[D-G] theater performance practitioners?

Julia Barclay julia at flyingoutofsequence.org
Sun Oct 16 23:51:58 PDT 2005

These are good questions.  I don't have time to answer them all right now, 
but will contemplate the questions and do what I can as soon as I can.  The 
frustrating thing of course is that seeing the work itself answers more of 
these questions than anything I can say but as I am trying to write a PhD on 
all this, it's a good exercise to try to write about it more clearly.
Answers soon, I hope,
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "malgosia askanas" <ma at panix.com>
To: <deleuze-guattari at driftline.org>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: [D-G] theater performance practitioners?

> Julia wrote:
>> Undermine the reality-grid of right now: meaning that which we say 
>> "that's
>> the way it is" about - either publicly or privately.
>> [...]
>> 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.
> I am a theater/performance practitioner, and am curious about some aspects
> of what you wrote:
> (1) What do you mean by "static nature of language, gesture, character, 
> etc"?
>    Can you give some examples of how your pieces accomplish the uprooting 
> you
>    mention above?
> (2) What is the postulated psychological mechanism whereby such an 
> uprooting
>    of the static nature of language, gesture, character, etc., would bring
>    about a process of "becoming" in the players/writers/etc?  Are there 
> any
>    empirical data to support that contention?  And what kind of a becoming
>    is being hoped for or accomplished - does it matter?
> (3) Who is your intended audience?  I assume they are not, for example,
>    militant neofascists, Christian fundamentalists, career military,
>    or Big Bang fanatics.
> (4) What is the postulated psychological mechanism whereby watching a
>    theatrical piece that accomplishes the uprooting you mention above
>    would bring about a process of "becoming" in the audience?  To bring 
> about
>    a "becoming" in the audience, is it necessary to first accomplish a
>    "becoming" in the performers/writers/etc, or are these independent
>    processes?
> -m
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info: 
> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org 

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list