Me

My photo
Fong Ma Po, Tai Po District, Hong Kong
I was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire in 1985. We call it the Shire because there are rumours Middle Earth's Shire is based on us - local locals do resemble Hobbit folk. I spent most of my early childhood in Longville-In-The-Dale, a tiny village near Much Wenlock. The village had a pub, a phone box, an old railway station, an old post office and many many farms. When I was 15 We moved to Church Stretton, a bigger town in Shropshire. But still not the hub of major theatrical events or of diverse culture. Church Stretton is a lovely little town. It has around 3,000 people. Which might sound like alot but isn't. Everyone knows everyone. Most people are related to everyone. We nickname our area the SY6, as this is the postcode. I love my hometown. But, I never really felt like I belonged there. I always wanted to know about everywhere outside of The Shire, outside of the West Midlands, outside of the UK, outside of Europe. After finishing college at 18 I left. My first trip was to Togo, West Africa. It wasn't my last... Here is a collection of adventures that happened After The Shire...

Saturday, 4 June 2011

What is Theatre?

Last weekend I was part of a group of Applied Theatre facilitators who had been helping lead-facilitator, Becky Proudfoot, create a performance with a group of women from Bethune House. Bethune house is a charity based organisation run through the Mission for Migrant Worker's Hong Kong.

Bethune House itself provides shelter, legal advice, support and care to domestic helpers in Hong Kong who have been subjected to exploitation and abuse. The performance we created together was firstly to raise awareness of the situation facing Bethune House as they are being forced to vacate their location, leaving the women with nowhere to go. The performance was a charity event with all proceeds being donated to Bethune House. Secondly the performance was a way for the women to create something together, to show others their talents and share their feelings.

The piece was called Four Scenes of the World, based on the women's thoughts about the sky, the sea, the city and the home. It was important for the women that they created a piece of theatre that was about something different than the problems and issues they face in everyday life, although some of this came through the work, it was not the focus of it. The women's performance was beautiful and included acted scenes, physical movement, poetry, song and choral speaking. However, my favourite part of the performance was the sense it gave you of community. As drama or theatre based professionals we know performance is about collaboration, but this performance really allowed me to see this element and to understand that these women were each other's support network and family. Pardon the obviousness of this statement, but their performance embodied everything Bethune House seeks to promote.

After being part of the process and watching three audiences come to watch the show I was therefore somewhat surprised, when I asked someone if they'd enjoyed it, to hear the statement (and please excuse my paraphrasing) "I loved it, but, it wasn't theatre was it?" I was most surprised to hear this from someone who is an active member of the Arts scene in Hong Kong and wasn't really sure how to respond, especially after hearing the person in question repeatedly describe their own work as Avant-garde.

It is true that as Applied Theatre practitioners we make use or various arts based texts and mediums, Four Scenes of the World only acts as an example of that, however, I was taken-aback by the idea that what we had created with these women was not theatre at all. I feel so passionately about this point being incorrect that I had to blog about it.

per·for·mance –noun 1.a musical, dramatic, or other entertainment presented before an audience. 2.the act of performing a ceremony, play, piece of music, etc. 3.the execution or accomplishment of work, acts, feats, etc.

Above is the English dictionary definition of performance. I am aware that we are getting into an argument of semantics and definitions as defined by different people. However, I would like make the case for 'theatre' performance being any kind of performance given in-front of an audience. This doesn't even have to be inside a theatre. This doesn't involve having lights, a set-script or even a director. It involves one person watching another.

I think the reason this has affected me so much is because I am of the opinion that to think theatrical performance has to take place in a theatre, with a director reigning supreme over everything is out-dated. I'm sorry but if that is Avant-garde then I think you may have your definition wrong.

a·vant-garde –noun The advance group in any field, especially in the visual,literary, or musical arts, whose work is characterised chiefly by unorthodox and experimental methods.

I'm not saying theatre-created with a director and a script cannot be Avant-garde, but believing that it has to have those things prevalent in the process to be theatre at all sounds like theatre-snobbery to me.

The theatrical performance that I was part of and watched last Sunday was a performance using different performative techniques and came about by devising ideas with a group of people. Maybe this can be defined as Community Theatre or Applied Theatre or whatever genre you want to call it. But surely, that is still a performance type and still has a right to be considered part of the ever growing umbrella of theatre.

3 comments:

  1. I think that every theatrical artist has their own definition of what theatre/art is. And I think that is important. If everyone defined theatre as the same thing then our art would be pretty boring.
    Personally, when a piece becomes more about message/theme over story, character and the other principals of drama I find that it dances into the territory of performance art. Performance art isn't inferior or any less important than theatrical art, I just believe it to have lesser bounds on it's definition. Just as abstract art has less boundries on it than conventional art, and it's still just as good.
    (Jeez, I haven't had a conversation like this since Grad school. You're making me nostalgic!)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Firstly let me say I also relish these theoretical conversations. Secondly let's break this down more.
    I agree with you, I also think that every theatrical artist has their own definition of 'theatre', what I'm not used to is when people have a definition of what is NOT 'theatre'.
    I want to question your opinion about message/theme vs story/character. In relation to the piece of theatre created by the women last week - what do you think their message was? I also think that this statement is very dangerous, once you start saying that theatre is only theatre if their are characters and a story that seems to limit oneself creatively.
    I'm not making a case against that type of theatre - I'm a literary manager and dramaturg - without those things I couldn't have trained.
    However, I think where my view is different to yours is that you seem to view theatre as such a small part of performance. You said that performance art has less bounds on it's definition. For me that comment should be about 'theatre' as a whole. Why separate things so much. As I said, 'theatre' is the umbrella for all these things and should not be considered separate or removed from other arts bases. For me this view means you will be creating work that is not informed by other art forms and brings in the differences and contemporary features these will allow. In my opinion this belief creates a very boring image of theatre with stock characters and people too scared to cut, adapt or play with a script. Have we forgotten that scripts are called plays?
    On a side note if theatre is about character and story and not about a message or theme how would you then define political theatre? How would you define non-western theatre, for example West African theatre that is heavily dance based and serves as messages about life passed through generations. How would you define Chinese theatre post-Cultural Revolution where the characters and story-lines masked heavy political messages and themes.
    If your type of 'theatre' isn't political and doesn't convey messages or themes what does it do?

    ReplyDelete
  3. My friend Rachael Drew who couldn't post this herself:

    hmmm... I've been thinking about this and going round in circles. It seems very personal. Theatre, to me, feels like anything for an audience... wherever it is, whatever it is, script, no script. I kind of love the fact there's isnt really a hard and fast definition - it's what you make it - and that's the point.

    The larger question from where I'm sitting, in a bit of a cultural blackhole, is 'does it matter as long as people go!?'

    Not to start another open-ended question but I saw this on a Guardian blog:

    "To be a performance artist, you have to hate theatre. Theatre is fake: there is a black box, you pay for a ticket, and you sit in the dark and see somebody playing somebody else's life. The knife is not real, the blood is not real, and the emotions are not real. Performance is just the opposite: the knife is real, the blood is real, and the emotions are real. It's a very different concept. It's about true reality." (Marina Abramovic)

    Found it interesting.

    being one of those pesky 'reign supreme'rs, I don't think the role of the director is defunct quite yet. Any project, be it community or otherwise will have a facilitator or someone else who takes control. If I didnt lead my youth theatre, it wouldnt happen - someone has to be responsible for the whole thing. Perhaps then we're looking into facilitator/director definitions, but they both encourage people to work towards whats best for the show... wherever that show may be.

    May have just written a load of tosh there - long time since i've spoken theatre.

    ReplyDelete