Drama 360 FALL & WINTER 2009/10/Tuesday September 15: Why You, Why Now, Why Here?

'''1.	Goulish, Mathew. 39 Microlectures: In Proximity of Performance. New York: Routledge, 2000. (Pages 77-85 & 105-111)

OR

'''1.	Chengyao, He. "Fragmented Words." China Live. Ed. Daniel & Yang Brine, Sue. London: Chinese Arts Centre, Live Art UK, Live Art Development Agency, Shu Yang, 2005. 42-61. -  6.1 Creature from the black lagoon In this first section Goulish explains the determination that artists have. As artists we speak of “getting into character” or BECOMING the character when in reality we should not have to BECOME anything; we already are the character. When an audience member refers to Goulish as a “male performer” he is offended because he considers himself the creature from the black lagoon. He was one with the character the character was not a part of him. This section also seems to draw a few ideas from (or is coincidentally similar to) some tenants of Hindu philosophy, especially that of Atman and Brahman. Atman being a word to represent the "self" as we perceive it within people and Brahman being the ever changing potential-driven universe. The theory in a nut-shell has to do with, for example, the fact that you may say you are cold but in reality you are not the attribute coldness in-itself. Since you cannot ever be one thing without automatically excluding all other possibilities then the self is seen as being inherently featureless and is simply endowed with the potential to be or in other words rests in a constant state of BECOMING, just like how Goulish the performer sees himself. This theory relates as well to parts of section 9.4 in which Goulish implies that we can only perceive our "self" through its contrast to all other things outside of ourselves, that the perceived personal "self" is defined by the outside "self" so much that the two are actually part of one whole, this is what is called Brahman, the collective "self". 6.2 Everything about life This section I believe is attempting to teach the reader that you can really never know everything or anything for that matter. Knowing everything is not possible but to be certain about something—completely one hundred percent certain may not be fully possible. To look at the world in a philosophical way we must ask ourselves is there anything that we really can be sure of or could this all be imagined? From an artist’s perspective we also must realize that there is always something to learn. As we realized in class on Thursday September 10th there is usually a different answer to a question and nothing is really straight forward. In conclusion to this section I believe that Goulish is striving to teach the reader that one must never feel one hundred percent confident with an answer because one ought to continue to learn and take every day as a new lesson that could be learned. 6.3 Slow Thinking In this part of Goulish’s piece he speaks of the value of looking at art in a deliberate and an unhurried manner because often art is not how it appears and one should not take it at face value—often one must study art or a performance carefully insisting that he or she does not miss what is truly intended. A photograph taken during a dance piece for example cannot be judged for what it is; the movement that a spectator is meant to see is lost in a still picture. 6.4 Beauty “The highest responsibility of the artist is to hide beauty.” This statement struck me as strange at first but when taking a closer look at I found another meaning to it. The way I have understood this statement is that an artist wants the viewer or reader or audience member to see their work for something deeper than beauty. Because art is not often physically beautiful it is often provocative and interesting. They want their art to be enlightening to the audience member not just a pretty picture or a graceful performance. Some of the most stunning pieces of art are actually train wrecks that open up the mind and cause the audience to truly reflect upon the piece.

6.5 Body through which the dream flow “But as a performer. I know that I have my own body and my own dreams and the bodies of others and the dreams of others. In order to continue I need them all.” This statement sums up an artist they need to be one with themselves and understand who they are and what their makeup is but they also need to be one with the character and understand exactly what makes their character function the way he or she does. It should not be a switch that the actor can turn on and off but it should be something that comes easily and naturally.

9.1 -9.5 I believe that the most important line from this piece is the last. “Zen stories are never about other people. They are always about you.” This one line sums up the entire piece and it also contributes to the discussion on Thursday September 10th in class. The value in learning the five “W’s” of you is so incredibly important. Who you are, what you are all about, where you came from, when were your most important moments and experiences, how you operate and why you operate that way. Once you learn those about yourself you can be so much more in sync with yourself and if you can answer these about a character you are embodying it is also incredibly important. --Courtney Keen 21:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)--Courtney Keen September 12 2009 at 3:29pm--Courtney Keen 21:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC) This piece also speaks to the ability we have as humans to put labels on things. It is our greatest wish, our deepest desire within the depths of our primitive little minds (as opposed to our modernized, civilized, approved for use by society and the FDA minds)to be able to look at something or someone and instantly be able to categorize them and assign them a label. This desire is not in and of itself wrong (despite the FDA warning)it helps us know when a situation is dangerous, safe, or uncertain. It tells us whether we should continue what we are doing, proceed with caution, or turn around and run. It is the very definition of a "gut instinct". So, not wrong. Not necessarily wrong. In our fumbling human way we also use this instinct to regulate cultures to the category of barbarian, men to the label of monster. We get it wrong again and again and we keep forgetting that as valuable as gut instinct can be to survival it is not always right and can indeed create a dangerous situation out of what could have been happy and new and fun.

An artist needs to be able to feel whatever atmosphere they are in and work with it. At the end of the story that Goulish told the composer Crumb begins to tear up his own program and said “When everyone else starting doing it, it looked like so much fun.” He took the disapproval from the audience and embraced it, because that’s what artists do. They put themselves out there, are judged and forced to gauge the reactions, accept the opinions and move on.
 * 1) In Goulish’s 6.5 Body through which the dream flows can back up the cliché “certain things happen for a reason”. The story Goulish told made an outstanding point that even when you have a passion for your own work or art sometimes you can find yourself working towards someone else’s dream. Its hard to stay on the track of success when being influenced by others whether it be other artists, coworkers or even a friend. But it is also ironic because without that pressure from outside viewers, without any constructive criticism, or even insensitive criticism you will never be able to allow yourself to broaden your horizons and find your true creative self.

Goulish, Mathew. 39 Microlectures: In Proximity of Performance; One of the things that really resonated with me is the comment Goulish made when he said “On a stage a horse or a dog that is not cardboard or plaster causes uneasiness. In the theatre looking for the truth in the real is fatal.” This is one of the things I love about theatre. The fact that we do not need that which is real on the stage to make it believable. But would the real damage the mental safety of the audience members? Which then makes me wonder, when to use this convention and when not to. Can it even really be employed on today’s passive audience? Have an actor point a rubber chicken at the performers and them respond as if it where a gun, the audience will believe that the chicken is a gun and go along with the scene. But have a real gun on stage, without the plastic orange tip. A real gun with real bullets. What then? Will the audience recognize the danger they are in, that the other people on stage are ACTUALLY in? Will they feel unease? Or, as they have been trained to do, will they remain a passive audience, willing to accept whatever we create within the realm on stage but not as a real convention within their physical realm. Is all theatre untouchable? Is all theatre passive? [Kira Sams]

Fragmented Words He Chengyao

Chengyao is highlighting the fact that artists tend to be treated like they are of a lower class and should be grateful when given the chance to perform in front of an audience that is percieved to be of a higher status. Performance artists are asked to perform for social occasions where their show is not the reason for the event, they are treated more like “clowns” and their work like “an after-dinner dessert.” Society dictates that a performing artist is to consider themselves lucky when they have been asked to dinner by a gallery or exhibition organiser. It means their societal status has been slightly raised. Chengyao mentions a story where the director of a gallery “warned [the artist] not to invite too many other artists to the opening, saying that artists were like hungry dogs.” The artists are constantly being degraded but will continue with their work because of the love they have for it. Chengyao poses the question “should artists rise in rebellion and boycott this gallery?” He believes the time has not come for such an occasion. When will be the right time though? Hopefully in the near future they will be treated as equals and be more accepted in society. However, perhaps one of the things that makes a performance artist is the fact that they aren’t accepted. Perhaps the uniqueness of the work will only stay unique if it is not molded into a form that is socially acceptable for this day and age.

Like earlier stated, a lot of Chengyao seemed to deal with the theme of social class and rules. The first part of the article deals with Chengyao’s life as an artist. He talks about attending art galleries in Beijing and how they are incredibly formulated; come in, get snacks, briefly look at the art and then socialize. He tells a story of attending one of these galleries and sitting at a dinner table after the event. Because he was not in the social clique, he and his friends were thrown out. The majority of the first half of the article sheds a negative light. This seems to change though, when he gets to the part about happiness; which was also the part that stood out to me the most. He speaks of various people doing activities at a park and genuinely enjoying themselves. Chengyao asks himself why coming to a park could produce such feelings of happiness. He writes “Isn't a so called 'happy life' simply living an ordinary life like an ordinary person? Like walking barefoot on soil; truth seems to be very simple".  What I think he is trying to say here is that why do we live life by other peoples guidelines when the key to happiness is simply doing things that make us happy? Often as artists we like to think of ourselves as having a deeper scope of feeling. We like to believe that we are the only ones capable of sensing what we do, and why not? We are the ones trying to grapple with our external thoughts and ideas and emotions and make them tangible world the world to see and marvel at. Many feel that once one had truly discovered themselves, and life, they can then be satisfied. He Chengyao proposes that perhaps, if we just took a moment to do what made us happy, we would be happy. The idea is simple but loaded. It is one that would do many of us well to ponder upon. Perhaps, like the story that could go on forever at the beginning of the article, (about the mountain, the temple, the monk and the story) it is best at times to accept how life is and not get carried away with a never ending circle of perturbing thought.

So often as artists we like to think of ourselves as having a deeper scope of feeling. We like to believe tat we are the only ones capible of feeling what we do Out of all the things Chengyao wrote about I was most grabbed by the age section. He says, "the day they retire from art would be the last day of their lives" which i feel is something that most people who aren't part of the art world don't quite understand. Art for the performer is not just a form of entertainment it is a life style.People who are in the audience, or who are attending the events at which someone is performing, don't always fully comprehend how what the performer is doing, and how, it is their whole world and they aren't just their for your entertainment.He also questions, "will their artistic age be restricted by their physical age?" I feel that no matter how old you may be you should not be restricted to do what you love. With that, the age section can also be connected with his section on happiness. As said in the previous post, "the key to happiness is simply doing things that make us happy" their is no age limit on happiness, and if creating or performing is what makes you happy then there should be no limit to someones artistic age.

After reading Chengyao's article, many of the previously noted thoughts were in my mind. two of the major ones were the concepts of happiness and age. Like the post above, i do not believe that any individual should be limited or restricted artistically by their age. in somewhat of a different perspective, i thought of the opposite sort of situation to Chengyao. Instead of thinking of the older individuals being restricted, i thought of the younger artists. we unfortunately live in a society were the more experience you have directly correlates to how much respect you are given. in any social environment the existence of cliques are common. these cliques make it incredibly hard for any up and coming artist to break through. This was apparent in the article with the mentioned scene at the gallery dinner table. many of the higher status individuals may look down upon the younger generation. this may then limit the amount of exposure a young new artist receives. this can be hard for any individual to handle, especially for a person who has already stepped so far out of the conventional mold as to become a performing artist. relating this back to the concept of happiness, if the younger individual has put so much on the line to follow their passion -only to be rejected by those who can help them shine- they may become discouraged and move to a different career path. thus losing their pursuit of happiness. as the post above says "I feel that no matter how old you may be you should not be restricted to do what you love.", i believe that in order for this to be possible we must learn to appreciate and respect both the older more experienced artists as well as the up and coming fresh artists.--Elisa Mancina 23:09, 13 September 2009 (UT

In the reading from Chenyao's article i enjoyed how the author recognizes some of the deep inner feelings we as artists feel as perhaps an 'artistic society'. I especially enjoyed the quote, "for the older artists artistic creation had become a part of their lives; photographs in the catalogue showed the graceful bearing of their younger years, and the day they retired from art would be the last day of their lives." i truly believe this applies to myself, and most likely to the whole of the 'artistic society'.

After completing Chengyao's work, the part of it that really grasped my attention is when he was talking about how people will always just take what they can. With the past week being the week of callbacks and auditions around the drama department i saw a lot of disappointed faces but i also some that some of the others were radiantly happy. People were cast in shows and some were extremely ecstatic with who they were cast as. While some of the other students had much higher expectations and were cast as something smaller but still just as important. They were offered a part and got to take what they could in the shows. Chengyao's examples of casting directors taking actors who have been on TV a few times and dancers that have attended classes a few times was a perfect example of the notion of people taking what they can. On another note, I also one hundred percent agree, like Courtney, on Chengyao's brilliant rebuttal one night when he was invited to a ritzy social event to "perform after dinner that evening" that performance artists are "not clowns and performance art is not an after-dinner dessert".--Janelle.kraemer 21:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I too agree with Chengyao when he states that “performance artists are not clowns, and performance art is not an after dinner dessert”. Too often, we forget that art has real purpose, and is not just there to be entertaining. Artists of all mediums serve a different purpose. Although frequently used to entertain, oftentimes, art is used for intentions we fail to realize, including; communication, expression of feeling, striving for political or social change, community investigation, as well as several others. A lot of times people don’t understand art, and therefore, refuse to acknowledge it has a true purpose, and is there for a reason.

Performances of any kind are generally thought of as purely entertainment. Rarely do we wever think the primary function of art is to put aspects of life into question. Artists who have the ability to provoke thought should not be seen as lower class. Chengyao was made to feel lower class by being told he should feel lucky when invited to events but artists should be willing to share their craft; even with other artists. I didn't necessarily believe with the art scene described in "Fragmented Words," but I was provoked to think when CHengyao described one of his performances. The one performance when he scaled the wall following the path of the sun, turning dark into light, really captured my attention. Artists are also amazing to have the diligence to make a performance like that last over two hours.

What I really found interesting about this article, Fragmented Words by He Chengyao was that the author explored some interesting differences in our society and the Chinese. One of these things that just absolutely stood out for me was the fact that at an art exhibition, the Chinese people really use it as an excuse to socialize as appose to just going to enjoy the art. Another thought provoking idea was that he said that he felt that, “isn’t a so-called ‘happy life’ simply living an ordinary life like an ordinary person? Like walking barefoot on soil. Truth seems to be very simple.” This comment reflects on how we in the western world take advantage of what we have and that we don’t need all of these fancy technological enhancements to be truly happy.

The part in Chengyao's article that really struck me was the quote from page 47 in regards to life: "isn't a so called happy life simply living an ordinary life like an ordinary person?" This really touched me because I find that alot of artist struggle when it comes to finding a happy life. We spend too much time acting like people we're not that I sometimes think we get lost in it all. In the end, though, all it takes is a walk in the woods or a swim in a lake to realize that its the little things in life that make us happy. Bagging big roles are only temporary joy. Like Chengyao said, "Truth seems to be very simple", and so is happiness. --Nicole B. Porter 00:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC) The photographs and accompanying descriptions were particularly fascinating to me. People look at what he has done and may wonder what he was thinking; why he chose to paint his body yellow, why he risks his own health for the sake of his art. Upon showing another person some of his performances they stated that they, "didn't get it" and wanted to know the point. As I can't read Chengyoa's mind I cannot tell every reason for why he did these particular performances but I can imagine what it was like to watch. I don't think there is a cut-and-dry answer to the question of what the point was, I think many different minds draw their own conclusions and thoughts of the provoking displays. He mentions later on that time may be the only thing that resolves and rescues us, so perhaps it is experience that will grant either the knowledge or the small appreciation required when we don't get it.

Response to Courtney's 6.4 Beauty: I don't believe that the artist wants the audience to see their performance for more than beauty, it's that the beauty is hidden inside of the performer's labour and performance itself. As Goulish says, in order for beauty to be hidden, it must be present. But the misconception lies in where the beauty is. The beauty is not int he text iteself; the artists work brings out the beauty in the text, or you could even say that the artist's work and labour is the beauty itself, and the text is the surface layer where the beauty shines through.--Cody.thompson 15:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)