How Far We Roam: Deviance from Roman Theatre

Rome has, and always will be, an interesting city to study. Theatre-wise, its quite
interesting to see the many influences it takes from Greek theatre. When reviewing the many,
many characteristics of Roman theatre, I noticed many attributes that appear in a lot of modern
theatre. Romes influence on modern theatre is very clear and obvious when you view the
standard progression of many new plays.
The biggest, most obvious change was the shift from Old Comedy to New Comedy,
which is a shift that I believe has occurred quite often throughout history (one example I can
think of is the shift from melodrama to realism). The most notable feature that we take from
Roman theatre is the focus on smallness and subtlety. Roman-era plays often focus on small
family life and promotes smaller gestures, much like many plays do today. Notable modern
works that fit this category are plays like Luna Gale by Rebecca Gilman and Annapurna by
Sharr White these stories focus on small-scale situations and rely less on the plot and more on
the realistic portrayals of sympathetic characters. Annapurna does this especially well as it
explores the past between Emma and Ulysses as the oncoming conflict of a visiting son looms
overhead, bringing forth the characters personalities through their small quirks. Luna Gale
stands out for its ability to bust the stereotypes of common stock characters the overprotective,
religious grandmother; the drug addict mother; the hard-at-work social worker in a way that
portrays them as wholesomely human, showcasing their many good and bad sides.
A major difference between modern and Roman theatre is that modern theatre focuses
much, much less on pure comedy and entertainment. This case can be argued against with
musicals, as they often are highly comedic and entertaining by nature, but even musicals have a
higher moral tone. Modern theatre often aims to impart some sort of wisdom onto the audience,
whereas Roman theatres goal was simply to entertain those with leisure time. While

entertainment-only plays arent impossible in modern theatre, most plays are written with the
intent of either debating an opinion/ideology or explaining a philosophy.
What makes modern theatre interesting is that does not shy away from combining
comedy and tragedy, which was an occurrence that Horace has said should never occur. In many
modern tragedies, there is still comedy to be found through many of the situations that occur.
Annapurna does this very well the opening scene shows Ulysses, naked in only an apron,
cooking expired sausage on a hot plate as soon as the lights come up. The same play later delves
into issues of divorce, alcoholism, and child abuse, which gets extremely heavy. Luna Gale does
the same to a lesser extent in the midst of two parents losing their child to protective services
because of drug abuse, we get many comedic moments that lighten the tension and breathe
brevity into scenes that would otherwise become dreary with tragedy.
While I do believe that Roman theatre has heavy influences on modern theatre, I cant
help but think that modern theatre has established itself as a unique passing point between the
next focus. Now more than ever, we see many diverse styles of playwriting and performance.
Plays like Slut Shaming are played out in a slam poetry style, and metaphysical, experimental
works are giving us insight into characters and lifestyles that many in the Roman time couldnt
hope to explore. However, we also see many more traditional dramas that utilize older methods
in newer ways, and even some attempts at recreating older styles to fit a modern audience.
Though we may be simply a passing point from one predominant theatre style to the next, its
fascinating to see the various approaches we take to tell our story in a remarkable and memorable
way.