I think that it is something worth thinking about both in terms of my practice and research. Why is it that people increasingly want to engage with their audience on such a personal level? There seems to be a surge of practitioners trying to create 'real' intimacy where the audience is having more and more of a realised input into the actual work. Whether this is in the form of confessional pieces, or in the case of Caroline Smith's new work providing information to actually make the show.
Considering this has been interesting in terms of what I am practically trying to achieve at the moment. My work is very much situated in between the conceptual nature of the confessional, and the gathering of material that Caroline is doing (although in a different manner as I am leaving the organic nature of the encounters to dictate the show which leaves the themes much more open ended at this point).
As Lyn Gardner states though, it is an enforced intimacy, an illusion of intimacy in a lonely world. So what does this say about the practitioners making the work and the audience willing to partake in it? What does the work say about the culture we live in?
For my essay I am shifting focus a little (AGAIN! haha). I am considering the intimacy produced in organic theatre (and indeed some one on one performances). I want to try and look at the culture we live in through the lens of these performances. hmmm
I believe that the organic nature of the work and the way that the audience are incorporated into the work produces an almost cult following. You feel intimate with the practitioner, you feel as though they are letting you in on a secret. Like you know them, their inner workings, both personally and as an artist working as they are letting you in on the process. You are really part of somehthing. But how is this effect produced and why?
In terms of a live event there is often an authority attached to it. A belief that you are having an authentic experience due to the visceral and temporal nature of the exchange. However, I believe that the mechanisms used to produce this effect and to draw in an audience are the same as the ones that are at work in media and celebrity culture. The intimacy is no more real than feeling that you know Ant and Dec.
Our culture is one where knowledge about a person or 'persona' is ubiquitous. We have easy, instant access to personal lives, the career development of 'personas', and the inner workings of the films or television programmes that these 'celebrities' are working on (behind the scenes). I would like to argue that the livesness and intimacy inherent in Organic Theatre has no more authority or authenticity than that of celebrity, media culture.
A continuation of Auslander's argument where the ontological nature of liveness and mediatisation is blurred but with a focus on intimacy and authenticity.
I love that I argue with myself constantly and my own ideals! God Dam! :o)
5 comments:
hey lady
Just wrote a long comment and then blogger crashed- doh!
trying to remember-
I think this article is really interesting for both our practices- and yes, as Lyn Gardner points out, it is very trendy (not sure I like being too trendy but suits my subversion of photography with storytelling) - lots of it at the EEC platform. This is a recent departure for Caroline- moving from beyond the 4th wall of a divulging all, anecdotal performance into asking people to confess their secrets themselves- definitely worth asking her about this shift and perception of this and where she sees the material going.
The article has helped develop my thinking about my intimate performance work in considering as I am at the moment, what is in it for the participant- why bother? I ask them to share a story, if they would like to after I have shared- is this real intimacy? I’m participating as self, and are they? A comment I received about my EEC performance was that they felt, ‘lulled into a false sense of security,’ after their memo was shredded, my reasoning was to point back to that performance is immaterial like a memory voiced fleetingly and then disappearing again- and I feel it communicated this and hold onto this action. Doug said he felt the shredding was good as it showed it had struck a nerve, and I am proposing to continue to eradicate traces of photography in extreme ways. When I performed this piece at the Nunnery, a description was ‘like a lovely, luxurious massage for the soul,’ this piece,as you know, was similar to the EEC without the shredder. I like extreme contrasts using dark humour (why I like stand up) which was why the shredder, like Leroy St project. But how do I feel about the ethics, how you frame the performance, how you document the performances (incidentally you blogged and photographed your participants drinking tea which was something I didn’t do as it felt a betrayl of trust- but our purposes and situations were different- yours to develop script material- mine this was the event.) is all to consider.
xx
Hey love,
How annoying when that happens!!!
I don't think that being trendy is really the point. The main thing that I took out of the article is that there is a surge/trend of intimate performances that are taking place in multiple forms. The audience and their participation is key. The question that begs to be asked is WHY. What is it in our culture that is provoking artists to enforce a sense of intimacy?
I'll need to see Caroline's new work before being able to comment further; but if she is just gathering material as I am then the 4th wall may well still be firmly in place. However, again this may not be the point, Caroline doesn't leave the 4th wall in place in her work anyway (well it wasn't there in Spank). Caroline is really good at creating a sense of intimacy during her performances and employs a number of techniques to do this without having to do one on one.
The 'So what' question is one that I ask myself constantly as you know. But maybe not asking 'why bother?' but 'why ARE participants bothering'? as they do turn up and participate. People did sit and have tea with me. Why?
My argument for my research is that the 'live' temporal nature of the work is immaterial, but instead focusing on the techniques that are used to create a false intimacy and why they would be employed.
As for documenting I only took the picture after the conversation had taken place, once the people knew what I was doing and with their permission so it didn't feature as an integral part of the exchange.
xxx
hey hon
sorry- some of what I re-wrote doesn’t make sense – not sure if this does either-head hurts with too much MA stuff!
maybe i'm missing the point but surely caroline's previous work is the fourth wall- we are not interacting or participating- she is talking to us but it is a given we aren't to respond?
i think the point about why its happening is an interesting one looking to culture in which we are constantly asked, even if only to pay lipservice in commerce, for our response- get engaged with ‘have your say’ showing we are ‘being democratic.’ blogs have opened this up as well. People are generally either sharing more with strangers in consumer culture or becoming more anonymous don’t know- a mix? In times of a credit crunch are more people being secret about their debt as it piles up or working ridiculous hours away from the intimacy of home life? There has been a rise in the use of Samaritans recently due the current credit issues I heard somewhere. so maybe its reflecting a secretive culture at boiling point letting off steam?
I would be interested in how carolines techniques in how she develops intimacy now change with it being one to one. The use of the impersonal email to start the process is intriguing for one.
I did mean why do the participants bother- sorry was writing leaving the important bits of the sentence out :(
I don’t think I have asked participants this yet- although for the nunnery and EEC it wasn’t a case of why they came along, they were already going to the show, so its about why did they knock on my door or sign up on the sheet. With Leroy st- need to ask people! And also asking what they were expecting- the waiting outside etc.
With your tea as well- asking people in your next tea event. How much does the offer specifically of being given something to consume entice people?
The documenting I can see wasn’t part of it-for research purposes why do you need a photo I can see recording the dialogue, yes. And also- at what point and how did you tell the people what you were doing, what did you say? in terms of your organic theatre do you mean this tea in the park to be ‘a performance’ or is it a starting exercise/workshop towards then a series of evolving performances, is there a difference?! Is it important?
phew- essay drags me away...
xx
Hey - thanks for your comments and questions it is good to finally thrash some stuff out with someone. This one does make more sense than the last one ;o) hehe
I think that you have miss understood what the 4th wall in theatre is. Think of it as a room where private scenes are happening but the 4th wall has been removed so that you can see in. The actors don't acknowledge that there is an audience present just carry on acting the private publicly! It can be really problematic and is fraught with voyeurism. It is a real 19thC thing. Even though it is debatable - I believe that the fourth wall encourages passive viewing. Having said that, at the Materials Theatre conference that we went to there was a huge debate during one of the talks where it was argued that passive viewing doesn't exist (hmm). What do you think?
Where there is no 4th wall - like Spank or in Tim Crouch's work - I think that as an audience member you are responding and reacting constantly (unless it is really bad theatre and you just switch off). Just because you can't speak out or 'participate' in a one on one exchange, there is still a response and an exchange occurring that you are participating in. Tim Crouch's 'An Oak Tree' is the perfect proof that this happens. When he talked about audience members actually standing up and volunteering for the hypnotist act, even though he had previously told them not too as it is only a theatre show. This demonstrates that the audience are participating and actively responding. It is physically visible here but participation doesn't have to be a physical act. It is what enables theatre to be political - it has the power to instigate change and this is what Brecht really fought for. In Organic Theatre this exchange is even more explicit than in say Spalding Gray's work where he talks to the audience. This is because the audience's reaction and feedback is embedded into the actual work. Although, I am arguing against myself for my essay and stating that this is not as real as it feels.
As for the WHY in cultural terms - I'm still not sure and you made some really good points. I think that the virtual and the media have provided us with a false sense of intimacy. You THINK you are involved, that your say matters, that you are making connections but I think that people are beginning to realise the false and fickle nature of this. Looking at the controversy over the telephone voting on tv shows for example - people are aware that they can be easily mislead. I think that this has left people searching for a real vicerial connection that feels more authentic and this partly answers the 'why participants bother'.
I don't think that these performative connections and sense of intimacy are any more real than the virtual or media ones. The same tactics are at work which is what I am trying to find and analyse for my essay (ahh what a pessimist I am)
Again with Caroline's work we'll have to wait and see as she is turning the exchanges into a show (well that was what I understood from the email request that she sent out) but intimacy can happen in large groups and reach a large audience. Proximity and one on one focus doesn't always equate to an intimate exchange.
oooo as for the questions you posed about my practice - they were good ones and it is good to think them through. The documenting is so I have visuals for my final show. I am trying (rather unsucessfully at the moment to get a dual narrative of process and story telling to run along side each other. I want physical, visual proof that these exchanges took place for the show. I suppose that this comes back to questions of authenticity again,
I am wanting to develop performative methodologies of realising a show and embedding this process into the work. Whatever the work is or will be will hopfully realise itself through an organic process.
I was just really honest with people when they spoke to me in the park. I talked about the project and who I was and what I was trying to achieve. These conversations really help me to realise and articulate what I am wanting to say with my work. In return I found that people were really honest with me (or so I thought - ooo) and let me ask questions that could be personal. When they answered I didn't feel like I was just talking from them without permission to use something for my own ends. They were willingly helping so I felt ethically better about it.
One of the problems that I am encountering now (to be addressed after the draft) is how to make the exchanges feel more intimate. Make them longer. Try and attract a wider variety of people.
Ok - this is longer than my essay is at the moment so back too it :o)
Please keep any comments coming though. It is great to have to think through issues and try and articulate them. Plus any counter agrguments :o)
xxx
Hey hon
I’m really pleased to be talking about the 4th wall as not being from theatre, I’ve picked this up from the way I thought the term has been used- but I’m obviously misunderstanding it- I can definitely see how tim crouchs isn’t 4th wall but I’m still having a problem with caroline’s spank, or are you implying she wouldn’t just be sat there talking to herself so it can’t be 4th wall? She is talking to the audience but it is a given they aren’t to reply so there is still a barrier (unlike tims work where he explains this) Oh god… or is it that we are laughing, she looks at us, not ‘into the box’… I don’t feel that we are directing the work? Where does punchdrunk fit into this? I also think the ideas of when is someone participating and when is someone interacting- the one sided or two sided thing is interesting in intimacy. Issues of co-authorship, democracy, or is this ever possible as we are always in charge as its our work?…etc
I think active and passive in performance and how they are used is really interesting- my forum yesterday was me telling story in front of a group in daylight- the proximity thing became really interesting for me to see how things changed away form one-to-one and standing close to me in the darkroom, and I definitely felt people were less active- watching from a chair- their body language is much more reserved- but then I suppose actively engaging is a mind and body thing- like stand up I suppose. people felt my story was intimate as it struck personal chords with their own lives. I think I should spend some time watching audiences as much as performances and see- the thing I learnt yesterday is the importance of the site of the audience in relation to the placement and scale of visuals, and also being seated was too formal and people suggested sitting on the floor- your sitting on a blanket in a park was great to put people at ease and set the tone. Maybe the next time you do it someone should be sat nearby just observing and noting things for you- also the reactions of those walking past when you were having tea with someone.
I think the virtual and media simulation of intimacy is very interesting comparision to intimacy in theatre- simulation of the intimacy ‘sold’ of family life/ comforts in tea adverts, horlicks, against the sexy coffee ads? Don’t know if this is interesting to you but just a thought?
I like the idea of bringing in the visuals to later work (of course I do) possibly like a performative lecture/ slide show? Or printed out and handled by hand- virtual or physical manipulation? how would this alter the intimacy projected into hand or large scale or
I think we should look at intimacy more together after the draft. Kira o’reilly talking about her work on Tuesday I hope to be a great starting place.
xx
Post a Comment