Performance process – Page 5 – ________-Safe House-_________

Post Performance Evaluation

Jake Robinson / May 7, 2013May 10, 2013 / Performance process

Safehouse as a project has to be considered a success. Each room provided an extremely different experience for each individual audience member, showcasing to them events and actions which many, myself included, would never have expected to find inside a house. Even as a member of Safehouse I found many of the final performances challenging to my perceptions of a house and home.

The process which we have gone through to create this performance was detailed – with a lot of work going into building the experience for the audience in every single room. As my previous blog’s have shown we worked through a number of ideas in the bedroom. Some were discarded through the process and others have been developed fully and further than even we ever thought possible, to build a piece which I would like to think stood tall on its own merits.

Photo taken 05/02/2013 by Jozey Wade

I would break the audience we performed to in the bed down into three categories, the first is those audience members who felt very comfortable with the situation they had found themselves and embraced it wholeheartedly. We had one particular audience member who was very comfortable in the bed, snuggling up to the assorted teddy bears which were laid out. With a constant smile on their face throughout the reading of Alice in Wonderland and the personal you narrative. This comfort is something which we aimed for with all audience members who were in the bed. This would mean that there was the biggest contrast between those in the bed and the Voyeur.

The second audience category is the one which the majority of the audience fall into. Those who, at first, were rather cautious and to an extent scared/nervous of what they were about to experience but who over the course of the piece relaxed until towards the end they were comfortable enough to interact with me in the bed.

The third audience category I notice was the audience members who simply did not want to be there. These audience members gave a feeling of being exceptionally awkward and uncomfortable throughout the performance. We had two audience members who, for me, defined this category, both of whom simply did not want to get in the bed. They had a large amount of eye contact with the Voyeur and laughed along with them, in a very awkward manner, unnaturally often. When they were convinced that they would be safe in the environment and did get into the bed they laid as far away from me as was possible. Laying deadly still and not moving or reacting to anything whatsoever, leaving with the utmost urgency when the piece came to its conclusion.

If we were to perform this piece again, I think it would be useful to increase the performance time. This would allow us time to make our audience member feel more comfortable in their surroundings before asking them to get into the bed. We could give them a tour of the room, pointing out certain pictures which have particular meaning and explaining this meaning to the audience. Allowing them to interact with us in a casual friendly way, building their confidence in their surroundings and with us before the performance in the bed begins.

I also think that it would be useful to have more of a summery at the end of the performance. By this I mean an individual discussion with our audience members on their experiences, through this I think that we would be able to improve the experience for our audience and hopefully cut out the awkwardness which was felt by the minority.

Empowerment Comes From Bravery

Lauren Simpson / May 7, 2013May 8, 2013 / Documentation, Performance process

The dictionary definition of ‘brave’ is; “having or displaying courage, resolution, or daring; not cowardly or timid.” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/brave?s=t) After completing 2 performances in the ‘Safe House’ I feel that this sums up my experience perfectly. I have never felt such a sense of achievement or felt such pride in myself, as I did after this performance. It gave me a huge sense of empowerment. The empowerment came from, not only being brave enough to be naked in performance, but also from the audience’s reactions. I managed to control what they did, even in the most vulnerable position. Each reaction was different and unpredictable, which made this a very exciting project. At the start of this long process, none of us knew how our final performance would turn out. Even as the process carried on, we had no idea how an audience would react to our piece, particularly the bedroom and the cupboard performance.

The male voyeurs were the more difficult to be confronted with as the blindfold came off. I did not know how they would react to me.

“Do spectators simply watch? Or are they gazing, or gawking? Are they impartial observers, innocent bystanders or voyeurs?” ((Freshwater, Helen (2009) Theatre and Audience, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan p. 2.))

I had no idea where they were looking when I had the blindfold on. Some audience members admitted to me, post-performance, that they were looking at my body. They looked at every single part of me. However, as soon as I took my blindfold off, they couldn’t look anywhere else but my eyes. This in itself gave me a sense of power over them. Using only my eyes, I could control where they looked. Some male voyeurs struggled with eye contact, and admired the pictures on the wall with forced interest. Only half of the male voyeurs that encountered me in the cupboard obeyed the command to get on their knees. The ones that did kneel said they did so because they were scared of what might happen if they didn’t. This is a comment that we did not expect when beginning the performances.

I found looking at the female voyeurs much easier, although I didn’t feel as powerful. I asked them questions in the narrative to which they answered me with a nod or a shake of the head. This was empowering as I controlled their movements and their thoughts for that period of time. However, the narrative was more about bravery and sympathy than power. “There was no unwritten script for the audience to follow, no clear actions to carry out, no roles proffered for adoption; there was simply a provocation.” ((Freshwater, Helen (2009) Theatre and Audience, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan p. 63.)) We wanted to provoke a reaction with simply the use of eye contact. No gestures or movement was used. My body and voice were not needed. Eye contact can be a powerful thing, and it worked in achieving our aim…total power reversal!

Referring back to an earlier post concerning the work of Carolee Schneemann, there are certain boundaries and opinions to overcome when incorporating nudity into performance. I took the following quote and referred to the fact that we would need to be careful with how we approached the subject.

“The line is very fine between making this point clear to the audience, and once again being turned into an object by the still powerful male gaze.” ((Sundberg, M (2011) ‘A One-Work-Artist? Carolee Schneemann and the Reception of her Work’, Konsthistorisk Tidskrift, 80, 3, pp. 168-179.))

The point that this is referring to is; Schneemann tries to subvert the idea that woman are simply an image. By comparing this quote and our performance, I believe we were successful. We reversed the concept of the male gaze as soon as the blindfold was taken off. We made the male voyeurs feel awkward and uncomfortable. We did all this by simply using the female gaze to return the males. All this was accomplished while we were tied, gagged and bound in a cupboard on the wall. So, I think our performance can be summed up in 2 words…girl power!

And it’s over…

Tiffany Abatilda Thompson / May 6, 2013May 12, 2013 / Performance process, Rooms, Uncategorized, West Parade

When first going to the house I thought we had it easy, but I was wrong. You could go along the path and just perform things you do in a house and not go above and beyond and explore the wonders of site specific. Being in the living room was tough as you could get drawn into doing something safe but I feel we really explored with the living room, we really tried to push the limits of what we could do with the space.

photo a0ded08b-610e-46fc-a01f-1bc655d9c222.jpg

Performance Day. 04/05/2013

The most difficult part of the process was finding something strong and developing it. The idea of doing the norm in the living room by watching T.V but exaggerating it so it illuminates the audience to the extent that they see that we are wasting our lives in front of the T.V and social sites. We are not what it used to be like going out and socializing with friends, we are just getting sucked into a uncontrollable void that we can’t get out of. Everybody’s becoming obsessed with T.V shows more than important things in your life such as family, exercise, and friends, and that’s what we wanted to show.

photo c1dc2fda-bae4-4d02-8e9f-112f8892b865.jpg

Performance Day. 04/05/2013

With the interior of ‘Safe House’ being so shabby we thought that dressing the living room in pizza boxes, booze bottles and various rubbish and receipts show’s how people live and have lived but once the T.V is on everything stops. Collecting all rubbish for the living room was especially hard as we needed more for it to look effective and with only three of us collecting them it took some time.

photo a164deb6-3c85-447a-a881-a3b9629121b9.jpg

Performance Day. 04/05/2013

The Performance

Before the actual performance’s that were happening on 1-4^th may, the ‘Safe House’ had a few tester audience members this is when I realized actually how hard this performance is going to be. Even though we are doing very little in this performance, I knew it was going to be quite physical. Our original plan was to stand/or sit in the same position for four straight hours but when we had the audience member’s in for the tester performances staying still for just an hour was so physical. I was finding myself twitching at every point when the spectator turned away from me. I was disappointed as I knew I wasn’t really focusing on the task just the fact of how physical it was. When it was my night to perform I had mixed feelings about how the audience were going to react, are they going to look around? Are they going to pick up things? Are they going to talk to us? Reflecting from other experience’s I thought at least one person is going to try and talk to us.

During my first night of performance we decided to change it a little and alternate who stood up and who sat as I thought it would be fair, now when I look back I regret doing this as I think we would have got a better reaction if we did stand still for the full four hours as I think the strain of doing that would have made the atmosphere in the living room a lot more intense. However, we did get a good reaction from some audience members. Whilst being in the living room one of the pair went into a cupboard and the other was left with us in the living room, most of the audience members just stood there and stared not moving as they felt uncomfortable. One Person in particular had a very different reaction to the rest; Lauren Olerenshaw a current 2^nd year drama student got in the room and felt very uncomfortable as i was facing the T.V I couldn’t really see much of her but from what I could see was that Lauren was very uncomfortable as she kept pacing around. Lauren also tried to get out of the room as I could hear her trying to pull the door. Lauren is an outgoing confident person and to see her so uneasy made me think about the effect the living room had on people. Most of the audience members did feel uneasy I could see some of it in their body language and also when they came to talk to me after the performance.

The last performance of the four days was the best performance yet. The audience member’s were great; we got so many different reactions. Whilst in middle of the performance one pair of audience members came met up after being separated and said the line ‘I understand now’ as a cue line for Libby the rabbit to come bursting through the door, just as they said the line Libby came bursting through. Previous to this we had stacked cans and bottles behind the door so when Libby came through it would make a noise that could be heard all over the house. Just as Libby opened the door the pair jumped out of their skin and screamed. I struggled to keep still as all I wanted to do was laugh, it was the best reaction we had all over the four performance days. Towards the end of the last performance I could feel the strain the house had on me. Saturday’s performance was the best I ever performed throughout the whole process.

If I were to perform again I would love to make the living room bigger and better and play with the idea of hoarding but to the extreme. I would gather more pizza boxes and collect more receipts, newspapers, and books and stack them as high as the ceiling as hoarders are usually organised and have their belongings stacked. I would want to fill the room only leaving a very narrow footpath for the audience to just about fit in. I would also play with the idea of T.V more by maybe adding more T.Vs or adding many laptops to show the audience the obsession with social networking and the internet. Similarly, I would still be sat still but possibly in different unconventional place such as the arm of the sofa, a table, or on a cupboard.

With the baby oil handcuffs and gags…do you still want to see me?
I wasn’t expecting this…

Lauren Bethany Elouise Watson / May 6, 2013May 8, 2013 / Documentation, Home, Performance process, Rooms

In my final performance I cried. I found my way into hysterics. This is because I had female voyeurs in the chair. My friends who know and love me…and who cried first.
When I heard their sobs, it made me realise my situation – that I was actually tied, bound and gagged in a cupboard, naked and completely vulnerable. At first it wasn’t too bad, just a few tears and silent sobs. But by the second female voyeur, we both ended up in hysterical sobs. I had to keep looking at them, the voyeur, my friends in the chair, but it became impossible. By the end of the second female voyeur, I had to cover my face and cry into my hands just as the cupboard doors were closed.

The experience left me shocked, shaken and very emotional. I had never expected to feel like that, I had always expected that the male voyeur would be harder…to look a man in the eye and exert dominance. But to feel empathy from a fellow woman, and to reduce each other to tears is something completely different, unexpected and exceptionally unique and moving. Just like it Marina Abramović’s work, my “audience became genuine co-creators of the performance” ((Freshwater, Helen (2009) Theatre & Audience, London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 63.)). The reactions by all voyeurs, male and female, were triggered by me. My body, and my voice. “You are the topic…You are the centre. You are the occasion. You are the reasons why” ((Freshwater, Helen (2009) Theatre & Audience, London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 1.)), and all these reactions were different. Some men knelt, some studied the pictures around the room with forced intensity, some looked away, others looked confused, sad, and some looked me over.

It was a shame that I couldn’t record the voyeurs reaction to me, my body, my voice. After all, I was getting filmed and observed, so my emotional breakdown was seen not only my the voyeur, but also by the CCTV crew, so it is a shame that the voyeur was in the CCTV blind spot, so only I could see their reactions. I am the only one to see their reactions, and will be the only one. That moment will never be re-shown or re-lived, making it truly a once in a life time experience. The submissive having all the knowledge, and therefore power is honestly an empowering, yet juxtaposed, position.

“When should you be naked and when should you be dressed?
What is performance?
What is the performance body?
…What is your responsibility to your audience?
If the performance is performed again, what are rules?
What is the role of the audience?
Silent voyeur or active participant?
What about reputation?” ((Marina Abramović (2010) ‘Foreword: Unanswered Questions’ in C. Conroy Theatre & the Body, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. viii-x. Pp. ix-x.)).

These questions caused anxiety, especially in relation to the naked body and reputation. I thought it would most difficult to perform to lecturers and men, as I would have to see them again afterwards, and I was worried about my reputation and the working relationship which had been previously developed would be forced to change. However, on the evenings of performance, these turned out to be the easiest. Although initially scared, I began to enjoy the performance; watching their reactions and their discomfort, and final submission was empowering.

Were the audience “just viewers, or accomplices, witnesses, participants?” ((Freshwater, Helen (2009) Theatre & Audience, London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 3.)). In relation to our performance in the bedroom and cupboard, the audience can be seen as all four. The house as a whole challenged the audience/performer relationship, and changed the pre-established dynamic. As they entered our performance space, the audience are unknowingly turned into accomplices and witnesses; witnessing the hidden adult world of the bedroom, while also becoming an accomplice to the performer in the bed, viewing and examining the female form in the cupboard. As performers, we knew what relationship we wanted to forge with the audience; “the relationship with the audience provides the performance with its rationale. This relationship is indispensible” ((Freshwater, Helen (2009) Theatre & Audience, London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 2.)).

Pushing past my personal boundaries, often being pushed rather than walking willingly, while dealing with nudity, the body, and eye contact have definitely shaped me, not only as a performer, but as a person. It’s interesting that at the beginning of this entire adventure I stated that when I was younger, the cupboard was the place which shaped me, and made me grow up faster than I should have done. So to have this experience mirrored is a little disconcerting, but also comforting. This process, although difficult at times, created a moving and unique performance. Not just in the cupboard, but in the bedroom as a whole. By supporting and pushing each other as performers, we managed to create something which we were incredibly proud of, and something which will never be performed again.

“Presence. Being present, over long stretches of time, Until presence rise and falls, from Material to immaterial, from Form to formless, from Instrumental to mental, from Time to timeless” ((Marina Abramović (2010) ‘Foreword: Unanswered Questions’ in C. Conroy Theatre & the Body, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. viii-x. P. viii.)).

Although we have left the house, our rooms and our performances, our presence will always be felt in that house on West Parade. How the rooms were transformed and broke away from the conventions of a ‘house’. The cupboard will now always be tainted, at least in my eyes. A place which created its own meaning and now stirs its own memories.

This experience, this journey, and the barriers I have overcome during this process…nothing can compare to it. And I don’t think it ever will.

Brutality through performance.

Andrew Tinley / April 23, 2013 / Documentation, Performance process, Research, Rooms

Decomposition is regarded as a normal inevitable action in which certain elements can act as catalysts to speed the process along.

In the performance varied jars containing food will populate the space. These jars symbolise the aftermath of consumption. What exactly happens to food when you’ve chewed it, yes it’s been made smaller by your teeth but then what happens on its journey through your body? They’ll be scientists who can analyse the exact transformation but I’m interested in how this can be portrayed and become an integrated performance.

The breakdown of substances in the jar are getting reinforced by the sounds on the soundscape to create a sensory performance outlining the route and transformation of food in an extremely short space of time. The effects that have been added to original sourced sounds make the clips sometimes barely recognisable. As the materials change, whether it is the sound, props or environment, it will signify the constant decay and so representing a constantly changing performance environment. Having barely recognisable sound clips adds to the potential unknowing of the substance in the jar, depending on how long it has been rotting. This sense of the unknowing reinforces the fact that these materials and objects, which are apparent quite significantly in everyday life, can become extremely unfamiliar once transformed. Taking something that we have become comfortable with and then catalysing its transformation in to an unknown or unusual state can increase peoples’ awareness but also makes this performance real. These real and truthful elements of life are touching upon dangerous material which can be left unexplored, yet the exploration of this provides an educative and surreal situation for audience members and so enabling us to explore this material in a safe, controlled and visually simulated environment.

(the photographs above were taken by myself source: flicker)

The images above show the methodology of my approach and so show the transformation of some of the food in the jars. I used catalysts such as fresh air and sunlight to enhance the material and speed the process of decay. Some of them are more advanced them others depending on the dates which are all on the back of the jars. The collaboration of the different levels of deterioration is great to enable the audience to compare and analyse. The strangest thing about these jars is that when fresh food was situated inside it looked quite aesthetically pleasing and created a sense of glory and beauty, but as they started eroding, causing the material from the tops of the jars to crumble, they suddenly became less visually capturing. Concentrating this process allowed me to analyse the destruction on a steady basis enabling me to try and understand the reality of this development.

This cycled performance and overall narrative is the story of food progression. But this process when mixed with performative element creates dilemmas which has made the realistic narrative of this method slightly inaccurate and surreal. As you go through the soundscape a separate story is being expressed visually. This confusion links to the element of control discussed in my earlier posts and so the surreal ambiguity

(the photographs above were taken from http://miista.com/damien-hirst-putrid-profit/ source: flicker)

A Thousand Years by Damien Hirst he brings together a similar cycle, this time though, of life. He uses a dead cow’s head in a box with an Insect-O-Cutor hanging above. This very literal vision of life and death expresses the cycle so shockingly and again touch upon a familiar issue but the exploration has always been censored and limited by cultural attitudes. Similarly to my performance it includes quite literal material which could come across quite shocking and therefore unsettling. This notion of unsettlement occurs throughout my performance and has been a rooted influence and idea throughout my production process. This evident audience reaction has then been reinforced by the intimate relationship between the audiences and the jars of rotting food, alongside the disjointed and metaphorically ‘decomposing soundscape’.