordogan, LuKa, Lahor, Književna revija, Lutka (Slovenija), Art Limes (Mađarska), Loutkář (Češka), Lingua Montenegrina (Crna Gora), KuklArt (Bugarska), Teatr Lalek (Poljska) i dr. Piše članke o lutkarstvu za Kazališni leksikon koji priprema Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža. Sudjelovala je na više međunarodnih stručnih skupova o lutkarstvu (Osijek, Budimpešta, Prag, Subotica, Ljubljana, Moskva, Jakarta).
Važniji radovi: Knjige • Zagrebačka zemlja Lutkanija. Zagrebačko lutkarstvo 1945-1985. godine – Prilog proučavanju hrvatskoga lutkarstva, Međunarodni centar za usluge u kulturi, Zagreb, 1992. 176
• Estetika PIF-a, Međunarodni centar za usluge u kulturi, Zagreb, 2012. Članci • Totální tvůrce Zlatko Bourek, u: Miloslav Klíma a kol., Divadlo a interakce II., Pražská scéna, Prag, 2007. • Golijat Milan Čečuk, u: „Omiški ljetopis“, god. VI., br. 6, Župa sv. Mihovila arkanđela u Omišu, Omiš, 2011. • Lutkarski komadi Arthura Schnitzlera, u: „Lingua Montenegrina“, god. IV/1, br. 7, Institut za crnogorski jezik i književnost, Podgorica, 2011. • Otnošenieto k’m prikazkama v s’vremennija kuklen teat’r, u: „KuklArt“, vol. 5, December 2011, Sofija, 2011. • Upotreba lutke u poučavanju hrvatskoga kao inoga jezika, u: „Lahor“, časopis za hrvatski kao materinski, drugi i strani jezik, Vol. 2, No. 12, Zagreb, 2011. • The Role of the Puppet in Language Teaching, u: The Power of the Puppet, The UNIMA Puppets in Education, Development and Therapy Commission & Croatian Centre of UNIMA, 2012. • Ścieżki chorwackiego lalkarstwa / The Pathways of Croatian Puppetry, u: „Teatr Lalek“, Polski Ośrodek Lalkarski POLUNIMA, Łódź, 2013, nr 1-2/111-112/2013, str. 70-76. • Vlasta Pokrivka, Educator and Artist / Vlasta Pokrivka, pedagoginja i umjetnica, u: Theatre for Children – Artistic Phenomenon / Pozorište za decu – umetnički fenomen, Knjiga 5, priredili Henryk Jurkowski i Miroslav Radonjić, Otvoreni univerzitet, Subotica, Međunarodni festival pozorišta za decu, Subotica i Pozorišni muzej Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Subotica, 2014., str. 175-193. • Četrdeset godina PIF-a na kulturnoj karti Europe (Međunarodni festival kazališta lutaka PIF od 1968. do 2007. godine), u: „Književna revija“, god. 53., br. 3., Tema: lutka, Ogranak Matice hrvatske Osijek, Osijek, 2013., str. 123-189. • „Interaktivno supostojanje lutke i glumca u lutkarskoj predstavi“, u: Krležini dani u Osijeku 2013., Supostojanja i suprotstavljanja u hrvatskoj drami i kazalištu, Zavod za povijest hrvatske književnosti, kazališta i glazbe HAZU / Odsjek za povijest hrvatskog kazališta, Zagreb, Hrvatsko narodno kazalište u Osijeku, Filozofski fakultet, Osijek, Zagreb – Osijek, 2014., str. 318-329.
177
Igor Tretinjak, ass. Umjetnička akademija u Osijeku Kralja Petra Svačića 1/F, 31000 Osijek, Hrvatska itretinjak@uaos.hr Rođen 1977. godine u Zagrebu. Godine 2005. na Filozofskom fakultetu u Zagrebu diplomirao kroatistiku i informatologiju, a 2010. godine na istom fakultetu i teatrologiju te upisao doktorski studij književnosti, izvedbenih umjetnosti, filma i kulture, na kojemu je trenutno na petom semestru. Od 2014. godine zaposlen na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku kao asistent na programu za lutkarstvo Odsjeka za kazališnu umjetnost. Prije toga, 2008.–2014. godine radio kao novinar na Internet portalu tportal.hr, a 2012. godine vršio dužnost pomoćnika glavnog urednika u novinama Matice hrvatske za književnost, umjetnost i znanost „Vijenac“. Od 2006. do 2008. godine radio kao profesor hrvatskog jezika i knjižničar u Osnovnoj školi Grigora Viteza, a od 2005. do 2006. kao profesor hrvatskog jezika u Zdravstvenom učilištu. Kazališne kritike i stručne tekstove objavljuje od 2008. godine u novinama za kulturu, publikacijama, strukovnim časopisima i na internet portalima: „Vijenac“, tportal.hr, kazaliste.hr, „Hrvatsko glumište“ i „Književnost i dijete“. Od 2010. godine član je Društva hrvatskih kazališnih kritičara i teatrologa.
Važniji stručni radovi: - „Suvremeno scensko ruho bajke“, u: Književnost i dijete, DHK, brojevi 3-4, I. godina, Zagreb, 2012. - „Filmski modernizam i multimedijalnost Timona Tomislava Radića“, u: Hrvatski filmski ljetopis, Hrvatski filmski savez, broj 70, Zagreb, 2012.
178
179
180
SADRŽAJ
Predgovor . ................................................................................................. 5 Henryk Jurkowski Terms in Puppetry and their Linguistic and Research Context................... 7 Radoslav Lazić Etimologija i semaziologija pojma lutke u istoriji srpskog lutkarstva, s posebnim osvrtom na savremene međunarodne rečnike pojmova klasičnog i modernog lutkarskog teatra....................................................................... 20 Rita Fleis Lingvističko-teatrološko tumačenje termina lutka u starogrčkom, latinskom, srpskom, hrvatskom i mađarskom jeziku......................................... 33 Jelena Sitar Cvetko Terminologija kot kontekst......................................................................... 45 Siniša Jelušić Lutka i transcendentno: nauk P. A. Florenskog......................................... 57 Marijana Petrović Postojanje paralelnih svetova na lutkarskoj sceni..................................... 68 Matt Smith Towards a Definition of Applied Puppetry................................................. 83 Jasminka Mesarić Doprinos slovačkog lutkarstva približavanju Osijeka europskim lutkarskim stremljenjima s naglaskom na umjetničko djelovanje Jana Ozábala i Bohdana Slavíka............................................................................................... 95 181
Zdenka Đerđ Hrvatsko lutkarsko nazivlje – lutkarski tezaurus..................................... 107 Teodora Vigato Stvaranje lutkarskog nazivlja u Kazalištu lutaka Zadar.......................... 126 Livija Kroflin i Igor Tretinjak Vrste lutaka i različite tehnike animacije u hrvatskom lutkarskom nazivlju ................................................................................. 143
182
CIP zapis je dostupan u računalnome katalogu Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu pod brojem 000898054. 184