Ruptured relations : guerrilla theatre, time & Pranksterish disability performance practice

Guerrilla theatre tends, by its very definition, to pop up unpredictably – it interrupts what people might see as the proper or typical flow of time, place and space. The subversive tenor of such work means that questions about ‘what has happened’ tend to the decidedly less polite form of ‘WTF’ as passersby struggle to make sense of, and move on from, moments in which accustomed narratives of action and interaction no longer apply. In this paper I examine examples of guerrilla theatre by performers with disabilities in terms of these ruptures in time, and the way they prompt reflection, reconfigure relations, or recede into traditional relations again - focusing particularly on comedian Laurence Clark. Many performers with disabilities – Bill Shannon, Katherine Araniello, Aaron Williamson, Ju Gosling, and others – find guerrilla-style interventions in public places apposite to their aesthetic and political agendas. They prompt passersby to reflect on their relationship to people with disabilities. They can be recorded for later dissection and display, teaching people something about the way social performers, social spectators and society as a whole deal with disability. In this paper, as I unpack Clark's work, I note that the embarrassment that characterises these encounters can be a flag of an ethical process taking place for passersby. Caught between two moments in which time, roles and relationships suddenly fail to flow along the smooth routes of socially determined habits, passersbys’ frowns, gasps and giggles flag difficulties dealing with questions about their attitude to disabled people they do not now know how to answer. I consider the productivity, politics and performerly ethics of drawing passersby into such a process – a chaotic, challenging interstitial time in which a passersbys choices become fodder for public consumption – in such a wholly public way.

Women and ADR

Alternative dispute resolution, or ‘ADR’, is defined by the National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council as: … an umbrella term for processes, other than judicial determination, in which an impartial person assists those in a dispute to resolve the issues between them. ADR is commonly used as an abbreviation for alternative dispute resolution, but can also be used to mean assisted or appropriate dispute resolution. Some also use the term ADR to include approaches that enable parties to prevent or manage their own disputes without outside assistance. A broad range of ADR processes are used in legal practice contexts, including, for example, arbitration, conciliation, mediation, negotiation, conferencing, case appraisal and neutral evaluation. Hybrid processes are also used, such as med-arb in which the practitioner starts by using mediation, and then shifts to using arbitration. ADR processes generally fall into one of three general categories: facilitative, advisory or determinative. In a facilitative process, the ADR practitioner has the role of assisting the parties to reach a mutually agreeable outcome to the dispute by helping them to identify the issues in dispute, and to develop a range of options for resolving the dispute. Mediation and facilitated negotiation are examples of facilitative processes. ADR processes that are advisory involve the practitioner appraising the dispute, providing advice as to the facts of the dispute, the law and then, in some cases, articulating possible or appropriate outcomes and how they might be achieved. Case appraisal and neutral evaluation are examples of advisory processes. In a determinative ADR process, the practitioner evaluates the dispute (which may include the hearing of formal evidence from the parties) and makes a determination. Arbitration is an example of a determinative ADR process. The use of ADR processes has increased significantly in recent years. Indeed, in a range of contemporary legal contexts the use of an ADR process is now required before a party is able to file a matter in court. For example, Juliet Behrens discusses in Chapter 11 of this book how the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) now effectively mandates attendance at pre-filing family dispute resolution in parenting disputes. At the state level, in Queensland, for example, attendance at a conciliation conference can be required in anti-discrimination matters, and is encouraged in residential tenancy matters, and in personal injuries matters the parties must attend a preliminary compulsory conference. Certain ADR processes are used more commonly in the resolution of particular disputes. For example, in family law contexts, mediation and conciliation are generally used because they provide the parties with flexibility in terms of process and outcome while still ensuring that the negotiations occur in a positive, structured and facilitated framework. In commercial contexts, arbitration and neutral evaluation are often used because they can provide the parties with a determination of the dispute that is factually and legally principled, but which is also private and more timely than if the parties went to court. Women, as legal personalities and citizens of society, can find themselves involved in any sort of legal dispute, and therefore all forms of ADR are relevant to women. Perhaps most commonly, however, women come into contact with facilitative ADR processes. For example, through involvement in family law disputes women will encounter family dispute resolution processes, such as mediation. In this chapter, therefore, the focus is on facilitative ADR processes and, particularly, issues for women in terms of their participation in such processes. The aim of this chapter is to provide legal practitioners with an understanding of issues for women in ADR to inform your approach to representing women clients in such processes, and to guide you in preparing women clients for their participation in ADR. The chapter begins with a consideration of the ways in which facilitative ADR processes are positive for women participants. Next, some of the disadvantages for women in ADR are explored. Finally, the chapter offers ways in which legal practitioners can effectively prepare women clients for participation in ADR. Before embarking on a discussion of issues for women in ADR, it is important to acknowledge that women’s experiences in these dispute resolution environments, whilst often sharing commonalities, are diverse and informed by a range of factors specific to each individual woman; for example, her race or socio-economic background. This discussion, therefore, addresses some common issues for women in ADR that are fundamentally gender based. It must be noted, however, that providing advice to women clients about participating in ADR processes requires legal practitioners to have a very good understanding of the client as an individual, and her particular needs and interests. Some sources of diversity are discussed in Chapters 13, 14 and 15.

After Darkly Catwalk Design, QUT Fashion Graduate Showcase 2013

QUT Fashion collaborated with QUT Interior Design to design the Catwalk for the After Darkly Graduate Fashion Show 2013. The ephemeral work (catwalk canopy) was developed through a collaboration between the authors based upon an undergraduate interior design unit 'Filmic Interiors'. The unit exploited the potential of film to influence, understand, and develop novel interior spaces – particularly through consideration of mise en scene, cinematic effects and atmospheric design strategies engaged by key film directors. The design outcome represented a hybridisation of student design proposals, contemplating both film and emerging fashion collections from QUT fashion graduate class of 2013. The creative work built upon material experimentation research explored by the designers either through prior QUT interior design units ('Strange Spaces') or through previous practice ‘Making Strange’(1). The work explored a number of iterations each testing material qualities and associated immaterial cinematic affects. The final catwalk proposed a unique design, which posited the spectators centrally within the space, encircled by a hand formed flexible material canopy used as an entrance for the fashion collections. The proposal exploited the malleable yet tensile character of the canopy to inform a temporary installation, intensified further through a varied program of sceno-graphic lighting. (1) Lindquist, M. & Pytel, A. (2013)

Theatre, co-creativity & co-creative spectatorship

Theatre is a socially and politically aware artform. It participates in the construction – and, potentially, the contestation – of a community’s history, identity, and ideals. It does this live, in the moment, where artist, artwork and audience meet here, now, together. This, most theatre makers think, gives theatre special power to make spectators think about the stories it stages. But it also creates challenges.

The Ex/centric fixations project # 2 - Memory, language and polyvocal performative writing

In this paper, Bree Hadley discusses The Ex/centric Fixations Project, a practice-led research project which explores the inadequacy of language as a technology for expressing human experiences of difference, discrimination or marginalisation within mainstream cultures. The project asks questions about the way experience, memory and the public discourses available to express them are bound together, about the silences, failures and falsehoods embedded in any effort to convey human experience via public discourses, and about how these failures might form the basis of a performative writing method. It has, to date, focused on developing a method that expresses experience through improvised, intertextual and discontinous collages of language drawn from a variety of public discourses. Aesthetically, this method works with what Hans Theis Lehmann (Postdramatic Theatre p. 17) calls a “textual variant” of the postdramatic “in which language appears not as the speech of characters – if there are still definable characters at all – but as an autonomous theatricality” (Ibid. 18). It is defined by what Lehmann, following Julia Kristeva, calls a “polylogue”, which presents experience as a conflicted, discontinuous and circular phenomenon, akin to a musical fugue, to break away from “an order centred on one logos” (Ibid. 32). The texts function simultaneously as a series of parts, and as wholes, interwoven voices seeming almost to connect, almost to respond to each other, and almost to tell – or challenging each other’s telling – of a story. In this paper, Hadley offers a performative demonstration, together with descriptions of the way spectators respond, including the way their playful, polyvocal texture impacts on engagement, and the way the presence or non-presence of performing bodies to which the experiences depicted can be attached impacts on engagement. She suggests that the improvised, intertextual and experimental enactments of self embodied in the texts encourage spectators to engage at an emotional level, and make-meaning based primarily on memories they recall in the moment, and thus has the potential to counter the risk that people may read depictions of experiences radically different from their own in reductive, essentialised ways.

Playing Pranks: Traditions, communities & co-creative cultural performance practice

Pranks, hoaxes and practical jokes are co-creative cultural performance practices that appear across times, contexts and cultures. These practices include everyday play amongst families, friends and coworkers, entertainment programs such as Prank Patrol, Punked or Scare Tactics, and aesthetic and activist pranks perpetrated by situationist artists, guerrilla artists, and, most recently, culture ‘jammers’ or ‘hackers’ intent on turning capitalist systems back on themselves. Although it can, in common usage, describe almost any show off behaviour, a prank in the strictest definition of the term is a performance that deploys a very specific set of strategies. It is an act of trickery, mischief, or deceit, that must be taken as real, and momentarily cause real fear, anger or worry for an unwitting spectator-become-performer, who is meant to play along until the trick is revealed and their response can be represented back to the prankster, other spectators, or society as a whole, either for the sake of entertainment or for the sake of commentary on a cultural phenomenon. A prank, in this sense, deliberately blurs the boundaries between daily and dramatic performance. It creates a moment of uncertainty, in which both the prankster’s ability to be creative, clever, or culturally astute, and the prankee’s ability to play along, discern the trick, discern the point of the trick, and, in the end, be duped, be a good sport, or even play/pay the prankster back, are both put to the test. In this paper, I consider a number of pranking traditions popular where I am in Australia, from the community-building pranks of footballers, bucks parties and ‘drop bear’ tales told to tourists, to the more controversial pranks of radio shock jocks, activists and artists. I use performance, spectatorship and ethical theory to examine the engagement between prankster, pranked spectator, and other spectators, in this most distinctive sort of community-driven performance practice, and the way it builds and breaks status, social and other sorts of relationships within and between specific communities.

When film, fashion & interiors collide: Designing the After Darkly Graduate Fashion Show

In 2013 QUT Interior Design and Fashion Disciplines partnered to design the Catwalk for the QUT After Darkly Graduate Fashion Show. The ephemeral work (catwalk canopy and cinematic affects) was developed through collaboration between the authors based upon an undergraduate interior design unit ‘Filmic Interiors’ in which students were tasked with designing a fashion show. Filmic Interiors exploited the potential of film to influence, understand, and develop novel interior spaces through consideration of mise-en-scene, cinematic effects and atmospheric design strategies engaged by key film directors Jean Pierre Jeunet and Darren Aronofsky. The design outcome represents a hybridisation of student design proposals, contemplating both film and emerging collections from graduate fashion students. The work explored a number of iterations each testing material qualities and immaterial cinematic affects, as a means to develop new space. The process was led by experimentation undertaken by the designers through previous studio explorations surrounding the theme of ‘Strange Space’ and design practice ‘Making Strange’(Lindquist & Pytel, 2012). In doing so, the work paralleled the material formations of ‘obsessive collections’ and ‘making do’ evident in Jeunet’s scenography, rendering uncanny hybrid space (Ezra, 2008). Evocation of the immaterial found in much of director Aronofsky’s work, also became critical in the atmospheric experience intended for the show. This paper explores the process of collaboration and material experimentation in design, approached through a filmic lens. It provides insight into what happens when one enters into what can be termed an ‘ecology of production’, whereby the experimental making becomes the collaborative agent between designers, disciplines, and between stage and spectators. Finally it underlines the importance of ‘finding the work’ through material making and testing rather than through more controlled formalistic responses.

Public history, private memories: Historical imagination in the new Italian cinema 1988-1999

The concern with the following arguments started during a study of national and international cinemas, from the desire to account for a cinema that internationally was doing well, but was undervalued domestically. The aims were to account for the renewal of Italian filmmaking from 1988, the New Italian cinema, and understand the conditions behind this renewal. The thesis identifies in the historical theme and in the recurrence of features from Italian cinema history elements of coherence with previous cinema production. The first consideration that emerges is that a triangulation between a new generation of filmmakers, their audience and recent history shaped the recovery of Italian cinema from 1988. A second consideration is that no discussion of Italian cinema can be separated from a discussion of that which it represents: Italian society and politics. This representation has not only addressed questions of identity for a cohort of spectators, but on occasions has captured the attention of the international audience. Thus the thesis follows a methodologic approach that positions texts in relation to certain traditions in Italian filmmaking and to the context by taking into consideration also industrial factors and social and historical changes. By drawing upon a range of disciplines, from political history to socio-psychological studies, the thesis has focussed on representation of history and memory in two periods of Italian film history: the first and the last decade of twentieth century. The concern has been not so much to interpret the films, but to understand the processes that made the films and how spectarors have applied their knowledge structures to make meaning of the films. Thus the thesis abstains from ascribing implicit meanings to films, but acknowledges how films project cultural contingencies. This is beacause film is shaped by production conditions and cultural and historical circumstances that make the film intelligible. As Bordwell stated in Making Meaning, "One can do other things with films besides 'reading' them" (1989, p. xiii). Within this framework, the thesis proposes a project that understands history films with the norms that govern Italian filmic output, those norms that regulate conditions of production and consumption and the relation between films from various traditions.

Teaching about deliberative politics: Case studies of classroom–community learning projects in four nations

Theories of deliberative politics position grass-roots community members as more than spectators of politics, and instead recognize their capacity for political engagement by discussing and evaluating options in order to make decisions about issues affecting community life. The processes and products of journalism can assist deliberative politics by providing community members with information resources that are vital for understanding the root causes of problems, weighing up competing claims, forming networks around shared concerns, reaching decisions and undertaking action. This article presents the findings of case studies of four community–classroom projects--one each from Australia, New Zealand, the United States and South Africa--that develop the capacity of journalism students to be effective contributors to deliberative politics. The research points to the importance of learning activities that prepare students to work in diverse communities, map significant community places and structures, identify leaders and stakeholders, engage in respectful dialogue about problems and perspectives, and appreciate community frames and values.

Performing immobility / protesting immobility: The risks & rewards of public space protest performances

Though there is much interest in mobilities and performing mobilities as a characteristic of modern, urban, social life today, this is not always matched by attention to immobilities, as the flipside of mobility in modern life. In this paper, I investigate public space performances designed to draw attention to precisely this counterpoint to current discourses of mobilities – performances about the socially produced immobilities many people with disabilities find a more fundamental feature of day-to-day life, the fight for mobility, and the freedom found when accommodations for alternative mobilities are made available. Although public policy is increasingly aligned with a social model of disability, which sees disability as socially constructed through systems, institutions and infrastructure deliberately designed to exclude specific bodies – stairs, curbs, queues and so forth – and although governments in the US, UK, and to a lesser degree Australia, New Zealand and other Commonwealth nations aim to address these inequalities, the experience of immobility is still every-present for many people. This often comes not just from pain, or from impairment, or event from lack of accommodations for alternative mobilities, but from fellow social performers’ antipathy to, appropriation of, or destruction of accommodations designed to facilitate access for a range of different bodies in public space, and thus the public sphere. The archetypal instance of this tension between the mobile, and those needing accommodations to allow mobility, is, of course, the antipathy many able bodied people feel towards the provision of disabled parking spaces. A cursory search online shows thousands of accounts of antagonism, vitriol, and even violence prompted by disputes which began when a disabled person asked an able person to exit a designated disabled parking space. For many, it seems, expecting them to pass by such parks so others can experience the mobility they take for granted is too much. In this paper, I examine a number of protest performances in public space in which activist present actions – for example, placing wheelchairs in every regular parking space in a precinct – to give bystanders, passersby and spectators, as well as antagonistic fellow social performers, a sense of what socially produced immobility feels like. I examine responses to such protest performances, and what they say about the potential social, political and ethical impacts of such protests, in terms of their potential to produce new attitudes to mobility, alternative mobility, and access to alternative modes of mobility.

Theatre, networked performance, and notions of ‘democratised’ spectatorship

The potential to cultivate new relationships with spectators has long been cited as a primary motivator for those using digital technologies to construct networked or telematics performances or para-performance encounters in which performers and spectators come together in virtual – or at least virtually augmented – spaces and places. Today, with Web 2.0 technologies such as social media platforms becoming increasingly ubiquitous, and increasingly easy to use, more and more theatre makers are developing digitally mediated relationships with spectators. Sometimes for the purpose of an aesthetic encounter, sometimes for critical encounter, or sometimes as part of an audience politicisation, development or engagement agenda. Sometimes because this is genuinely an interest, and sometimes because spectators or funding bodies expect at least some engagement via Facebook, Twitter or Instagram. In this paper, I examine peculiarities and paradoxes emerging in some of these efforts to engage spectators via networked performance or para-performance encounters. I use examples ranging from theatre, to performance art, to political activism – from ‘cyberformaces’ on Helen Varley Jamieson’s Upstage Avatar Performance Platform, to Wafaa Bilal’s Domestic Tension installation where spectators around the world could use a webcam in a chat room to target him with paintballs while he was in residence in a living room set up in a gallery for a week, as a comment on use of drone technology in war, to Liz Crow’s Bedding Out where she invited people to physically and virtually join her in her bedroom to discuss the impact of an anti-disabled austerity politics emerging in her country, to Dislife’s use of holograms of disabled people popping up in disabled parking spaces when able bodied drivers attempted to pull into them, amongst others. I note the frequency with which these performance practices deploy discourses of democratisation, participation, power and agency to argue that these technologies assist in positioning spectators as co-creators actively engaged in the evolution of a performance (and, in politicised pieces that point to racism, sexism, or ableism, pushing spectators to reflect on their agency in that dramatic or daily-cum-dramatic performance of prejudice). I investigate how a range of issues – from the scenographic challenges in deploying networked technologies for both participant and bystander audiences others have already noted, to the siloisation of aesthetic, critical and audience activation activities on networked technologies, to conventionalised dramaturgies of response informed by power, politics and impression management that play out in online as much as offline performances, to the high personal, social and professional stakes involved in participating in a form where spectators responses are almost always documented, recorded and re-represented to secondary and tertiary sets of spectators via the circulation into new networks social media platforms so readily facilitate – complicate discourses of democratic co-creativity associated with networked performance and para-performance activities.

The prankster’s passion: Using theatrical terms to unpack players motivations in popular social performance

Amongst social players, the prank, as a social performance form, holds a lot of potential to impact on personal, relational and social status within a group or between one group and another group. More than simply showing off, a prank in the strictest definition of the term, is a social performance in which one player, a prankster, deploys mischief, trickery or deceit, to cause a moment of anxiety, fear or anger about a happening for another spectator-become-collaborating-player, a prankee – to enhance social bonds, entertain, or comment on a social, cultural or political phenomenon. During a prank, the prankster’s ability to be creative, clever or culturally astute, and the prankee’s ability to be duped, be a good sport, play along, or even play/pay the prankster back, both become fodder for other spectators and society to scrutinize. In Australia, pranking traditions are popular with many social groups, from the community-building pranks of footballers, bucks parties and ‘drop bear’ tales told to tourists, to the more controversial pranks of radio shock jocks, activists and artists. In this paper, I consider whether theatrical terms – theoretical terms from the stage such as actor, acting, objective, arc, performance, audience and emotion, such as those offered by Joseph Roach – are useful in understanding the passion some social players show for pranksterism. Are theatrical terms such as Roach’s as useful as analysts of social self-performance such as Erving Goffman suggest they are? Do they assist in understanding the personal actions, reactions and emotions of prankster and prankee? Do they assist in understanding the power relations between prankster and prankee? Do they assist in understanding the relation between the prank – be it an everyday prank amongst families, friends and coworkers, an entertainment program prank of the sort seen on Prank Patrol, Punked or Scare Tactics, or an activist pranks perpetrated by a guerrilla artist, ‘jammers’ or ‘hackers’ intent on turning dominant social systems back on themselves – the social players, and the public sphere in which the prank takes place? I reflect on how reading pranks as performances, by players, for highly participatory audiences, helps understand why they are so prevalent, and so recurrent across times, cultures and contexts, and also so controversial when not performed well enough – or when performed too well – prompting outrage from the prankster, prankee or society as passionate as any debate about a performance by players in a theatre.