(Photo copyright Clare Elizabeth Owen 2014)
Research, development and execution – three key terms which must be acknowledged and applied when creating a site specific performance. The research must be thorough, detailed and precise – the site must become more than just a place to performance within or a source of inspiration. The site should be fundamental to the performance, the same performance outside of this site would lose its context, as Patrice Pavis notes its “great charm and power” (in Pearson 2010, pp7). Therefore the site is as Fiona Wilkie describes it, a “story teller” (in Pearson 2010, pp8) and the story that it tells must also be researched and developed, allowing it to grow and evolve beyond the classic or modern text it was originally inspired by. Finally the execution of the performance must be precise and deliberate, every visual, text or installation supported by a critical rationale.
For our performance we were given two sister sites to work with, The Usher Gallery and The Collection, both located in the cathedral quarter of the city of Lincoln. We decided to create an installation piece, the first day consisting of curating and cataloguing the items we had collected over the eight weeks and the second day creating the installation and displaying it. Our installation was that of a “Camellia Sinensis”, the tree which produces tea leaves. The tree itself was made of recycled materials such as wine bottles and newspaper, and we then used crockery such as tea cups, tea pots and saucers which we had smashed to create representations of the tea leaves. Each piece of crockery was labelled with a specific tea, such as “Early Grey” and then hung from the tree. On the table during the performance was a video with the pieces of crockery being smashed which was accompanied by a corresponding audio track of breaking crockery. We also created a short performance which took place during the displaying of the tree in which we used a series of tableaus inspired by audience member’s movements we had observed, to create the image of a tea party accompanied by the song “A Very Merry Unbirthday To You” from the Alice in Wonderland sound track.
The Site
The first point to address when beginning to explore the realms of site specific performance was to focus on the site itself. The traditional connotations connected to museums and art galleries is often that they are places which are dull, boring and for either “smart” or “arty” people. Similarly theatre as a cultural institution may also be thought of in this respect by members of the public. Yet both industries are centered on an ideology which is accessible and enjoyed by all ages, genders, ethnicity and cultures; performance. The connection between theatre and performance is easily visible, theatres produce performances whether that is devised or text based for the general public. The connection between museums and art galleries and performance may be less obvious at first glance however it is the “common ground” (Bennett 2012, pp3) that the institutions share.
To first see the connection I had to examine what performance is. Is performance simply the construction and presentation of elements such as plays, dances and music? Or it is something more than just the obvious suggestions? Performance is incredibly hard to define as “there are no clear boundaries” (Schechner 2002, pp171) to separate the performance of everyday life to the performances we see on stages. Furthermore, it is not just humans or animals that can perform but inanimate objects too. The objects within the museums and the art displayed in art galleries are therefore performing to an audience. The presentation of these collections, in particular the exhibitions in museums, are used to “perform the knowledge they create” (Bennett 2012, pp4). For example in our site, the display of the collections of tea sets, performs not only the function of being a) a collection and b) an aesthetically pleasing display but also presents an impression of a particular time period or of the characteristics and interests of the original owner. This is comparable to the way an actor on stage can be deconstructed, for example the costume the actor wears and the place or the way the actor stands presents a representation of the character without necessarily speaking – just like the design of the tea set and the way it is displayed. By the objects “performing” the knowledge there is an immediate sense of truth, the object’s performance supports the documentation that may be placed beside it; without the presence of the object, the documentation would simply be read as a statement lacking in physical evidence.
As both institutions share the same role “of providing entertainment and educational experiences” this does pose a significant issue for museums in particular. If we see a performance at the theatre, we often accept that it is a theatrical piece, not based in truth unless told otherwise. At a museum or art gallery an audience is more inclined to see this as a place which represents “the truth”. An example of where this “truth ideology” was exposed is in the performance piece “The Couple in the Cage” (1992) by Coco Fusco and Guillermo Gómez-Peña, in which two people were displayed in a cage as “authentic” aboriginal inhabitants. Many members of the audience believed in the performances authenticity as the site for this performance was with in places regarded as reputable sites. This showcases that in fact informative sites such as museum are only as “true” as the people who decide on its contents.
(Photo copyright Bomb Magazine)
This idea of questioning the truth was a topic we wished to address in our own performance as although our idea changed radically over the course of the eight weeks, the source of inspiration remained constant – an exhibit of tea cups, collected by the site’s original owner James Usher. Originally we wanted to create a performance centred on memory and the museum. I looked at how specific objects often have a significant place within our brains; evoking not only memories but often triggering an emotional response. Moreover, I looked at how the historical and cultural significance of the authoritative voices such as the museum as being one of “truth” may further distance the participant from their own memories.
Although we were inspired by memories and Memory Theatre, we felt it would be much more effective and interesting to take this very simplistic image of a tea set collection and I aspired to address critical questions such as, why are these tea cups chosen to be in this collection? What would happen to the tea cups if one was damaged or broken? Who makes these decisions about what is displayed and what is not? Why should we perceive these tea cups as being “special”? To do this we collected tea sets from charity shops, a place where unwanted items typically find themselves, smashed the pieces thus traditionally destroying their “value” and created a piece of art from these. Ultimately making items stripped of value, in to art, which may have been perceived by audience members as “valuable”. We felt in order to challenge the power that such institutions as art galleries and museums hold over influencing the public’s decision on what should be perceived as “valuable” or “important” that we should hold our performance outside of these institutions, but follow the same procedures and display rituals that exist within the institution for example, wearing gloves when handling the broken crockery and each person having a set task.
(Photo copyright Mia Kaur)
Critical engagement
In order to engage fully with any artistic or creative institution such as the theatre, an art gallery or a museum, one must take into account and to an extent, project their own personal experiences, interpretations and cultural histories on to both the site as a whole as well as each individual object that is present within the site. To simply view but not to critic is to fall victim to the hegemony of the institution, to merely accept one view point as “the truth” and to become simply a viewer of art and culture as opposed to a participant. By considering our own personal and cultural histories, we can begin to “challenge the dominant speech codes” (Garoian 2001, pp238) allowing a more creative, diverse and collaborative interaction between “us” the participants and “them” the institutions.
(Photo copyright Wrights & Sites)
One performance which relies on the participation of audience members is Wrights & Sites “An Exeter Misguide“. Although the site of this performance is not within a museum or art gallery, the use of a guidebook which creates a state of equilibrium between factual histories as well as “fictional, fanciful, fragile and personal” (Wrights & Sites, 2003) allows the participant to consider their own opinions on the significance of place. Furthermore, by helping to reveal an “unknown side of their city” to the participants, their own psychogeographical map of the city may be radically changed after being exposed to perspectives different to their own. This could then lead the participants into questioning who decides which parts of a city are deemed as “significant” or “important” and why the “hidden” parts of the city are dismissed from the public consciousness.
In our own performance, although we did not need to create an artificial interaction between the public and our installation piece, the audience were free to participate in a way that required little persuasion from us. For example when cataloguing the items, the audience members were free to come up and study the canvas on which the labelled tea cups were placed on. There the audience members were exposed to both common and uncommon variety of teas, which in turn created a dialogue between the audience and the installation. Familiar teas were initially and immediately searched for by participants but once located were bypassed temporarily, as the participants absorbed the names of other teas. One sentence that we documented from the day said by a participant was “there must be more teas than that, have a look on google”. Indeed, we deliberately chose not to incorporate all 3,000 varieties of tea within our installation but display a selection across the 5 main types – Japanese, Chinese, Indian, herbal and compressed.
Documentation
Documentation was used throughout our creative process in order to critically assess and then develop the changes and evolution of our final piece. We were first exposed to the process of documentation in week two when we were each sent a personal invitation detailing tasks to complete prior to the lesson and as well as while we were exploring the space within the museum and gallery. The first sets of tasks to be completed in the city of Lincoln were from Carl Lavery’s “Instructions for Performance in Cities” and were of “two varieties: general and specific” (Lavery 2005, pp.286) The second set of tasks for the museum and gallery replicated a similar system of discovery as the Lavery tasks. Your individual interpretation of the task was crucial in this section as each of us had our own personal tasks to complete. By completing these tasks independently, it allowed me to explore the space at my own pace as well as begin to form ideas about the way in which the site and its contents could be used as a stimulus for the final project.
Ultimately, the tasks themselves were not the critical part of the experience; indeed it was the documentation of the tasks which were significant. Documentation is not only the recording of information, moments in time or experiences for nostalgic purposes, as Matthew Reason states “preserving and making present to see” (2011, pp.164) but also “can be understood as another occurrence” (Ledger et al 2011, pp.164). Documentation often takes place pre-performance as part of research into the site but can also be classed as part of the performance, for example our installation piece was created through the tea sets we collected, smashed and then curated, therefore installation piece of the Tea Tree also served as the documentation for the creative process.
(Photo copyright Aylwyn Walsh)
Documentation can also enable us to make artistic connections between our own work and the work of others, for example in class on the second week we each created a story, an idea or an image from the documentation of the tasks. We gave each creation a title and then used string to see how our ideas and the ideas of others connected to each other. Without the documentation of the tasks, it would have been difficult to collaborate in this way. For example, Waste Land (2010) artist Vik Muniz collected rubbish from the garbage dump to recreate photographs of the workers there, and the process was documented through video before being made in to a film. This is comparable to our piece in two ways; firstly the way in which both piece were created i.e. the collection of “valueless” objects which were then transformed. Secondly, we also used video to document our process, for example we filmed the smashing of the tea cups and then displayed this during performance day.
Evaluation of the performance day and site specific performance
(Photo copyright Aylwyn Walsh)
Overall, the performance day went well for us despite suffering from adverse and ever changing weather conditions – one of the many challenges that can arise with performing outdoors. In terms of audience interest/interaction the results were varied. We did in theory have a constant audience as a consequence of setting the performance site right outside of the museum’s café on a busy Saturday. The level of direct interest from audience members was however lacking, those who were sat inside the café near the windows did watch us from inside but did not venture outside to have a closer look. We did have a few people who were sat outside approach the table to investigate and enquire; however on the whole, this was a performance that many viewed from afar. Although this did not affect us performing, as previously mentioned we did not want to force an interaction between ourselves and the audience, it did mean that only a specific demographic of available and potential audience members got to see our piece. This does therefore have an effect on our intention for the audience to question the “truth” of the museum/art gallery and what should and should not be classed as “valuable”. The issue of attracting a larger audience could have been addressed earlier on in the creative process, although we did not wish to invite audience members directly, we could have created a theatrical invitation on the day to stir up interest.
Contrary to our original plan for performance days i.e. curating and cataloging on the first day and then creating and then creating and displaying on day two, we decided to perform all processes on the same day, a decision which I believe gave more audience members the opportunity to see the performance. Despite this, our performance was still one which audience members would “drop in” to, as although intriguing it was not a piece which would hold an audience’s attention for the duration of the piece – nor was it intended to. On reflection to compensate for this type of audience presence it would have been helpful to include some device, either a text or another video which explained the process we were doing and why, so those who joined later on in the day had some idea of the framing of the piece. We did use documentation to frame the pre-performance smashing of the crockery so it would have been effective to perhaps re-use this technique when it came to the curating and creating processes.
I believe the most effective part of the entire performance was the audio and video of the smashing of the crockery. This was what intrigued those who did step up to the table to approach us in the first place. The reason this video and audio was so effective was firstly, the idea of deliberately destroying or breaking an object is an action we have been socially conditioned to think is deviant from normal behaviour. Therefore the public displaying of this action is immediately intriguing. The audio in particular creates an alluring noise, often when an object is dropped or smashed in a busy café, customers will turn around to see where the sound has come from. The repetition of this noise throughout the day worked effectively to provide a soundtrack and also combined nicely with the wind chime effect that was created by the tree when the wind blew. This video is available on Youtube at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LadHUSttw8A&feature=youtu.be
My perception of the site has not changed radically through this process, as I was already a person that was invested in the function and importance of these institutions, however I do feel that I am at more of an advantage now to critically analyse what I see in art galleries and museums. Furthermore I believe that spaces away from the stage can be used effectively to create original and innovative performances, whereas before I tended to link the term “site specific” with performances such as ghost walks or other performances of that nature as opposed to the sophisticated and complex performances I have now been exposed to. I think one of the most important ideas that has stuck with me throughout this process came from Sue Palmer “it’s not just about the place but the people who normally inhabit it. For it wouldn’t exist without them” (in Pearson 2010, pp8). This phrase has been particularly crucial to me during the creative process as the title “site specific” immediately suggest the importance of the site but not the importance of those who give life to the site with their presence.
Works cited
Bennett, S (2012) Theatre and Museums, Palgrave Macmillan
Bomb Magazine (1993) Coco Fusco and Guillermo Gomez-Pena [photograph] [online] http://bombsite.com/issues/42/articles/1599 [Accessed 19th February 2014]
Fusco, C, Gomez-Pena, G (1992) The Couple in the Cage [online] http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLX2Lk2tdcw [accessed 19th February 2014]
Garoian, Charles R (2001) Performing the Museum, Studies in Art Education Vol. 42, No. 3. (Spring, 2001), pp. 234-248, National Art Education Association
Lavery, C (2005) 25 Instructions for Performance in Cities
Ledger, J, Ellis, S.K, Wright, F (2011) “The Question of Documentation: Creative Strategies in Performance Research” in B. Kershaw and H. Nicholson (ed.) Research Methods in Theatre and Performance, Edinburgh University Press, pp 162-171
Kaur, Mia (2014) Smashed Crockery
Kaur, Mia (2014) Site Specific [online] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LadHUSttw8A&feature=youtu.be [accessed 7th May 2014]
Owen, C (2014) Camellia Senensis
Pearson, M (2010) Site Specific Performance, Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillian
Reason, M (2011) “The Question of Documentation: Creative Strategies in Performance Research” in B. Kershaw and H. Nicholson (ed.) Research Methods in Theatre and Performance, Edinburgh University Press, pp 162-171
Schechner, R (2002) Performance Studies: an Introduction, London: Routledge
Walsh, A (2014) Crockery Hanging
Walsh, A (2014) Tea Party
Waste Land (2010) Directed by Lucy Walker, Arthouse Films
Wrights and Sites (2003) An Exeter Misguide