A sense of direction: the directionality of light and the creation of meaning and feeling on stage

ABSTRACT

The direction light comes from is one of its fundamental properties, alongside brightness and colour. However, the directionality of light on stage – the qualities, effects and affects that arise from its directional property – has received little critical attention. In the UK and the English-speaking world more broadly, the discussion of directional light in professionally focused textbooks is generally based on an historical model from the mid twentieth century, developed by Stanley McCandless. This model prioritises a certain type of visibility of the actor and has little or nothing to say about how directionality can contribute to the expressive content of the performance. In this article, I provide a brief overview of directionality from the time European theatre moved indoors, and a critique of the McCandless ‘method’ and lighting systems that derive from it, which are still influential. I go on to propose a new approach to directionality, rooted in the relational – the relationships among light, audience, performer, character, space, the wider cultural context, and changing theatre-making practices. My approach is a phenomenological one, drawing on the experiences of practising lighting designers, to create an initial essay of how we might reconceptualise directionality and how it can create meaning and feeling on stage.

Acknowledgements

I thank Sofia Alexiadou, Lucy Carter, Rob Halliday and Michael Hulls for generously giving their time and expertise to contribute to the research presented here.

Ethics statement

I confirm that my research has received ethics approval from the Research Ethics Committee at Rose Bruford College of Theatre and Performance. Approval number REC2023003.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 It is also worth noting here that it is often not possible to achieve the McCandless 45+45 angles, as the lighting positions – especially in the auditorium – are not available. The point is that the 45+45 method has often been seen as an ideal, whether it can be achieved or not.

2 Later, Pilbrow noted that the term ‘multi-lantern complexity’ was not his: ‘I think Fred [Bentham] coined the phrase “multi-lantern complexity” by which he meant lighting that employed a mosaic of instruments to fill the stage with light. His taste was for a simpler bolder composition’ (2001). Bentham, a lighting technologist and practitioner of the previous generation to Pilbrow, was still committed to an element of wash lighting, with a small number of spotlights – closer to Appia’s schema than Pilbrow’s approach, itself built on McCandless’s method.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nick Hunt

Nick Hunt was a professional lighting designer and technician before starting to teach lighting design at Rose Bruford College of Theatre and Performance, where he is now Digital Research and Innovation Fellow. His research interests include the performative potential of light, digital scenography and performance, theatre technology history, and the roles and status of theatre-making personnel. He is an Associate Editor of the International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media and has served as co-convenor of the Scenography Working Groups of both the International Federation for Theatre Research and the Theatre and Performance Research Association.