Uncertainties that matter : risk, response-ability, ethics and the moment of exchange in Live Art

This article examines the moment of exchange between artist, audience and culture in Live Art. Drawing on historical and contemporary examples, including examples from the Exist in 08 Live Art Event in Brisbane, Australia, in October 2008, it argues that Live Art - be it body art, activist art, site-specific performance, or other sorts of performative intervention in the public sphere - is characterised by a common set of claims about activating audiences, asking them to reflect on cultural norms challenged in the work. Live Art presents risky actions, in a context that blurs the boundaries between art and reality, to position audients as ‘witnesses’ who are personally implicated in, and responsible for, the actions unfolding before them. This article problematises assumptions about the way the uncertainties embedded in the Live Art encounter contribute to its deconstructive agenda. It uses the ethical theory of Emmanuel Levinas, Hans-Thies Lehmann and Dwight Conquergood to examine the mechanics of reductive, culturally-recuperative readings that can limit the efficacy of the Live Art encounter. It argues that, though ‘witnessing’ in Live Art depends on a relation to the real - real people, taking real risks, in real places - if it fails to foreground theatrical frame it is difficult for audients to develop the dual consciousness of the content, and their complicity in that content, that is the starting point for reflexivity, and response-ability, in the ethical encounter.

Spank performance tour [at National Review of Live Art 2008]

Spank is a duet about two women’s journeys as they play out different roles. One woman recalls stinging anecdotes marked by intimacy, jealousy, fear and fantasy from her childhood in the 70s suburbs – round the corner from where Mike Leigh would film Life Is Sweet. Her Double (projected on screen) reads from a newspaper about an event that punctured the local community, creating an enduring cultural scar, her voice lacking emotion. Both women must eventually face one another and ask, who is deceiving whom? The consequences of guilt and shame and the unstable shift from private memory to public consequence is inevitable and deadly.[ABSTRACT BY THE AUTHOR]

Review of "Christoph Schlingensief : art without borders" edited by Tara Forrest and Anna Teresa Scheer

Christoph Schlingensief: Art Without Borders, edited by Tara Forrest and Anna Teresa Scheer, is the first English-language collection of essays about this extraordinary German artist. As Forrest and Scheer suggest in their introduction, ‘access to Schlingensief’s highly challenging productions has been hampered by the fact that very little has been published on his oeuvre in the English-speaking world’. This collection aims to introduce English-speaking artists, scholars and academics to Schlingensief’s extensive, experimental, and at times highly controversial body of work across film, theatre, television, live art and activism...

Insider comes out : an artist's inquiry and narrative about the relationship of art and mental health

Background Through an account of prevailing experiences of art and mental illness, this paper aims to raise awareness, open dialogue and create agency about art created by people with experience of mental illness. Methods This paper draws on personal narrative and inquiry by an artist with mental illness and data collected as part of a larger participatory action research project that investigated understandings of identity, art and mental illness. Result An inquiry through art raised awareness and attentiveness to the importance of choice in identity construction and exposed frequent dichotomies in art and mental illness that were negotiated to eschew prescribed social stratification. As an artist, the first author challenged values present in one idea and absent in the other, and the options and concessions available to authorise her own dialogue and agency of being an artist. Conclusion Constructing an identity is an important part of being human, the labels that we choose or are chosen for us attribute to our identity. Reflections and recommendations are offered to consider expanded ways of thinking about art and mental illness and the functions that art play in identity construction.

Medeleven

Medeleven was a practice-based research work that challenged conventional notions of how audiences ‘experience’ contemporary dance. It resulted in a 40 minute ‘experiential’ performance that inverted the traditional ‘passive’ presentation paradigm by situating the audience centrally within the creative process. The ‘traditional presentation paradigm’ was inverted in numerous ways including: asking the audience onstage with the performers, placing swings onstage for the audience to play on during the performance and guiding the audience through backstage corridors before entering onstage – all of which added elements of physicality, agency and liminality to the performance not usually available to audience members of contemporary dance. Five dancers moved throughout the space allowing the audience to choose where and how they engaged with this work and the swings were utilised both as a performance space and for audience seating. In addition to these spatial variations, the quadraphonic soundscore created distinct ‘environments’ throughout the stage space that varied individual experience possibilities. By positing performance as an experiential phenomenon, the pivotal objective of this work was to create a live-art experience that extended its performativity to include audience members as active meaning-makers, challenging both their role within this paradigm and their expectations of contemporary dance. The work produced strong responses from the audience with surveys indicating the presentation format, as well as the construction of the work, changed audience experience and ability to connect with the dance work. The research suggested that, in addition to existing research on dance audiences, barriers to engagement with contemporary dance may include how the art is constructed and where the audience is positioned within that creative framework. The research builds upon artistic practices being undertaken throughout the world that challenge the notion of existing ‘passive’ performance paradigms via creative ‘engagement’ with audience.

The moment of exchange : risk, vulnerability, responsibility

Any cycle of production and exchange – be it economic, cultural or aesthetic – involves an element of risk. It involves uncertainty, unpredictability, and a potential for new insight and innovation (the boom) as well as blockages, crises and breakdown (the bust). In performance, the risks are plentiful – economic, political, social, physical and psychological. The risks people are willing to take depend on their position in the exchange (performer, producer, venue manager or spectator), and their aesthetic preferences. This paper considers the often uncertain, confronting or ‘risky’ moment of exchange between performer, spectator and culture in Live Art practices. Encompassing body art, autobiographical art, site-specific art and other sorts of performative intervention in the public sphere, Live Art eschews the artifice of theatre, breaking down barriers between art and life, artist and spectator, to speak back to the public sphere, and challenge assumptions about bodies, identities, memories, relationships and histories. In the process, Live Art frequently privileges an uncertain, confrontational or ‘risky’ mode of exchange between performer, spectator and culture, as a way of challenging power structures. This paper examines the moment of exchange in terms of risk, vulnerability, responsibility and ethics. Why the romance with ‘risky’ behaviours and exchanges? Who is really taking a risk? What risk? With whose permission (or lack thereof)? What potential does a ‘risky’ exchange hold to destabilise aesthetic, social or political norms? Where lies the fine line between subversive intervention in the public sphere and sheer self-indulgence? What are the social and ethical implications of a moment of exchange that puts bodies, beliefs or social boundaries at ‘risk’? In this paper, these questions are addressed with reference to historical and contemporary practices under the broadly defined banner of Live Art, from the early work of Abrovamic and Burden, through to contemporary Australian practitioners like Fiona McGregor.

Lighter than Tai

YEAR: 2008 ROLE: Performer FORMAT: Live Art Event at Tiananmen Square Beijing, China (3 hours) and Later on Summit of Mt. Tai Shan, Shandong Province, China (6 hrs + 3 hrs). WITH: Solo WHAT: In the Hall of Reverence on Tiananmen Square, Beijing Mao Zedong's body lies in state surrounded by flowers and draped with a Red Flag of Communist China. His casket with a glass top lies on a black stone from Mt. Tai, reflecting the quotation from Sima Qian (China's Han Dynasty historian) that "One's life can be weightier than Mt. Tai or lighter than a goose feather". This pair of performances were a quiet, personal reflection upon what such a once revolutionary expression might mean in today's very different time and place. The work was conceived during the Olympic Cultural Festival showing of Intimate Transactions (www.intimatetransactions.com) - during the tumultuous times leading up to China's proudly staged August 2008 Olympics. The rise and rise of China had long been generating major geopolitical, ecological and cross-cultural shifts throughout the region and beyond. In this dramatic epicentre of change and at a time of such great national pride, how might we each act in ways that are ecologically 'mighty' and yet simultaneously have an impact lighter than a goosefeather? This is both a question for China in its relations with the autonomous provinces and the environment as it is for all of us in our own 'local' affairs. However ecologically speaking all that is of local concern is of global concern and noone can therefore be exempt from the need to sustain that which we share in common and must all protect for the future. Performance 1: Tiananmen Square, Beijing: Dropping 100 goose feathers. Performance 2: The summit of Mt Tai, Shandong Province. Building a mountain from Goose Feathers. SHOWING HISTORY: 1: Anniversary of Protest Crackdown, Jun 8th 2008. 2: Dawn on Tai Shan's summit, 15th June, 2008 DETAILS: Performance 1: Begin an hour after dawn (5.45am) in Tiananmen Square Bring pre-prepared performance shirt, a bag of goose feathers tipped with red. Begin at the "Gate of Heavenly Peace" under the image of Chairman Mao. Circumnavigate the world's largest open and the most surveilled public space 5 times dropping feathers periodically. Meditate on Forces of Change. Finally enter Chairman Mao's mausoleum with the masses and move quietly past his preserved body. End the performance at the Gate of Heavenly Peace 3 hours later. Performance 2: Walk up Mt. Tai Shan in silence meditating on Forces of Change (6 hours). Stay overnight on the summit. Begin an hour before dawn (3.45am) in silence. Bring performance shirt, a sack of goose feathers and a simple wooden structure. On the sunrise viewing side of the mountain build a miniature, fragile 'mountain' in goose feathers and sticks on the edge of a sheer precipice. Watch the sun rise as the feathers blow away into the valley deep below (3 hours).

About T.I.M.

A series of short performance experiments demonstrating the creative potential of motion capture technology as a tool within performance for exploring audience behaviour and interaction. Examples highlight the possibilities for future work and give basic demonstrations of what is technically possible for the stage. Please note that people attending this performance may be videoed and motion captured for research and/or publication purposes. This work has been funded by the EPSRC c4dm platform grant.

“That you would post such a thing implies that you are a despicable human being”: spectatorship, social media, & the struggle for meaning in disability performance

Artists with disabilities working in Live Art paradigms often present performances which replay the social attitudes they are subject to in daily life as guerilla theatre in public spaces – including online spaces. In doing so, these artists draw spectators’ attention to the way their responses to disabled people contribute to the social construction of disability. They provide different theatrical, architectural or technological devices to encourage spectators to articulate their response to themselves and others. But – the use of exaggeration, comedy and confrontation in these practices notwithstanding – their blurry boundaries mean some spectators experience confusion as to whether they are responding to real life or a representation of it. This results in conflicted responses which reveal as much about the politics of disability as the performances themselves. In this paper, I examine how these conflicted responses play out in online forums. I discuss diverse examples, from blog comments on Liz Crow’s Resistance on the Plinth on YouTube, to Aaron Williamson and Katherine Araneillo’s Disabled Avant-Garde clips on YouTube, to Ju Gosling’s Letter Writing Project on her website, to segments of UK Channel 4’s mock reality show Cast Offs on YouTube. I demonstrate how online forums become a place not just for recording memories of an original performance (which posters may not have seen), but for a new performance, which goes well beyond re-membering/remediating the original. I identify trends in the way experience, memory and meaningmaking play out in these performative forums – moving from clarification of the original act’s parameters, to claims of disgust, insult or offense, to counter-claims confirming the comic or political efficacy of the act, often linked disclosure of personal memory or experience of disability. I examine the way these encounters at the interstices of live and/or online performance, memory, technology and public/private history negotiate ideas about disability, and what they tell us about the ethics and efficacy of the specific modes of performance and spectatorship these artists with disabilities are invoking.

Are We The One?

A collaborative, performative and relational experience for two people, woven together by a custom digital phone App. Two walkers, who have never met, simultaneously use a phone App to record a personalised walk around their locality, crafting a series of special moments and surprises for each other. The App then allows participants to continue their two walks, but now directed by what the other person has just created for them. Finally, at the end of the experience they can then choose whether they would like to actually meet in person. Based loosely on the idea of a date, each participant is initially asked to give a little bit of personal information, and then actually speak volumes about themselves through how they choose to care for their 'date's future experience. After walking in parallel universes, but never far away from each other, both daters can ultimately choose to then meet in person -- if what they have experienced tells them that maybe "We Are The One".

The last avant-garde?: Disability arts and (rethinking) mobility

Taking as its starting point a remark by Turner Prize nominee Yinka Shonibare that disability arts is “the last avant garde”, this panel focuses on the role of aesthetic experimentation in disability arts and the possible rethinking of the relationship between avant-garde aesthetic strategies and inclusive arts. Points of connection between the avant-garde and disability arts include a rejection of traditional aesthetic forms, the development of aesthetic strategies appropriate to non-normative bodies, politics and populations and the implications of these ideas for the conference themes. This panel is intended as a facilitated discussion involving researchers and artists undertaking work in this area. The panel will begin with some brief provocations reflecting on the implication of Shonibare’s comment. For example, Gerard Goggin will discuss three projects by Antoni Abad with artists and activists with disability in Barcelona, Geneva and Montreal as part of Abad’s Megaphone project, a decade-long, global digital art project. Bree Hadley will speak on performative interventions in public space, performance art, live art, activism and culture hacking by artists with disabilities, such as pwd's online performances, and artist’s performative responses to the austerity agenda in the US, UK, and Australasia. Eddie, Lachlan and Sarah will discuss ideas arising from their work on the project Beyond Access: The Creative Case for Inclusive Arts, which involved research with six Melbourne-based artists/artistic companies with disability, supported by Arts Access Victoria. Chair: Dr Eddie Paterson (School of Culture and Communication, Faculty of Arts, University of Melbourne) Dr Bree Hadley (Creative Industries, QUT) Professor Gerard Goggin (Professor of Media and Communication and ARC Future Fellow, University of Sydney) Dr Lachlan MacDowall (Head, Centre for Cultural Partnerships, University of Melbourne). Sarah Austin (PhD candidate, Theatre/Centre for Cultural Partnerships, VCA and MCM) Artists (tbc, based on existing relationships with artists developed in the Beyond Access research).

Une étude générique du metteur en scène au théâtre:son émergence et son rôle moderne et contemporain

The theatre director (metteur en scene in French) is a relatively new figure in theatre practice. It was not until the I820s that the term 'mise en scene' gained currency. The term 'director' was not in general use until the I880s. The emergence and the role of the director has been considered from a variety of perspectives, either through the history of theatre (Allevy, Jomaron, Sarrazac, Viala, Biet and Triau); the history of directing (Chinoy and Cole, Boll, Veinstein, Roubine); semiotic approaches to directing (Whitmore, Miller, Pavis); the semiotics of performance (De Marinis); generic approaches to the mise en scene (Thomasseau, Banu); post-dramatic approaches to theatre (Lehmann); approaches to performance process and the specifics of rehearsal methodology (Bradby and Williams, Giannachi and Luckhurst, Picon-Vallin, Styan). What the scholarly literature has not done so far is to map the parameters necessarily involved in the directing process, and to incorporate an analysis of the emergence of the theatre director during the modem period and consider its impact on contemporary performance practice. Directing relates primarily to the making of the performance guided by a director, a single figure charged with the authority to make binding artistic decisions. Each director may have her/his own personal approaches to the process of preparation prior to a show. This is exemplified, for example, by the variety of terms now used to describe the role and function of directing, from producer, to facilitator or outside eye. However, it is essential at the outset to make two observations, each of which contributes to a justification for a generic analysis (as opposed to a genetic approach). Firstly, a director does not work alone, and cooperation with others is involved at all stages of the process. Secondly, beyond individual variation, the role of the director remains twofold. The first is to guide the actors (meneur de jeu, directeur d'acteurs, coach); the second is to make a visual representation in the performance space (set designer, stage designer, costume designer, lighting designer, scenographe). The increasing place of scenography has brought contemporary theatre directors such as Wilson, Castellucci, Fabre to produce performances where the performance space becomes a semiotic dimension that displaces the primacy of the text. The play is not, therefore, the sole artistic vehicle for directing. This definition of directing obviously calls for a definition of what the making of the performance might be. The thesis defines the making of the performance as the activity of bringing a social event, by at least one performer, providing visual and/or textual meaning in a performance space. This definition enables us to evaluate four consistent parameters throughout theatre history: first, the social aspect associated to the performance event; second, the devising process which may be based on visual and/or textual elements; third, the presence of at least one performer in the show; fourth, the performance space (which is not simply related to the theatre stage). Although the thesis focuses primarily on theatre practice, such definition blurs the boundaries between theatre and other collaborative artistic disciplines (cinema, opera, music and dance). These parameters illustrate the possibility to undertake a generic analysis of directing, and resonate with the historical, political and artistic dimensions considered. Such a generic perspective on the role of the director addresses three significant questions: an historical question: how/why has the director emerged?; a sociopolitical question: how/why was the director a catalyst for the politicisation of theatre, and subsequently contributed to the rise of State-funded theatre policy?; and an artistic one: how/why the director has changed theatre practice and theory in the twentieth-century? Directing for the theatre as an artistic activity is a historically situated phenomenon. It would seem only natural from a contemporary perspective to associate the activity of directing to the function of the director. This is relativised, however, by the question of how the performance was produced before the modern period. The thesis demonstrates that the rise of the director is a progressive and historical phenomenon (Dort) rather than a mere invention (Viala, Sarrazac). A chronological analysis of the making of the performance throughout theatre history is the most useful way to open the study. In order to understand the emergence of the director, the research methodology assesses the interconnection of the four parameters above throughout four main periods of theatre history: the beginning of the Renaissance (meneur de jeu), the classical age (actor-manager and stage designer-manager), the modern period (director) and the contemporary period (director-facilitator, performer). This allows us properly to appraise the progressive emergence of the director, as well as to make an analysis of her/his modern and contemporary role. The first chapter argues that the physical separation between the performance space and its audience, which appeared in the early fifteenth-century, has been a crucial feature in the scenographic, aesthetic, political and social organisation of the performance. At the end of the Middle Ages, French farces which raised socio-political issues (see Bakhtin) made a clear division on a single outdoor stage (treteau) between the actors and the spectators, while religious plays (drame fiturgique, mystere) were mostly performed on various outdoor and opened multispaces. As long as the performance was liturgical or religious, and therefore confined within an acceptable framework, it was allowed. At the time, the French ecclesiastical and civil authorities tried, on several occasions, to prohibit staged performances. As a result, practitioners developed non-official indoor spaces, the Theatre de fa Trinite (1398) being the first French indoor theatre recognized by scholars. This self-exclusion from the open public space involved breaking the accepted rules by practitioners (e.g. Les Confreres de fa Passion), in terms of themes but also through individual input into a secular performance rather than the repetition of commonly known religious canvases. These developments heralded the authorised theatres that began to emerge from the mid-sixteenth century, which in some cases were subsidised in their construction. The construction of authorised indoor theatres associated with the development of printing led to a considerable increase in the production of dramatic texts for the stage. Profoundly affecting the reception of the dramatic text by the audience, the distance between the stage and the auditorium accompanied the changing relationship between practitioners and spectators. This distance gave rise to a major development of the role of the actor and of the stage designer. The second chapter looks at the significance of both the actor and set designer in the devising process of the performance from the sixteenth-century to the end of the nineteenth-century. The actor underwent an important shift in function in this period from the delivery of an unwritten text that is learned in the medieval oral tradition to a structured improvisation produced by the commedia dell 'arte. In this new form of theatre, a chef de troupe or an experienced actor shaped the story, but the text existed only through the improvisation of the actors. The preparation of those performances was, moreover, centred on acting technique and the individual skills of the actor. From this point, there is clear evidence that acting began to be the subject of a number of studies in the mid-sixteenth-century, and more significantly in the seventeenth-century, in Italy and France. This is revealed through the implementation of a system of notes written by the playwright to the actors (stage directions) in a range of plays (Gerard de Vivier, Comedie de la Fidelite Nuptiale, 1577). The thesis also focuses on Leoni de' Sommi (Quatro dialoghi, 1556 or 1565) who wrote about actors' techniques and introduced the meneur de jeu in Italy. The actor-manager (meneur de jeu), a professional actor, who scholars have compared to the director (see Strihan), trained the actors. Nothing, however, indicates that the actor-manager was directing the visual representation of the text in the performance space. From the end of the sixteenth-century, the dramatic text began to dominate the process of the performance and led to an expansion of acting techniques, such as the declamation. Stage designers carne from outside the theatre tradition and played a decisive role in the staging of religious celebrations (e.g. Actes des Apotres, 1536). In the sixteenth-century, both the proscenium arch and the borders, incorporated in the architecture of the new indoor theatres (theatre a l'italienne), contributed to create all kinds of illusions on the stage, principally the revival of perspective. This chapter shows ongoing audience demands for more elaborate visual effects on the stage. This led, throughout the classical age, and even more so during the eighteenth-century, to grant the stage design practitioner a major role in the making of the performance (see Ciceri). The second chapter demonstrates that the guidance of the actors and the scenographic conception, which are the artistic components of the role of the director, appear to have developed independently from one another until the nineteenth-century. The third chapter investigates the emergence of the director per se. The causes for this have been considered by a number of scholars, who have mainly identified two: the influence of Naturalism (illustrated by the Meiningen Company, Antoine, and Stanislavski) and the invention of electric lighting. The influence of the Naturalist movement on the emergence of the modem director in the late nineteenth-century is often considered as a radical factor in the history of theatre practice. Naturalism undoubtedly contributed to changes in staging, costume and lighting design, and to a more rigorous commitment to the harmonisation and visualisation of the overall production of the play. Although the art of theatre was dependent on the dramatic text, scholars (Osborne) demonstrate that the Naturalist directors did not strictly follow the playwright's indications written in the play in the late nineteenth-century. On the other hand, the main characteristic of directing in Naturalism at that time depended on a comprehensive understanding of the scenography, which had to respond to the requirements of verisimilitude. Electric lighting contributed to this by allowing for the construction of a visual narrative on stage. However, it was a master technician, rather than an emergent director, who was responsible for key operational decisions over how to use this emerging technology in venues such as the new Bayreuth theatre in 1876. Electric lighting reflects a normal technological evolution and cannot be considered as one of the main causes of the emergence of the director. Two further causes of the emergence of the director, not considered in previous studies, are the invention of cinema and the Symbolist movement (Lugne-Poe, Meyerhold). Cinema had an important technological influence on the practitioners of the Naturalist movement. In order to achieve a photographic truth on the stage (tableau, image), Naturalist directors strove to decorate the stage with the detailed elements that would be expected to be found if the situation were happening in reality. Film production had an influence on the work of actors (Walter). The filmmaker took over a primary role in the making of the film, as the source of the script, the filming process and the editing of the film. This role influenced the conception that theatre directors had of their own work. It is this concept of the director which influenced the development of the theatre director. As for the Symbolist movement, the director's approach was to dematerialise the text of the playwright, trying to expose the spirit, movement, colour and rhythm of the text. Therefore, the Symbolists disengaged themselves from the material aspect of the production, and contributed to give greater artistic autonomy to the role of the director. Although the emergence of the director finds its roots amongst the Naturalist practitioners (through a rigorous attempt to provide a strict visual interpretation of the text on stage), the Symbolist director heralded the modem perspective of the making of performance. The emergence of the director significantly changed theatre practice and theory. For instance, the rehearsal period became a clear work in progress, a platform for both developing practitioners' techniques and staging the show. This chapter explores and contrasts several practitioners' methods based on the two aspects proposed for the definition of the director (guidance of the actors and materialisation of a visual space). The fourth chapter argues that the role of the director became stronger, more prominent, and more hierarchical, through a more political and didactic approach to theatre as exemplified by the cases of France and Germany at the end of the nineteenth-century and through the First World War. This didactic perspective to theatre defines the notion of political theatre. Political theatre is often approached by the literature (Esslin, Willett) through a Marxist interpretation of the great German directors' productions (Reinhardt, Piscator, Brecht). These directors certainly had a great influence on many directors after the Second World War, such as Jean Vilar, Judith Molina, Jean-Louis Barrault, Roger Planchon, Augusto Boal, and others. This chapter demonstrates, moreover, that the director was confirmed through both ontological and educational approaches to the process of making the performance, and consequently became a central and paternal figure in the organisational and structural processes practiced within her/his theatre company. In this way, the stance taken by the director influenced the State authorities in establishing theatrical policy. This is an entirely novel scholarly contribution to the study of the director. The German and French States were not indifferent to the development of political theatre. A network of public theatres was thus developed in the inter-war period, and more significantly after the Second World War. The fifth chapter shows how State theatre policies establish its sources in the development of political theatre, and more specifically in the German theatre trade union movement (Volksbiihne) and the great directors at the end of the nineteenth-century. French political theatre was more influenced by playwrights and actors (Romain Rolland, Louise Michel, Louis Lumet, Emile Berny). French theatre policy was based primarily on theatre directors who decentralised their activities in France during both the inter-war period and the German occupation. After the Second World War, the government established, through directors, a strong network of public theatres. Directors became both the artistic director and the executive director of those institutionalised theatres. The institution was, however, seriously shaken by the social and political upheaval of 1968. It is the link between the State and the institution in which established directors were entangled that was challenged by the young emerging directors who rejected institutionalised responsibility in favour of the autonomy of the artist in the 1960s. This process is elucidated in chapter five. The final chapter defines the contemporary role of the director in contrasting thework of a number of significant young theatre practitioners in the 1960s such as Peter Brook, Ariane Mnouchkine, The Living Theater, Jerzy Grotowski, Augusto Boal, Eugenio Barba, all of whom decided early on to detach their companies from any form of public funding. This chapter also demonstrates how they promoted new forms of performance such as the performance of the self. First, these practitioners explored new performance spaces outside the traditional theatre building. Producing performances in a non-dedicated theatre place (warehouse, street, etc.) was a more frequent practice in the 1960s than before. However, the recent development of cybertheatre questions both the separation of the audience and the practitioners and the place of the director's role since the 1990s. Secondly, the role of the director has been multifaceted since the 1960s. On the one hand, those directors, despite all their different working methods, explored western and non-western acting techniques based on both personal input and collective creation. They challenged theatrical conventions of both the character and the process of making the performance. On the other hand, recent observations and studies distinguish the two main functions of the director, the acting coach and the scenographe, both having found new developments in cinema, television, and in various others events. Thirdly, the contemporary director challenges the performance of the text. In this sense, Antonin Artaud was a visionary. His theatre illustrates the need for the consideration of the totality of the text, as well as that of theatrical production. By contrasting the theories of Artaud, based on a non-dramatic form of theatre, with one of his plays (Le Jet de Sang), this chapter demonstrates how Artaud examined the process of making the performance as a performance. Live art and autobiographical performance, both taken as directing the se(f, reinforce this suggestion. Finally, since the 1990s, autobiographical performance or the performance of the self is a growing practical and theoretical perspective in both performance studies and psychology-related studies. This relates to the premise that each individual is making a representation (through memory, interpretation, etc.) of her/his own life (performativity). This last section explores the links between the place of the director in contemporary theatre and performers in autobiographical practices. The role of the traditional actor is challenged through non-identification of the character in the play, while performers (such as Chris Burden, Ron Athey, Orlan, Franko B, Sterlac) have, likewise, explored their own story/life as a performance. The thesis demonstrates the validity of the four parameters (performer, performance space, devising process, social event) defining a generic approach to the director. A generic perspective on the role of the director would encompass: a historical dimension relative to the reasons for and stages of the 'emergence' of the director; a socio-political analysis concerning the relationship between the director, her/his institutionalisation, and the political realm; and the relationship between performance theory, practice and the contemporary role of the director. Such a generic approach is a new departure in theatre research and might resonate in the study of other collaborative artistic practices.

The art of careful listening : children as co-artists in the making of live performance

Since 2007 Kite Arts Education Program (KITE), based at Queensland Performing Arts Centre (QPAC), has been engaged in delivering a series of theatre-based experiences for children in low socio-economic primary schools in Queensland. The twelve-week workshop experience culminates in a performance developed by the children with the assistance of the teacher artists from KITE for their community and parents/carers in a peak community cultural institution. Using Wartella’s notion of the socially competent child this analysis interrogates the performance product Precious, child participation modes, the intersection between the professional artists, teacher artists and child artists and outcomes in terms of building capacities for the development of social competencies in children.