Showing posts with label tim etchells. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tim etchells. Show all posts

That Night Follows Day: Uncertain Pedagogies Out of Performance by David Berridge

That Night Follows Day

by Victoria and Tim Etchells

Queen Elizabeth Hall, Southbank Centre


One of the slightly perturbing elements of Victoria’s That Night Follows Day is its similarities to a Forced Entertainment show. Perhaps normally that wouldn’t matter. We’d accept a certain stylistic similarity - in the ensemble playing style, the use of text, and the performers’ frank audience facing demeanor - via Tim Etchells (artistic director of Forced Entertainment and writer of That Night Follows Day). But, as far as That Night Follows Day is concerned, I am drawn to ask questions about this stylistic similarity because Etchells’ collaborators are all aged between 8 and 14.


This creates a curious doubleness in a show as aware of its constructed and artificial qualities as any ‘grown up’ Forced Entertainment piece. It plays with its fiction and its reality both, with a script not adverse to examining its own premises even as it seems to function as a child to adult telling-it-how-it-is. On the night I saw the show, I felt as if the audience responded more to this second function, with parents audibly chuckling at some revelation of adult behaviour because “I also said (or did) that.” Such audience responses confirmed the script as truth-telling, ignoring or absorbing its self-critical aspects.


Lurking behind all this is the theme of agency, and how much the children are active, empowered explorers of their own lives, and how much they are props in a theatrical work-out. Let’s assume the former (ignoring such complications as how the show was originally performed by a completely different set of children). Then, the connections to Force Entertainment become not a matter of Etchells’ own stylistic influences, but a broader proposition: a certain style of devised, collaborative theatre is not just a way of theatre making, it is a form of radical pedagogy.


This is not, of course, an insight I am deriving from this piece alone. The sense that the techniques and practices of performance art overlap with radical educational theorists such as Paulo Friere and Ivan Illich has been proposed by theorists including Charles Garoian and Yvonne M. Gaudelius, who then look to apply such techniques in the classroom. Their arguments take different forms, but I will focus here on their entwined use of performance and collage, because these terms seem particularly relevant to how the text of That Night Follows Day is functioning:



“Collage enables us to experience everyday life in such a way that its disparate and idiosyncratic fragments resist coalescing into a unifying whole... Instead of a totalizing body of knowledge, the composition of collage consists of a heterogeneous field of coexisting and contesting images and ideas. Its cognitive dissociation provides the perspectival multiplicity necessary for critical engagement. Dialectical tension occurs within the silent, in-between spaces of collage as its fragments, its signifying images and ideas interact and oppose one another. Such complexity and contradiction represent the substance of creative cognition and cultural transformation”.



Part of That Night Follows Day’s strangeness is how the children’s “disparate and idiosyncratic fragments” - the litany of sentences beginning “You tell us...” - become unified by a monolithic, sentimental sense of childhood.


For example, the elements that are most evocative of Forced Entertainment - the use and style of text; the frank, audience facing demeanor - become containers that these child performers can fill, like a constraint or restriction. This frame makes several things possible: it negotiates between the children’s “authenticity” and the demands of a professional performance at the Queen Elizabeth Hall (and elsewhere around the world where the show has toured). It also attempts to enable the sentiment prompted by a group of children onstage to be countered with a distanced, critical and question-raising nonchalance.


But it is impossible to tell from the performance itself whether what we are seeing is the children’s agency or their manipulation by Etchells and Victoria. In such a space of uncertainty, the adaptation of Forced Entertainment’s techniques becomes ventriloquism. Only the children themselves, in their lives beyond the performance itself, know which is which. To think otherwise is to add a nostalgia of performance to a nostalgia of childhood.




SOURCE


Charles R.Garoian and Yvonne M. Gaudelius, Spectacle Pedagogy: Art, Politics and Visual Culture (State University of New York Press, Albany, 2008), 63-4.



David Berridge writes and edits the blogzine More Milk Yvette: A Journal of the Broken Screen. moremilkyvette@gmail.com


You tell us that we are children by Theron Schmidt


That Night Follows Day

by Victoria and Tim Etchells

Queen Elizabeth Hall, Southbank Centre


They are 16 performers whose ages range between 8 and 14. They mostly speak in unison, but occasionally in small subgroups, or individually into a microphone. They speak in Dutch, and their words in English are projected onto a blackboard over their heads as they speak. For the most part, the words they say are formed into sentences that have the structure ‘You [something] us’, as in ‘You dress us’ or ‘You feed us’ or ‘You tell us when to sit and when to stand’.


This is the scenario. It’s one in which the possibilities for the precarious, funny, obvious, and unexpected are all bubbling at the surface from the beginning. And the words that are to be spoken have been prepared long before we encounter them. They have been prepared by an adult, Tim Etchells, an expert on theatre, a writer. And systematically, exhaustively, this range of possibility, present from the beginning, is played out. Nothing happens to change the structure of the event: the simple fact of young performers speaking these kinds of sentences written by someone who knows his craft. Nothing happens which is not an exploration of what is apparent from the outset. But as the structure explores itself, I find that my own thoughts about what I am watching change significantly, that the categories that I think I would use to describe it start to break down and become inoperable.


It begins with a tone of accusation. The children speak in unison, reflecting the totality of the extent to which young people’s lives are out of their control. But it’s a totality which overreaches itself. As the list of information that is required of them goes on, it becomes absurdly impossible: the knowledge of right and wrong, the delicacies of every social situation, the history of the world and all of scientific discovery. How do they ever learn all this? How do any of us ever learn all this? Just when I think that this is an incredibly adult thing of which to be aware, the text adopts this adult perspective, with the speakers describing the things that ‘we’ think about ‘them’, our backwards-looking thoughts that have nothing to do with the reality of childhood.


So the text keeps shifting, always one step ahead of me, anticipating any question I think of about what I am watching. I reflect on the challenge of the performance task, the memorisation required – and the text becomes exaggeratedly virtuosic, spilling off into elaborately long constructions and bravado displays of wordplay. I think about the taboos about what children should and shouldn’t think – and the text becomes peppered with obscenities, with bigotries, the petty prejudices and hypocritical judgements of the ‘adult’ world. I think about the theatricality of the situation – and the performers say, ‘You give us words to memorise. You make us stand in lines. You tell us that an actor is only a parrot saying words he cannot understand.’


The obvious thing to say about this piece is that it is a piece about children and the power of adulthood – indeed, the newspaper extract quoted in the festival publicity calls this ‘perhaps the finest show about parenthood and childhood ever produced in Europe’. However, something more subtle and contradictory than this is happening. The piece has childhood as its central theme, but I cannot shake the feeling that somehow the performers have stopped being children – stopped being only children, anyway. Because of being on stage, these children are not really here; or they are not-here at the same time as they are here. Any of them could just as easily be a different child from another school – in fact, they were a different group two years ago when the work was first performed by a group of now-too-old children. And what they are constantly presenting and re-presenting is the idea of what is happening, the idea of a child speaking, represented by a child speaking. The child is both there and is also only the idea of a child being there.


Watching them I think: this is not just about the politics of childhood but about the politics of theatre. I think: something equalising happens to everything that appears on a stage. It’s a peculiar kind of equality, which works by doubling everything so that it is no stronger or weaker than its opposite. No difference, other than the perception of difference, between being and doing. Between reality and illusion. Between human and non-human. Between living and non-living. Between present and absent. Between dancing and walking. Between showing and telling. Between playing and screaming. Between violence and jest. Between mask and face. Between idea and image.


Watching them I think: inside this event, there is no longer any such thing as childhood. There is only the distinction called childhood, the distinction between child and adult. And this distinction – how it is formed and when and why – is a political one, one in which there is much at stake. It is also this distinction which is thoroughly obliterated by this particular theatrical event, precisely through its continuous, unrelenting articulation of ‘you’ and ‘us’. Through the line they keep forming and re-forming at the front of the stage, the line behind which everything is overshadowed by the idea of itself. Through the exhaustion of the structure. Through the way the structure exhausts itself. Watching them I think: what defines childhood, the only thing that defines childhood, is that some group tells some other group that they are children.


It is only in the curtain call, when the performers stand before me looking goofy, pleased and excited for what they’ve done, that they start being children again, and I again feel the responsibility of being an adult. I applaud, encouragingly, in my way of saying ‘well done children’, and at the same time I feel all the condescension of the gesture. But I feel compelled to keep clapping supportively, enthusiastically, in a performance of earnest affection and care – because it’s what adults do.


Theron is a writer and performer. http://www.newworknetwork.org.uk/theron

Small Talk 02 - That Night Follows Day

by Alex Eisenberg


That Night Follows Day by Victoria and Tim Etchells

Queen Elizabeth Hall, Southbank Centre


7th April 2009

7.46pm – 7.51pm

Seat K12 – (A)

Seat K13 – (H)

Seat K14 – (U)


You can read an introduction to Small Talk here.

________________________________________________


7.46pm


A: Hi…

U: Hiya…

A: I was wondering if anyone was going to come and sit next to me.

[LAUGH]

H: Why…were you trying to…sell the seat?

A: No…I was not trying to sell a seat? [ALL LAUGH]

U: Thank you.

A: How are you?

H: Good how are you? [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]

A: I’ve had a busy day. I’ve been cycling like a maniac.

U: Doing what like a maniac?

A: Cycling…yeah…for about three hours…

U: Fantastic! For exercise or to get around?

A: No, I do some work that I need to cycle for.

U: Right…

H: Yeah…[SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]


U: And have you been to other stuff at the Spill Festival?

A: Yeah…I went to Inferno.

U: Yeah, us too.

A: How was that for you?

U: Errrr…I liked it a lot, and I was jet lagged but the next morning I did wake up and want more from it in terms of the way it was [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING] we were jet lagged and the pace…I actually loved the pace…it was very, sort of, mesmerising.

A: Yeah…

U: And then we went to see the installation and we are going to see Purgatorio tomorrow, so it would be good to look at them as a trilogy.

A: As a three?

Where, why were you jet lagged – where had you come from?

U: Syndey.

A: Oh my god! You’ve come all the way from Australia…for the festival specifically?

U: We’re on holiday but yes, for the first week of Spill…then we’re going to Spain.

A: How nice.

U: Yes…so we are seeing lots of shows. [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]

A: Oh great.

So what do you think this is going to be like?

U: I have no idea…I love Tim Etchells and I love Victoria so…it’s ummm…we’ll see….

A: We’ll see…we can’t know necessarily.

U: It’s actually been in Melbourne

A: Oh okay…you didn’t catch it?

U: No I didn’t get to see it…so…so are you an arts…worker…do you work in the arts?

A: I do yeah…

U: Is your cycling for a performance?

A: Err no…its actually for a job, but I’ve been desperately trying - not desperately - I’ve been trying to craft it into a performance for a while. I cycle around so much and I always get very distracted from the actual thing that I have to do.

U: Are you a courier?

A: No I’m not a courier…this is what everyone thinks - that I’m a courier. I’m actually a ‘database collector’ and so I get a list of addresses and I have to go to the addresses and have to basically write down the name of the company that is there…but I get very distracted…in the city. [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]

U: That’s so funny…

A: Yeah…it’s a strange job. So I’d like to make it a performance but I don’t quite know how that’s going to pan out…but it’s definitely in my mind. [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]


U: This obviously didn’t sell out…I’m surprised.

A: Someone did say it had sold out but I don’t…I don’t think it has.

H: How long’s the run?

A: It’s just two nights.

U: Two nights.

H: Oh…

U: I guess this is a big space…but it’s not that full… [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]

H: Two nights…

U: Interesting…

H: I don’t know how people…how they do it…for two nights…we don’t do that. A two-night run seems to be very standard in contemporary performance here, in the UK, and we don’t, we don’t do that.

A: Oh okay…I think its something to do with the fact that its part of the festival…and it’s a way of creating a movement through the festival?

H: Yeah…of course.

U: Yeah

H: But it seems to be…with places outside of the festival context…they seem to do that with live art though…

A: Yeah...I think so.

H: We very rarely do this…in the week…

[SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]

Well you understand…if it’s in a festival, in a large venue like this that seats, what, seven, eight hundred…

A: Yeah…about seven hundred…

H: Then you understand [SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING] when you go and see two nights of another show…and you think about how many people they turned away…

A: What…they turned away people tonight?

H: No, no…we went to see Mem Morrison’s show and you know that was two nights with a capacity of ninety and some people couldn’t get in because it was sold out.

A: That’s a shame…

H: Maybe that’s the first run and then err…it gets picked up by a bigger venue, with more money, who can…err

A: I think that show was also specific to that space, to a certain extent?

H: It wasn’t available because, for weddings and what-not…I believe so….[SOUND OF CHILDREN PLAYING/SCREAMING]

A: It seems to be going quiet now….


7.51pm











THAT NIGHT FOLLOWS DAY













9.00pm




___________________________________________________


To find out about Alex's Small Talk click here: Small Talk by Alex Eisenberg


Alex Eisenberg is an artist making performance. He is helping to coordinate SPILL: Overspill over the course of the festival.