Final answer:
Theatre of the Absurd differs significantly from other anti-realistic theatre styles in its non-logical structure and exploration of existentialism, with playwrights like Samuel Beckett and Eugene Ionesco leading this genre. In the contemporary era, it adapts to modern media and remains relevant by questioning reality and human significance.
Step-by-step explanation:
Theatre of the Absurd is profoundly distinct from other anti-realistic theatre styles in its philosophy and staging. While other movements have stepped away from realism to tackle different social issues or to present a heightened version of reality, Theatre of the Absurd embodies a radical departure by neglecting logical structures and embracing the chaotic. It posits a world where traditional plot and character development are secondary to the portrayal of existential helplessness.
Samuel Beckett and Eugene Ionesco stand as the pillars of this genre with works like 'Endgame' and 'Rhinoceros', which depict circular narratives and nonsensical dialogue to reveal life's inherent absurdity. Rather than relying on coherent storylines, these plays present a universe where meaning is futile and the human condition is isolated within a disordered cosmos. This ultimately serves to disrupt the audience's complacency and provoke a deeper contemplation of existence.
In the 21st century, the influence of Theatre of the Absurd continues to evolve with modern storytelling, often infusing traditional narratives with absurd elements or utilizing new media to expand its existential themes. The aim is to continuously challenge the audience's understanding of reality and the significance of human actions in an ever-complex world.