Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
TheatreasCritique CongressoftheSocietyforTheatreStudies,FrankfurtandGießen,3.-6.November2016 Organisers:TheInstituteforAppliedTheatreStudies,JustusLiebigUniversityGießen(ProfessorDr GeraldSiegmund),andtheTheatreStudiesChairoftheInstituteforTheatre,FilmandMediaStudies, GoetheUniversityFrankfurtamMain(ProfessorDrNikolausMüller-Schöll),incollaborationwiththe HessianTheatreAcademy(HTA),theFrankfurtLABandtheKünstlerhausMousonturm. Undertheheading“TheatreasCritique”,theorganisersofthe13thCongressoftheSocietyfor TheatreStudiesinviteresearcherstoexaminetheatreasacriticalpractice.Withthecrisisofthe classicalgroundingsofboththeatreandcritiqueinmind,thecongressaimsatareconsiderationof, ontheonehand,thehistory,theoryandissuesoftheatreand,ontheother,theconceptof critique.Attheheartofthedebate,therefore,isnotjustthesubjectmatteroftheatrecritiquebut rathercritiqueitself.Plenaryspeechesandshortercontributionson8differentsubjectareaswill becomplementedbyperformativeformats,visitstothetheatre,talksandsceniccontributions fromstudentsoftheHessianTheatreAcademy(HTA). Onequalityofthefiguresofthoughtreoccurringthroughoutthediscourseoftheoccidentaltheatre isthatthistheatre–especiallywhereitdealswithaspectsofthepoliticalbutalsowithsocial practicesandtradition–canbeseenasacriticalexaminationofthattradition.Theatreascritiqueis arevisionofdecisionsmadeelsewhere,anegotiationofthemythspickedupuponinthetheatre,of historicaleventsandofprocesses.ItisascenicarticulationofanItshouldbedifferent(TheodorW. Adorno)–evenwhenthereisnoapparentalternativetothatwhichisbeingpropagatedastheone andonlysolution.Philosophers,churchdignitaries,dogmatistsandguardiansofvirtuehostiletothe theatrehaveallcontributedtothisviewofthetheatre–thosewhofearthesubversivepowerofthe stage,whoseektodemonisethetheatreanditspractitioners–ashavethosewhospeakoutin favourofthetheatre,whoinitseeameanstocriticisebothpersonalandsocialtransgressions,an institutionthatisabletounsettleauthoritiesthathavebeenconstitutedelsewhere,thatcancriticise untenableideologicalpositionsanddissolvepatternsoforderanddoctrinesofanykind.Theatre–in accordancewithaviewwidelyhelduntilrecentlybytheatrepractitionersandcommentators–isa criticalpractice. Thisviewhasveryrecentlyfounditselfonshakyground.Ithasbeenradicallyquestionedbytwo schoolsofthought,bothwithregardtotheconceptoftheatrethatitidealisesaswellasinrelation totheoftenalltoosimpledefinitionoftheterm‘critique’. –Thenotionofthetheatreasacriticalentityisidealistic,asitrendersacertainconceptoftheatre absolute.Itconcealsthematerialconditionsoftheatreaswellasits,atbest,indirectlycritical purposesofentertainment,pleasureandcheerfuleveningactivity.Onanindividuallevel,itputs asidethesatisfactionofone’sownnarcissismfrequentlyconnectedwiththetheatre,and,onan institutionallevel,itignoresallsortsofaimspursuedwiththetheatre.Moreover,criticaltheatre– thereincomparablewithpoliticaltheatre–mustaskitselfifitscritique,asarule,islittlemorethana kindofpreachingtotheconverted.Itsreferencestoitsowncriticalpotencyseemtoself-legitimise aninstitutionthatnotinfrequentlyreaffirmsandsolidifiesnorms–preciselyinthecriticalmode.On theotherhand,thatwhichmarkstheatreasanautonomousartformunderminestheheteronomous aimsitfollows,includingcritique.Thus,perhapsbehindtheconceptoftheatreasacriticalpractice, therelieshiddenachargedrelationshipwhosetwopolesaretheatreandcritique. –Additionally,thegenerallyacceptedideaoftheatreascritiqueseemstoosimplewithregardtothe conceptofcritiqueperpetuatedwithinthisidea,whichhasbeenradicallyshakeninthelastfew decades,andnotwithoutreason.WereferheretotheradicalcriticismoftraditionalMarxist ideologicalcritiqueundertakenbyAdorno/MaxHorkheimerintheDialecticofEnlightenment,which Adornoonceagaintakesupinhisoft-citedessay“CulturalCriticismandSociety”.Secondly,webear inmindFoucault’sgenealogyofcritique,whichhecarriesoutasaproponentof,ontheonehand, desubjugationinrelationtoformsoftheartofgoverninghumanbeingsand,ontheotherhand,of therejectionofeveryfundamentalistcritique,whichJudithButlerhastakenupinmorerecenttimes. Allthreehaveenquiredintothefoundationsonwhichcritiqueisbased,aswellasthepossibilityof post-fundamentalistcritique(Butler).Thetaskofshakingthefoundations,forwhichcriticaltheory andpost-structuralismbothstand,affects,astheyillustrate,notleastalltraditionalformsofeven proto-totalitariancritique. OnlyonesentencefromAdorno’sessay“CulturalCriticismandSociety”isusuallycited–theonethat hasbeendeclareda“dictum”,accordingtowhichitisbarbaric“towriteapoemafterAuschwitz.”In thecontinuationofthisthought,Adornomakesitclearthat“this”,alsocorrodes“eventhe knowledgeofwhyithasbecomeimpossibletowritepoetrytoday.”(Adorno1981,34)Ininitially surprisingunisonwithMartinHeidegger’selaborationsonthenatureofthemoderntechnology establishedatthebeginningofthe17thcenturyas“Ge-stell”(Heidegger1991,32),Adornospeaks aboutthe“absolutereification”,“whichpresupposedintellectualprogressasoneofitselements [and]isnowpreparingtoabsorbthemindentirely”.(Ibid.)“Criticalintelligencecannotbeequalto thischallengeaslongasitconfinesitselftoself-satisfiedcontemplation.”(Ibid.)MichelFoucaultand JudithButlertakeupthis“Leftistcriticaltradition”whentheyassignthecriticthe“doubletask”of showing“howknowledgeandpowerworktoconstituteamoreorlesssystematicwayofordering theworldwithitsown‘conditionsofacceptabilityofasystem,’butalso‘tofollowthebreaking pointswhichindicateitsemergence.’”(Butler2001) Inthestrictsenseoftheterm,critiqueiscloselyassociatedwiththeEnlightenment.Inallusionto ImmanuelKant,Foucaultdefinescritiqueas“theartofnotbeinggovernedquitesomuch.”(Foucault 1997,29)Usingone’sownreasontoaskthequestionofhowonewouldlikenottobegovernedor, moreprecisely,notgoverned“likethatandatthatcost”(ibid.)meansusingone’sreasoninthe senseofcriticisingthegivenstateofaffairs.Thus,Foucaultunderstandscritiqueasanobjectionto clerical,stateandparentallaws,andthereforeasafathomingoftheboundariesofgovernability. “[C]ritiquewillbetheartofvoluntaryinsubordination,thatofreflectedintractability.Critiquewould essentiallyinsurethedesubjugationofthesubjectinthecontextofwhatwecouldcall,inaword,the politicsoftruth.”(Ibid.,32)Inasmuchascritiqueinitsresistanceto“everygovernment”“[puts] forthuniversalandindefeasiblerights”(ibid.,30),itissubjecttotheverysamedangerthatAdorno andHorkheimerdescribeinDialecticofEnlightenment.TherationalityoftheEnlightenment, unenlightenedintermsofitsownlimits,willruntheriskofdeterioratingbackintoitssupposed opposite,themyth,orofdegeneratingintoinstrumentalreason.Furthermore,critiqueseemsto haveimplicitlyandcontinuouslyconducteditselfinrelationtoanormthatitkeepsupexnegativo, evenwhenitsetsouttoworkitthroughandsuspendit.Thisalsoposesthequestionofwhichclaim tovaliditycritiquecanhaveatall,ifitisalwaysinachargedrelationshipbetweenthegeneral,which mustdeliverthestandardsofcritique,andtheparticular,whichreceivesspecificcriticism.Towhich normativityiscritiqueattachedexplicitlyorimplicitlyandhowisthisattachmentproblematised? Alongsideitsrelationshiptonormativity,everyformofcritiqueisaccompaniedbythepotentialofa utopiaofsomekind.Thosewhocriticiseappealatleastimplicitlytosomethingbetter,toanother, evenifitisnotthetaskofcritiquetodevelopuniversallyvalidalternativesorsolutionstothatwhich itiscriticising.Ifcritiqueinevitablydrawsupanother,howcanitpreventitselffromterrorisingthat whichresistsitsideas?Howcancritiquepreventitselffrombecominganotherofthe“great narratives”(Lyotard)endinginterrorandcatastrophe,likethegreatnarrativesofthe19thcentury thatLyotardwarnedagainst? Critiqueopensupaspectrumoftensionsbetweenthenormanditsdegeneration,thegeneraland theparticular,theutopiaandthegiven.Fromthis,centralobservationscanbederivedwithviewto artisticpracticesandthetheatre.ThequestionthatJudithButlerposes,pickinguponFoucault’s definitionofcritique,isthatofthepossibilityof“desubjugation”andthusthetransformationof conditions.Howcancritiquelauncha“desubjugation”andthusa“desubjectivisation”,considering thatsubjectivityisnotpossiblewithoutsubjugation?Foucaultsubstitutesthismysteriousagentwith the“originaryfreedom”ofthehumanbeing,whichhecannotground,butwhichserveshim, accordingtoButler,asanecessityofthinking–placinga“notknowing”insideofdiscourse(Butler 2001,18),settingtheconditionsandthesubjectitselfinmotion.Freedomisapurelystrategicor even,asFoucaultsays,fictionalpresumptionthathasveryrealconsequencesforthesubject,sinceit producesactualfreedoms.Foucault’sdescriptionofcritiqueas“art”is–againstthebackgroundof thistrainofthought–morethanjustarhetoricalwayofspeaking.Instead,itisdirectedatthecore ofthematter:Critique,which“risksone’sveryformationasasubject”(ibid.),isanaestheticpractice. Asanaestheticpracticeitevokesthatwhichitrisksandrisksthatwhichitevokes.The“natural freedom”ofthehumanbeingisitsaestheticfreedom.Thisisaccompaniedbythequestionof whethercritiqueasapracticeisfirstandforemostaquestionoftheindividual–oftheindividual artist,whoinhisorheruniquetheatresetshimorherselfinoppositiontotraditionalformsand entrenchedinstitutionalprocesses.Thisinvolves,inButler’ssense,anethicsofcriticalpractice,for whichtheindividualmusttakeonresponsibility. Inthissense,theatreasartisacriticalpracticebecauseitisapracticethatsuspendstruths. Criticisingtheconditionsisthusnotprimarilydependentonacertaincontentthatthetheatre negotiatesbutratherliesinthewaythatthetheatreitselfexists.Thetaskofthecritiqueofthe Enlightenmentisto“[havean]ideaofourknowledgeanditslimits”(Foucault1997,35)andthusthe limitsofknowledge,powerandthesubject.Howdoesthischallengethelimitsofknowledge?Which strategiesemphasiseitsconstitutiveconditionsandfractures?Whichroledoaffective,emotional, corporealoridiosyncraticelementsplay?Whichroledoesmaterialityplayinrelationtothe rationalityofcritique?Whatwouldanotherformofcritiquelooklike–onethatisnotleftexclusively tothediscretionoftherationalityofreason,asKantwantedit? Inoppositiontothetwofold,radicalquestioningofthelegitimacyoftheatreascritiqueisan increasinglymoreurgentquest,aboveallsincetheturnofthemillennium,fornewformsofcritical practiceinthetheatre,performanceandactionart.Theatreasacriticalpracticeisdrivenbythewish notjusttorelatetorealityinthemodusofacontemplativedoubling,butrathertoasserttheatreas acriticalexaminationofuntenableconditions,policiesandnormalisations,asanalternativeconcept toexistingrealities,asiteforprotest,politicalinterventionandutopia.Withoutforgettingthe aporiasoftheclassicalgroundingofcritiqueandwithviewtothequestionabilityoftraditionaland contemporaryapproachesincriticaltheatretoday,thecongresswilldiscussthequestionofhowwe canreconceivetheatrecritique,understoodinadoublesense:Howdoestheatrecriticise?Which kindofcritiquecouldbeformulatedwithviewtotoday’stheatrepractices? ThesequestionscanbediscussedinvarioussectionsattheCongressoftheSocietyforTheatre Studies.Thefollowingthematicemphasesarethinkable: 1.Criticalpracticesincontemporarytheatre Anumberofdifferentpracticesincontemporarytheatreseethemselvesascritical.Butwhatisbeing criticisedconcretely,bywhichmeans,withwhichrightandonwhichbasis?Whicheffectorpotency canbedescribed?Whichrealityrunscountertotheseapproaches?Howdoesthecritiquearticulated onthelevelofreferentialitybehaveinrelationtoitsperformance?Whatdotheformsofproduction andtheorganisationofcriticaltheatrepracticeslooklikeandhowaretheyrelatedtothepositions arguedonthelevelofcontentandcriticisedobject?Whatisevenbeingcriticisedandfromwhich perspective? 2.Critiqueandnormativity Ifcritiquealwaysmaintainsarelationshiptothenormthatitcriticises,thequestionmustbeposed aboutthenorm-stabilisingtendencyoftheatricalpractices.Theatreiscalledintimeandtimeagainin timesofcrisis,inordertodefuseconflictsthroughnegotiationandrepresentation.Theatrehasa valvefunctionlikeatthecarnival;itcreatesfreedomstothinkandact,which,however,cannotbe separatedfromtheinstitutionsthatthesefreedomsfinance.Theatrecanbethoughtofasthecritical practiceoftheorderingofthingsitself,whichacceptsthattheidealself-imageofthisorderisbeing appealedtoandwhich,inreturn,leadstoatransformationofthatorder.However,thisprocessof criticaltransformationimpliesthattheorderisbeingkeptalive,albeitdifferently.What,therefore, istherelationshipbetweencritiqueandaffirmation?Whichrelationshipdoesthesubversive potentialthatisoftenassociatedwiththetheatreentertainnotonlyinthedissolutionofexisting normsandordersbutalsointheirstabilisation? 3.Critiqueofthedispositiveofthetheatreinthepastandthepresent WhentheatreisconceivedofasanapparatusintheFoucauldiansense,wecanthenaskwith Agambenhowtheatrepractitionershaveworkedonwhathecalls“profanation”andonthe evocationoftheungovernabilitythatisco-originaltothetheatre(Agamben2009,24).Whatdidthe scenic,practicalandtheoreticalungovernabilityofthetheatre’sowndispositiveoritsprofanationin decisivetimesofchangelooklike,forexampleduringthetheatrereformationofthemid-18th century,attheWeimarCourtTheatre,atthebeginningofthe20thcentury,inBrecht’sEpicTheatre, inEinarSchleef’schoricstagingsorintheso-calledconceptdanceattheturnofthe21stcentury? 4.Theatreasacriticalpracticeofthoughtandaction Sinceitsbeginnings,theatreintheoccidentaltraditionhasnotjustbeenunderstoodasacritical practiceinthenarrowsenseof“theatre”.Itappears–inthepolemicsofitsadversariesaswellasthe defencesofitsadvocates–tobeaformofcriticalpracticeofboththoughtandaction.Howcanthis critiquebegraspedmorepreciselyinviewoftextsaswellasscenicpractices–acritiquethat,above allinthelastfewyearshasledtotalkofathinkingofthestage,ofartisticresearchandoppositional bodies 5.Critiqueofcritique Whencritiqueitselfissubjecttomultifacetedcritique,itaffectsboththetheatreasacriticalpractice inthebroadsenseaswellasthepostulateofcritiqueinthenarrowsense.Theatrecritique,which noticeablydispersesinfavouroffleetingrecommendationsornolessfleetingslatingreviews,is affectedbyamoregeneralcritiqueofcritique.Whichaporiasofcritiquecanbeaccountedforina criticaldiscourseaboutcritique?Whichperspectivesdoesthecritiqueofcritiqueopenupforother relatedpractices,astheyhavebeendevelopedinthepastfewyears–ofresistance,of deconstruction,ofcitation/repetition,ofparody? 6.Theatrestudiesasacriticalpractice Inwhichrespectcantheatrestudiesbegroundedasacriticalpractice?Towhichextentcantheybe basedonthetraditionsofCriticalTheory,theFrankfurtSchoolorotherFrenchandUS-American schoolsofthoughtthatinpartcompetewithbutinpartcontinuethesetraditions–forexample Butler,JacquesDerrida,Foucault,JacquesLacan,PhilippeLacoue-LabartheandJean-LucNancy?How dopracticalproblems,theexperienceofsufferingandknowledgeofthesocialmediacyofone’sown positionaswellastheobservedobjectsandpracticesandsocietalcontextsasawholeenterintoa kindoftheatrestudiesthatconsidersitselfcritical?Howaretheatrestudiesasacriticalpractice relatedtoothercriticalpractices?Whichquestionsdotheyposetootherformsofknowledgeand thearchivingofandinquiryintothetheatre? 7.Critiqueandthepublicsphereinthetheatre ThepracticeofcritiqueasaconsequenceoftheEnlightenment–especiallyinthetheatre–is connectedwiththedevelopmentofthepublicsphereanditscounter-publicspheres.InLessing’s HamburgDramaturgy,hedemonstratesthatcritiqueastheconstitutionofanewpublicsphere alwaysservesthedevelopmentoftheself-image,valuesandnormsofasocialclass.Howcanthe relationshipbetweentheatre,thepublicsphereandpowerbedescribedhistoricallyandcurrently(in thepre-Marchperiod,intheThirdReich,individedGermanypost-1945)?Atwhichpublicspheresis criticalpracticedirectedandwhichdoesitshape?Whichnormsandvaluescomeintoplay?Which roledoesjournalistictheatrecritiqueplayasarepresentativeofthepublicsphereinthefightforthe recognitionoftheatricalaesthetics?Howaretheriseandfalloftheatrecritiqueconnectedwith generalstructuralchangeinthepublicsphere? 8.Hostilitytowardsthetheatre Whatkindsofcritiquehasthetheatrefacedthroughouthistory,fromPlatontoTertullian,fromthe JansenitesandRousseautoGuyDebordandcontemporaryperformanceart?Whichargumentshave beenvoicedagainstcertaintheatricalpracticesinwhichcontexts,forexampleagainsthistoricalas wellascontemporarytheatreformsandaesthetics?Howdoesphilosophicalcritiqueofthetheatre behaveinrelationtothetheatreinherenttotheory,tothelinguisticalityandstagingthatare inseparablefromtheory?Whatistherelationshipbetweenthetheatre-criticaldiscoursesofclerical criticsandthefathersofthechurchtheybasedthemselvesuponfromthe18thtothe20thcentury? Howisthecritiqueofthespectacleandthemediarelatedtotraditionalformsoftheatrecritique? Significantacademicsandartistsareintendedaskeynotespeakers.Therewillalsobeagroupof youngacademicsthatwillpresenttheresultsoftheirdiscussionsinakeynotespeech.Alongsidethe classicalkeynoteandpanelformats,thelatterwiththreelecturesof20minutes,thecongresswould liketoencouragecontributorstotryoutothercontributionformats.Wearealsoseekingsuggestions forlectureperformancesorgrouppresentationsatalengthof60minutes,givenbyuptosix academicswithadiscussionafterwards.Alongsidesingletalks,entirepanelswiththree correspondinglecturesmayalsobesuggested,althoughtheorganisersreservetherighttoenlarge orreconfigurethepanelswithrespecttothesuggestionstheyreceive.Aspecialyoungacademics forumisnotplanned,althoughyoungacademicsareparticularlyencouragedtotakepartinthis congresswiththeirowncontributions.Furthermore,oneelementarycomponentofthecongressis mutualvisitstotheatreperformancesinlocaltheatresaswellassceniccontributionsfromstudents oftheHessianTheatreAcademy. ThecongresswilladvancetheinternationalisationofGerman-speakingtheatrestudiesbyputtingon aseriesofpanelsinEnglishthatwillrunparalleltotheGerman-speakingpanels.Wewouldthuslike toencouragecontributorsfromabroadtosubmitabstracts.Wewillendeavourtoprovidefunding forthetravelandaccommodationcostsofcontributorsfromabroadfromtheGermanResearch Community(DFG).Inordertobeeligibleforthisfunding,pleasesubmityourabstractbythe1stof April. Forthoseofyouwhodonotneedfunding,pleasesendyourabstractorsuggestionforapanel(max. 500characters)bythe30thofApril2016tothefollowingemailaddress: [email protected] Theorganiserswillarrangethefinancialmeanstofreethosewhosesuggestionsforalectureora presentationareacceptedfromtheconferencefee,inasmuchastheydonothavetheopportunityto receivethisfundingelsewhere.Pleasetelluswhenyousendusyoursuggestionifthisappliestoyou. Forhotelreservations,pleasecheckthelistofhotelsonthecongresshomepagefromthe1stofMay on: www.theater-wissenschaft.de/kongresse Ifyouwanttotakepartinthecongress,pleaseregisteronourwebsitefromthe1stofJune2016on. Literature Adorno,TheodorW./Horkheimer(2002),Max,DialecticofEnlightenment,trans.EdmundJephcott, Stanford:StanfordUP. Adorno,TheodorW.(1981),“CulturalCriticismandSociety”,in,TheodorW.Adorno,Prisms,trans. SamuelundShierryWeber,Cambridge,MA:MITPress,p.17-34. Agamben,Giorgio(2009),“WhatisanApparatus?”,in,GiorgioAgamben,WhatisanApparatus?And OtherEssays,ed.WernerHamacher,trans.DavidKishikandStefanPedatella,Stanford:StanfordUP, p.1-24. Butler,Judith,“WhatisCritique?AnEssayonFoucault’sVirtue,in,DavidIngram(ed.),ThePolitical: ReadingsinContinentalPhilosophy,London:BasilBlackwell2001,accessed16.12.15at <http://eipcp.net/transversal/0806/butler/en>. Foucault,Michel,“WhatisCritique?”,in,JamesSchmidt(ed.),WhatisEnlightenment?EighteenthCenturyQuestionsandEighteenthCenturyAnswers,Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress1997,p. 23-61. Heidegger,Martin(1977),“TheQuestionConcerningTechnology”,in,MartinHeidegger,The QuestionConcerningTechnologyandOtherEssays,trans.WilliamLovitt,NewYork;London:Garland, p.3-35.