©Damen,
2021
Classical Drama
and Theatre
Return to Chapters
While the comparison of genetic evolution
and cultural change may seem to some a bit stretched, if not tortured, it is nevertheless
valid to see entertainment as a "niche," at least inasmuch as people
who have the leisure will seek to be entertained and forms of entertainment will
then come and go as tastes evolve. While one should not push the metaphor too far,
genres of art just like animal species do both "feed off" a situation
and fill a role in a larger system. But what dictates changes of popular
taste in art is very hard to say, much harder really than it is to track the mechanisms
that have driven the restructuring of biological life in the past. Art involves
whimsy as well as luck, whereas luck is the more dominant factor behind the randomness
that bedevils paleontology. Yet it is quite clear from history that
drastic changes in lifestyle often precede the rise of new forms of art. So, for
instance, both the Renaissance and the birth of Elizabethan drama follow closely
on the heels of massive social reconfiguration. Cubist art and absurdist theatre
are also clearly by-products of their day. Thus, while the equation of biological
and artistic development may seem at first outlandish, it is not entirely so,
and even if it were, a similar biological model is what underlies our older, gradualistic
presumptions about the origin of Greek drama. If it is unwise to carry over the
methodologies of one field to another, it is even less wise to import outdated
modes of thinking.
Return to Chapter 4
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.