Since its birth, the theatre has been a noble movement, and to this day it is still born to please the bourgeois class and remains "the great Aristotle".
Since the reform and opening up of the arts, there has been a gradual loss of revolutionaryism in literature, a gradual convergence towards consumerism and the disappearance of the topic of the poor.
For example, a more topical "star" theatre has been used to squeeze the "residual value" of air stars. Some stars also try to raise their prices by labeling themselves with drama.
For example, the strike line in Luhai in Thunder Rain was deleted. Love is expressed in so-called more romantic ways. It's just some vested interests who are super-sensitive to certain events and events in the play, and they feel that itches when they see Luhai strike.
Other examples are the non-hazardous decomposition of the confiscation of production resources by fishers in the new generation ' s drama director ' s "Reflection ". Since the company's marketing of the red fried chicken has been very strong, the chicken has no choice but to compromise on the work.
The above works are a constant demonstration of the weakness and compromise of the theatre industry today.
The concept of middle income is the means by which capitalism divides the proletarian class, creating a more affluent proletarian class as an example, creating consumerism bubbles and influencing the values of young people. Those who have been obscured by their individual class are more anxious to leave behind than to bring themselves in in the face of the proletariat that lives in want. Who's willing to face the pain?
Some of the plays depict the poor with stereotypes and prejudice, either as a symbol in the play, or as a lamb that is slaughtered by anyone, or as an empty slogan of the Virgin Mother, because the author and director are nobility and lack experience at the bottom.
There are a few who seriously deconstruct the work of the poor to be unlighted in "underground", "aesthetic space", or they will be capped with negative and negative energy. There are only a few theatres dedicated to 90 per cent of people in China.
The birth environment of the Euphoria, censorship and multiple castrations under capital pressure have led to the progressive absence of revolutionary theatres, the rise of creative thresholds and the severe division of classes within industries. Real estate bubbles have made theatre rents the first challenge of theatre production, and how to maintain balance of payments is the first element of theatre creation.
I've heard a man tell the drama of the poor that he has never experienced poverty and has never been exploited, that he has no sympathy for the part of the protagonist, but that he praises the performance of the exploiter in the work, that he has shown the impotence and truth of being the boss. His ass determined his head, so he agreed with his boss that the resistance of the poor was unreasonable and that the lack of capacity for inter-human relations today was the cause of the disappearance of the theatre of the poor.
In conclusion, 90 per cent of people in China still need drama, still need drama to express their claims and still need theatre to achieve their aspirations. Discarding them, the drama disengages the crowd. The theatre of the poor must exist.
The play is a means of production, and we live for the audience, avoiding certain factors that make our own internal consumption so that we can walk in the longer term. Without handing over their work and their work to capital to operate, there will be more freedom of creation, more income will be allocated to participants and more exercise of their combined abilities. The theatre can be truly free only if the creation takes place at any time, wherever the stage is placed, out of the limits of the theatre.