Portret „teatrała”. Tadeusz Kudliński – krytyk…
xmlui.dri2xhtml.METS-1.0.item-citation: Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. 263, Studia Historicolitteraria 18 (2018), s. -112
MetadataShow full item record
Description:Dokument cyfrowy wytworzony, opracowany, opublikowany oraz finansowany w ramach programu "Społeczna Odpowiedzialność Nauki" - modułu "Wsparcie dla bibliotek naukowych" przez Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego w projekcie nr rej. SONB/SP/465103/2020 pt. "Organizacja kolekcji czasopism naukowych w Repozytorium UP wraz z wykonaniem rekordów analitycznych".
Tadeusz Kudliński remained in the memory of Cracovians, above all, as a theatre critic and the author of books dedicated to this topic, which have been republished many times. Serving the function of an educational mission, they combined a harmonious perspective of a historian, researcher, critic, polemicist and apologist, who was also a great story-teller. The role of a ‘theatre man’, which he assumed, also included contacts with amateur theatre, discussions with audience and cooperation with the Theatre Lovers Club. Views on art which had clashed in the preceding century, were clearly reflected in the monographs and collections of reviews written by the author, for whom the history of the theatre was, in fact, the history of drama. For years, Kudliński consistently carried out his ‘theatre lesson’. It revolved around numerous issues – from the description of various theatrical aesthetics, through the search for ‘a Polish style’ of performance, to the characterisation of experimental groups (e.g. Grotowski’s or student theatre). The critic placed experiment on the side of cultural life, on no account in the popular theatre, therefore, he criticised all Polish directors from the second half of the 20th century who staged ‘experimentally’, especially classics. Being a traditionalist and a supporter of theatrical illusion, he attacked Brecht’s model of epic performance, glorifying ”the process of actor transformation”, although he emphasised that it doesn’t have to ”concern only reality.” He provoked, irritated – and taught, which can be confirmed by the fact that his books about theatre are still widely read nowadays.