On 20/2/05 10:50 AM, "Dominic Fox" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I like this idea--that "Fuck the audience" is actually, when it comes to
>> making art, an ethical response to the fact of having an audience.
>
> "Just carry on as if I wasn't here", as the anthopologist said to the
> tribesperson.
Not quite the same. It's impossible in theatre to ignore the fact of an
audience; unless you're Grotowski, theatre doesn't happen unless an audience
is there. They cough and shuffle and rustle chip packets (I remember this
happening in front of me, in one of my own plays, in Adelaide - by the end I
wanted to kill). They complain (overheard by a friend an an STC production
- a pensioner bussed in for the play saying, "Why do they make us come to
these things?") Sometimes they hold very animated conversations. Sometimes
they sit perfectly still with their mouths open. They shape the experience
by their attention and inattention, they make it happen as much as a
performer does. Different stakes, of course: one is the price of admission
and an evening, others are weeks or months of work and thought and the
possibility of ego-crushing failure.
An aggressive attitude might let the art happen, if that is what is desired,
where the tyranny of the audience might inhibit it; and that might apply
where an audience is less visible than in a theatre. And yes, therefore
might be a deeply ethical attitude towards the same audience.
Best
A
Alison Croggon
Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|