[D-G] theater performance practitioners?
julia at flyingoutofsequence.org
Sun Oct 16 07:03:17 PDT 2005
To attempt to answer some of your questions, I'm going to cut and past my
theatre company's (and my) 'mission statement' into this email...hopefully
will specify some goals anyway...also if you have access to a journal called
'Performance Research' (a Brit publication) I can direct you to an article
about my work...or you can go to Brunel's "Body Space and Technology"
on-line journal, where there's an article I've written called "How I
Work"... it's hard, always, to translate 4 dimensions to 2, but here's some
Also, as to other responses to my query on the list: thanks. I do
appreciate them and am slow to absorb this stuff...attempting to find a
language to discuss the work I do and also the possible larger frames it can
Here's the vision...hope it clarifies...any responses are welcome...
Apocryphal Theatre's artistic vision/desire/hope is to:
Undermine the reality-grid of right now: meaning that which we say "that's
the way it is" about - either publicly or privately.
Regarding: class/money, race/ethnicity, gender/sex, religion/God,
realpolitik/politics, nationalism/patriotism, war/peace,
Through: the creation of theatrical work that challenges these assumptions
by, first, owning them as our own (not pawning it off on an "other" which
somehow creates a world in which we live as victims), exploring the depths
of our own assumptions/investments and investigating our own "desiring
machines" (concept from Gilles Deleuze/ Felix Guattari). The
Deleuze/Guattari theory is that we all, to some extent carry within us
fascistic investments (meaning investments in a state of "being") and
revolutionary investments (meaning investments in the process of
"becoming"). Their desire was to enact a kind of radical psychology
wherein our fascistic investments could be examined, owned and somehow
uprooted to bring about a social investment in something other than
"being" - i.e., a static, repressive environment which rewards conformity
and a certain kind of subservience to an other-centered order of things as
they are. Their vision has to do with a more revolutionary social body -
one in which the process of becoming itself is integral to living, and there
is no need to impose a hegemonic force onto other living creatures (examples
of this now and in the past: capital, Christianity and other
Evangelical/missionary religions, slavery, women as property, man's dominion
over/destruction of nature, psychology, "the Big Bang", etc.) This is an
incredible reduction of everything they said, but serves as a useful
starting point for the goals of our theatrical experiments.
How: by creating theatrical pieces that uproot the static nature of
language, gesture, character, etc. in such a way as to bring about this
process of becoming: first in our own bodies/souls/minds as
players/writers/designers/choreographers/directors and thence into the
bodies/minds/souls of the audience.
Why: to make visible the construction of the language with which we create
the world we perceive; to allow us a moment in the gap between the
understood and the unknown, to listen for the voices which have not yet
formed, not yet been heard but still call to us in an undefined language
which is perhaps no less real or pressing for being as yet unwritten.
- written by Julia Lee Barclay (1999; revised for Apocryphal in 2005)
for further info, email: julialeebarclay at yahoo.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Liza Kozner" <liza_kozner at yahoo.co.uk>
To: <deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: [D-G] theater performance practitioners?
>I am following a track around Performance, like: the destratification of
>the organism (cfr ATP)
> On nummerous occasions, i saw statements on this list people saying: "but
> it is important to be careful in the destratification process", as DG
> quoting Artaud and Michaux, etc. "
> I think Performance could be confronted to this idea. Then the question:
> what is this process of destratification of the organism, what does it
> imply, technically speaking, pragmatically, how could we elaborate the
> process. More generally, why should we destratify the organism, but more
> precisely: with what tools, what are the operations. I don't know the
> context of your research or the quality of your artistry, but the question
> seems to me full of possibilities, an interesting question what.
> Julia Barclay <julia at flyingoutofsequence.org> wrote:
> Have not answered yet because all the questions are big and I have been
> incredibly busy and not able to give them time...be patient and I will
> thanks for caring about it.
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new
> Yahoo! Security Centre.
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org
More information about the Deleuze-Guattari