Exploring the use of relational theory and agency within performance, through experimental practice

Emma Fell N0272985 BA (Hons) Theatre Design THTR30070

Plagiarism Disclaimer

NAME: Emma Fell

ESSAY TITLE: Exploring the use of relational theory and agency within performance, through experimental practice

MODULE: THTR30070

TUTOR: Matthew Hawthorn

This submission is the result of my own work. All help and advice other than that received from tutors has been acknowledged and primary and secondary sources of information have been properly attributed. Should this statement prove to be untrue I recognize the right and duty of the board of Examiners to recommend what action should be taken in line with the Universitys regulations on assessment contained in its handbook.

Signed:

Abstract
Introduction In this essay I investigate the use of relationality and agency within a performance context; focusing on theories put forward by Bruno Latour, Michel Callon and Nicolas Bourriaud. Through the use of looking at actor network theory; as well as relational aesthetics; I devise my own piece in response to this. Through calling on key texts in performance theory; such as Anthony Howells The Analysis of Performance Art; I investigate prime methods of devising performance. From this, I create my own instruction- based piece to test these relational ties and how they work in practice. I later go on to look at this in relation to site, and how it brings another layer to the relationships created between objects, people and space. From this, I push my investigation further to apply my knowledge of relational methods to my own site specific piece. In this way, I create a deeper understanding of relational ties within performance, through applying these theoretical methods to my own practice.

Research Question In this project I plan to investigate the use of relational theory and agency within performance. In this way, I focus on how these theories are applied and the effect they can have upon an audiences experience. I have chosen to look at these methods within studio theatre and gallery spaces, as they clearly establish a context for the work. This sets a framework for each piece I examine; including my own; and allows the focus to remain on the relationships within that space. However, I later challenge the meaning of space within this, through applying my research to site specific practice. I chose to focus on this area, due to previous research undertaken into the use of proxemics and the senses, and how they create a more powerful audience experience. Focusing on this notion of experience, I wanted to investigate further into how this is created through our relations to the

things around us. In this process, I chose to develop my own pieces as a way to test how these methods could be used in practice, through direct relation to academic research.

Materials and Findings Through this process, I have found that giving an audience a high level of agency within performance can allow them to become more immersed. Through them having to make choices about their involvement, and so their relationship to the piece, they are able to understand it in the form of these associations; bringing to light their contribution to the network and the effect they had, or later could have upon it. Through later investigating this within site specific works; we can see how these associations are strengthened further; through the connection to site. Adding a component of complexity into the network; through the historical, social and political context of the site itself; further questions the audiences understanding of these relationships. In turn, this creates a deeper relation with the piece itself, and an understanding of it within a wider context.

Method To investigate this subject area, I developed a basic understanding of relationality by looking at actor network theory and relational aesthetics. From this, I felt the best way to look at these relationships in more detail would be to devise my own practice piece. From looking at ideas on performance theory, I could develop an understanding of how to go about this. I do so by taking knowledge from relevant examples, as well as my own experience and involvement in another, research based performance.

Devising my own piece in relation to this; allowed me to work in depth around the subject area. Due to physically developing a performance piece in response to this, I was able to allow one to inform the other; and vice versa. In this way, I could create a depth to my knowledge and understanding of the subject area through experimental practice.

Presentation approaches In this project I have chosen to present my findings in a traditional essay format. I feel this works appropriately for the piece, as it has extensive theoretical context to it. Through using a traditional essay format, I can talk about my process of devising two practice pieces in close relation to my academic research. Using this way of working, also allows for me to go into more depth about each piece, through analysing all elements. Placing videos of my work within the text allows the reader to see and understand the piece for themselves first; before I examine why these choices were made and the affect they had.

Conclusion In conclusion this project shows how the use of relational theory and agency within performance can allow the audience to develop a deeper understanding and connection to the piece in question. Through first looking in depth at actor network theory and relational aesthetics; as well as performance theory; I built a strong foundation to create a practice piece from. Through devising work in relation to these academic concepts, I give strength and resonance to my research through being able to provide detailed applications of these methods, upon my own practice. This in itself allowed me to explore a more extensive research area, and created room for the application of this method upon other areas of performance.

Chapters
1 Introduction Experience 3 Proxemics and the Senses 5 One to One Performance 8 Crowd Behaviour

Relational Theory 11 Actor Network Theory 13 Relational Aesthetics

Performance Theory 18 Transference 21 Stillness, repetition and inconsistency 24 Assembly

Practice Piece 26 Piece 1- Experiment 34 Five Objects, Three Action

44 Space and place 48 Calke Reframed 56 Conclusion 58 Bibliography

Introduction In this essay, I plan to explore the use of relationality and agency within a performance context, through my own experimental practice. Throughout this document I explore ideas put forward by Bruno Latour and Michel Callon on Actor Network Theory, as well as investigating Nicolas Bourriauds concept of Relational Aesthetics. In this, I apply them to relevant examples of art and performance in purely a gallery or theatre context. Through directly applying these theories and methods to my own practice, I examine these concepts in more depth. I later go on to look at the notion of place in relation to these theories, and investigate them further through the devising of my own site specific piece. The first chapter focuses on the notion of experience, and how we; as an audience; encounter performance. To do this I refer back to my own previous areas of research, looking in particular at the use of proxemics and the senses, through theories put forward by Edward T.Hall and Juhani Pallasmaa. I then go on to look at how performance is traditionally experienced as a group the audience, through exploring Gustave Le Bons ideas on crowd behaviour and deindividuation theory. In comparison, I also bring to focus an article on One to One Performance by Rachel Zerihan, which interviews sixteen performance artists who create work for an audience of one. In this way, I can compare and contrast the notion of how others can affect our experience. In Chapter Two, I start to question the relationship between people, objects and space and their role within our experiences. From this I draw on the method of Actor Network Theory; formed by Bruno Latour and Michel Callon; which in turn leads me to investigate Nicolas Bourriauds ideas on Relational Aesthetics. Using prime examples of Felix Gonzales-Torres and Rirkrit Tiravanji, I question Bourraids theory and how it can be applied in practice. Chapter Three looks at performance theories in preparation to explore my research through practice. In particular, I focus on the Anthony Howells, The Analysis of Performance Art, to look at

ideas of repetition, inconsistency and transference. Through looking at a variety of ways in which these methods are applied to both art and performance; in traditional gallery or theatre settings; I develop ways of implementing these into my own practice. I also draw upon my experiences in a recent research based performance, Assembly, to reiterate key components of devising performance. In Chapter Four I talk in depth about my own experimental performance pieces, which I devised to explore relational theory further. In this, I define the concept of each element of both performances, and depict the relationships and connections created between space, objects and audience within them. Through this I show the use of my first piece, to inform a second, task based performance, Five Objects, Three Actions. This is where I apply the majority of my research to my own practice, to see how relational ties can affect our experience of performance. Chapter Five starts to look at the notion of space and place in relation to my research so far, through applying these theories to examples of site specific pieces. Here, I call on key texts such as Miwon Kwons, One Place After Another, and Nick Kayes, Site-specific Art; Performance, Place and Documentation, to depict the meaning of creating art or performance work for a specific site. Here, I draw upon Louise Ann Wilsons work to highlight its integrated and immersive nature. In Chapter Six, I apply my knowledge and understanding from the previous chapter, to examine my own site-specific installation. Through this, I again question how relationship between objects, people and space are formed. Focusing on ideas of integration and immersion, I interrogate my own concept and execution of the piece to establish how experience is created, through relational ties. In this way, I can generate a deeper understanding of my subject area, through exploring theoretical and practical research simultaneously. This research document does not try to justify whether these theories are right or wrong, it purely offers a space in which we can explore their use and function, through practice based research.

Experience
Proxemics and the Senses From previous research undertaken last year, I have found that the use of proxemics and the senses is a fundamental part in creating experience. Looking at theories by Edward T.Hall and Juhani Pallasmaa, we can see how these elements work together to create a more immersive experience. Experience is defined as, A particular instance of personally encountering or undergoing something (Dictionary.com, 2012). The notion of experiencing is for something to actually happen; it is a live moment that occurs in the present. Edward T Halls research on proxemics is seen as the understanding of objects within space. It gives focus to the human aspect of this through centralizing around people, and their interaction within that space. Hall describes it as a hidden dimension of human culture that we practise unconsciously all the time, which affects our perceptions of space. In, The Hidden Dimension, Hall defined four main types of space that determine the cultural norms of proxemics. These are: intimate, personal, social and public. Intimate is the closest proximity we can have to others, and involves being in physical contact with another person. Personal moves further away; so you are still in close proximity, but only occasionally in physical contact. Social, again steps further away, to where there is a distance between us and the other person, and we do not expect to touch or be touched. Finally, public, creates a larger distance between us and we no longer expect interaction; we are separated from that person. Depending upon the social situation and hence, our proximity to others, we know what level of interaction to expect. Moving on to look at Juhani Pallasmaas theory on the senses, Pallasmaa explains how we live in an ocular centric world, and so rely mainly on vision as a way of understanding the things around us, in relation to ourselves. In, The Eyes of The Skin, he first talks about our use of peripheral and focused 3

vision, in connection to the senses. Peripheral vision centres ourselves within a space, and focused vision pushes us out of a space. When using only one of the senses alone we have focused vision, and so are pushed outside of, and separated from, that space. However, when we begin to use more than one of the senses we are using our peripheral vision, and so become integrated within the space, instead of purely being a spectator. Pallasmaa then goes on to explain how the skin is the oldest sense, and so every other bodily sense has grown from it. He explains how we can see, touch, hear and smell through the skin, and so can perceive with our whole being. With the skin being the largest organ of the body, and it being able to read multiple signals of weight, temperature, density, and texture; it allows us to generate a more complex understanding of the things around us. From this, we know that using one sense alone will detach us from an object or space, but by using multiple senses we can perceive that object or space fully. Through the use of touch in particular, we can experience with what Pallasmaa describes as our whole being. (Pallasmaa, 2005) Bringing these together, we know when in close proximity with others, such as personal or intimate spaces; as Hall defines; we expect to touch or be touched. At such close proximity, we are going to be engaging more of our senses, and in turn will be more receptive to things that otherwise we would be distanced from. In this environment, we will have a deeper understanding of the things around us, due to experiencing them fully; through all of our senses. From this research, we can see how proxemics and the senses are fundamental elements to creating depth and understanding through experience. When using these in a performance context, we are able to create a more genuine encounter for our audience. Through the heightening of the senses in such close proximity, the audience will be able to experience the piece through every sensory receptor; generating understanding. This in turn allows them to experience the piece in question fully.

One on one performance As theatre is often a communal experience, we tend to view performance as part of a group; the audience. I started to question how this experience would differ when viewed alone; how our responses and reactions to the piece would change if we knew this was a private moment, and how the relationship between the performer and spectator would change. After finding an article from The Live Art Development Agency on one-on-one performance, I was intrigued as to why these artists created work for a singular audience and how they felt it benefited the participant. In interviewing sixteen performance artists; including Adrian Howells, Oreet Ashery, and Sam Rose; Rachel Zerihan hears of how they feel it creates a more authentic and intimate experience for their audience. Adrian Howell in particular, speaks about how in his piece, Foot Washing for The Sole, the audience member is entering into something very genuine with the artist. In this piece, he invites participants to enter the space, where he will wash and massage their feet for a set period of time. Through this, he speaks of how it allows the potential for two people to be very intimately responsive to each other (Zerihan, 2008, p35). This intensity of one-on-one interaction can only bring with it a level of intimacy. In this situation, intimacy is created through the breaking down of the audience-performer divide. In proxemics, we use a measure of closeness to others to judge how we should interact with them. In a group audience situation, you will be more willing to interact with the other audience members around you than you would with a performer. As the performers are distanced from you, there is a clear divide between the two groups; hence you are less likely to interact with members outside of your own grouping. In one-on-one performance we see this barrier being broken down, as there is only one audience member and one performer in the space at one time. Here, you are only conscious of your proximity

to one other person. There is no one else within the space and so groupings cannot form. This in itself allows the proximity between the two to change quite easily; from a social space to an intimate one. Due to both parties having an awareness of this proximity; through the type of space they have created between them; the level of interaction expected by both parties also changes. This intimacy between the two becomes more anticipated as it is a private situation and you are both there as individuals. In Howells piece the spectator and performer are in close proximity to one another; causing physical contact as well as other senses to be stimulated. For this close contact to occur in a space of privacy, he is very easily creating an environment for intimate exchange. Intimacy is a key element within one-on-one performance. It is interesting to see how these artists can create a sense of closeness in such a short space of time, with someone they previously may not know. Through using simple techniques which the body will instantly respond to, the senses are heightening. Creating a rush of emotion, whether positive or negative, there is an innate response to stimulation of the senses. Within one-to-one performance, another key element is the vulnerability of the performer, due to the agency the audience are given within the encounter. In Oreet Asherys piece, Say Cheese, she sits on a bed in a private room as her alter ego Marcus Fisher and allows each spectator to come sit with him for three minutes each. In this time the audience member can interact with him as they

Figure 1. Say Cheese, Oreet Ashery

please; there is no set script for what may happen. In this way the audience create the character of Marcus Fisher; they literally animated him, projected upon him, gave him history, narratives, context, they created who he was (Zerihan, 2008, p16). This brings with it, questions of the freedom given in one-on-one performance, for the audience to behave as they wish, and the agency they have within the piece. Here, the audience can choose what happens during this encounter and build a relationship with the character of Marcus Fisher. Ashery though, will not know how this character might develop and how he will be treated by each individual. She is putting herself in a vulnerable position, through giving her audience a high level of agency. Agency is defined in Merriam Websters dictionary as: the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2012). Here we can see that something that has agency has the ability to influence something else. In a performance context, we can then say that an audience that have agency have the ability to affect, adapt or create the piece in question. When looking at agency in more depth, we can see it is something that is always present, although it may not always be acted upon. In relating this to performance, we can see how different levels of agency can be present within different contexts. When there is a low level of agency; such as when viewing a painting; we can understand there is agency present, but not likely to be acted upon. Here, within the context of a gallery space, we know that we shouldnt interact with the piece we see before us; lowering the level of agency we are given. In comparison, when there is a high level of agency; such as in one on one performance; the audience will expect to engage with the piece. Here, the opportunity for agency is increased through expectancy and the freedom of choice, within this context. There is often opportunity for audience agency within one-on-one pieces, and so the experience both participants are about to enter is to some degree, unknown. Here, it becomes a much more collaborative process; due to the participant having a comparable amount of agency within the performance, as the artist. Having one audience member and one performer offers the chance for 7

these two to join, and become one, in creating the piece in question. It is a collaboration between audience and performer. This freedom for the spectator to be able to affect the piece, whether in a subtle or dramatic way, is what creates such an authentic experience. This element of individuality and each spectator bringing their own attitudes, understandings and emotions to the piece is what creates such interesting encounters. It is a moment of exchange between two individuals that will never happen in exactly the same way again.

Crowd Behaviour In contrast to this, I started looking at crowd behaviour and how the audience, as a mass, would experience performance. Although they will all still bring individuality to the piece, I was interested to see how this relationship between spectator and performer would change if they were in larger groupings, and how the division between these two may become more distinct. Gustave Le Bon is a French psychologist who developed theories to examine and predict crowd behaviours. When defining his findings in, Crowd Psychology; A Study of The Popular Mind he first talks of how a group of people will only become a crowd when they have a common focus between them. As Le Bon states: A thousand individuals accidentally gathered in a public place without any determined object in no way constitute a crowd from the psychological point of view(Le Bon, 1896). In a BBC Radio 3 Sunday Feature on Crowd Psychology we hear geneticist Steve Jones, give a prime example of this; when people are on the tube and it breaks down. Before the incident they are all there as individuals, and often have no relation to the people around them. However, when the tube breaks down, this group of people now all have a common focus; that the tube has stopped. This in itself forms a crowd, as the focus is taken away from individual situations, and moves towards the group situation. (Wright, 2012) 8

Le Bon then goes on to look at how when grouped together, people start to show new characteristics, very different from if they were in isolation. Deindividuation theory suggests that when grouped together, the boundaries between people disappear and they become a whole, resulting in mental unity. This is the idea that each individual loses their identity as they see themselves as part of a collective, and so act in the best interests of the group. An extreme example of this is rioting, where people lose conscious awareness of themselves and start to copy or mimic the actions of the collective.

Figure 2. Looting Rioters in London August 2011

As we hear later in this Sunday Feature, from legal affairs journalist Fiona Ball; it started from a small group of people louting shops and businesses, and grew to a national level. Ball is creating an analysis of the 2011 riots through first-hand accounts, and talks of how people arrested at the scene were from varying ages and backgrounds; showing that this was not a predominant factor or motive.

Instead, people were experiencing a psychological shift to mental unity; i.e. because everyone else is doing it, they should be doing it too. They are mimicking the actions of the collective. During this report, we hear that many people handed themselves in to the police days later as they felt, They had behaved so out of character, and in the cold light of day they were absolutely shocked and appalled by what they had done (Wright, 2012, 40 minutes). This shows the influence crowd behaviour can have upon people, as many were later aware that their behaviour had changed dramatically in this situation. Le Bon compares the similarities of this to those present within biology, exactly as the cells which constitute a living body form by their reunion a new being which displays characteristics very different from those possessed by each of the cells singly.(Le Bon, 1896) From this we know that in a collective, our experience of performance will be very different from that as an individual. We feel supported by others of our own group, and so will respond as we feel they would anticipate us to. Compared to as an individual, we can only respond as we genuinely would in that moment, as we have no responsibility or ties to a collective. This allows us to respond in a very open way when we encounter performance as an individual, and gives a more authentic experience.

10

Relational Theory
From looking at one-on-one performance and crowd behaviour in detail, I realised the focal point of my research was the relationship between objects, people and space. I was interested in exploring how these relational ties worked together in their entirety, and in turn, could transform the audiences experience.

Actor Network Theory Actor Network Theory is a method of exploring these relationships, and first goes back to the idea of sociology or the science of the social to redefine what this means. Instead of looking at sociology as we know it today, Bruno Latour and Michel Callon stated that it is a tracing of associations; a connection between things that do not themselves have to be social. They believe that sociology is a network of associations, or relationships between actants; both human and non-human actors. In effect, every actant; object, person, organisation etc; has meaning and purpose within the network in which they function; through their relationships to every other actant. When the relationships between actants change, so does the meaning and purpose of them. This may also cause the network to function in a different way or to breakdown. One of the main differences of this theory, to others in the social sciences, is its inclusion of material objects within the network, as well as the idea of generalized symmetry; which gives both human and non-human actants equal amounts of agency. In this way, it is a method that can be applied to various subject areas, and when applied to performance brings a particular interest, due to this inclusion of non-human actants. This method, when applied to art and performance, could give us a way of understanding how the relationships between space, objects and people, can change their meaning, and in turn, our

11

understanding of them. At its most basic level; in art, we could compare it to a composition. In a painting, meaning is constructed through the arrangement of objects and/or people within a space. If the composition was reassembled, our understanding of the relations between each element or as Latour terms, actant, would in turn change. Due to this, the network itself; here the painting; will also transform and new meaning is created. This simple assembling and reassembling of things to create meaning through the relations between them, is one of the fundamentals of any art form. A prime example of using relational theory to create a specific environment is Jeremy Benthams, Panopitcon. The Panopticon is a circular building in which there is a central tower and cell blocks around the edge wall. Light is used to shine from the tower onto the prisoners, so they can always be seen but are unaware if there are guards present. Due to a consciousness of this, they will not risk misbehaving for fear of being seen. Here, control is achieved through the relation of objects to the prisoners, within the space of the prison walls.

Figure 3. An example of The Panopticon 12

In looking at this, Michel Foucault talks in, Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of the Prison, about the idea of panopticism. This is founded on Benthams design, and looks at creating power and control over people through the idea of surveillance. In this way, Foucault uses it as an example, to show how control could be created over other establishments in society; for example schools. In this, we can see how relational theory can be used to create power and control over a group of people. Through the simple assembling of components within the network, associations are created between them. Through the prisoners connections to the space, and other components around them, they create understanding and meaning about each of these in relation to themselves. Here, these relationships generate the understanding that they are potentially being watched at all times. If we were to take one of the actants away; for example the light in the central tower; these associations between each actant would change. The prisoners would now be able to see whether there are guards present or not, and so their behaviours will change because of it. Here, the networks function has transformed, through a change in the associations between each actant.

Relational Aesthetics and Agency

Going back to the idea of how we experience performance through our relationships to the things around us, I came across a piece by David Overend called A Work on Progress. In this installation, he sets up various stations with different objects or pieces of equipment, and lets the audience create what they wish within that space. For example, one station had various types of lighting features; from torches and lamps to a lighting desk, controlling pre rigged theatrical lighting. Here all the audience are told is what can be found on a short piece of text next to each station.

13

these are the lights that we already rigged control them with the faders on the lighting desk

lamps, torches, an overhead projector, and plug sockets around the room reconfigure them? blind us with light play with the shadows

Text- The lighting station. (Overend, 2011) Here, the audience are free to move and change the lighting as they please, in essence creating their own experience. This idea of letting the audience have complete control over what they do within the space, gives a high level of agency to each individual, but within a group situation. By taking the performer out of the network and having purely props and an audience within the space, the audience are free to do what they wish. This leaves more to the participants to create their own experiences, and as Overend states, it offers the potential for a range of different modes of engagement, possibilities for interaction and relationships with the event. (Overend, 2011)

A Work on Progress was strongly influenced by the idea of creating real live events that offer opportunity for communication and interaction. This is the foundation of Nicolas Bourriauds relational aesthetics. As an extension of relational theory, through placing it within an art context, relational aesthetics brings focus to inter-human associations. Bourriaud describes this term as A set of artistic practices which take as their theoretical and practical point of departure the whole of human relations and their social context, rather than an independent and private space. (Bourriaud, 2002, p113) In this sense, he believes that we could extend our understanding of the relationships and associations we create between one another through the artwork; creating its own social context.

14

Bourriaud talks of how art should be about these inter-human relations, and the emphasis for artists should be on how their work will create these for an audience. Pieces he uses as prime examples are purely social and offer the space for communication and interaction between spectators. Here the artwork is the social encounter. One artist who works in this particular way is Rirkrit Tiravanija. In his first piece Pad Thai, shown in New York, he provided the equipment, ingredients and instructions for gallery visitors to cook and eat a traditional Pad Thai. In this piece the audience are the people creating the artwork, through the process of cooking and eating together. These tasks in themselves are traditionally very communal, and so easily create an environment for social interaction. In an interview after receiving his Absolut Art Award in 2010, Tiravanija states how the focal point of his work is about the process and the social relations his audience experience through the piece, rather than the actual objects involved and the final product of the artwork (Author Unknown, 2012ABSOLUT ART AWARD 2010). Their social interactions create the work themselves. As he is merely constructing an environment in which this can happen freely; he is simply the creator. Without an audience the piece would not exist. This focus on creating interactions between people is key to Tiravanijas work, as it is their social relations that create understanding and meaning from the piece. Through this, he is offering the space for them to be reflective within a live moment. Later in an interview, he talks about how traditionally, when viewing artwork, our relationship to the piece is very internal; we create understanding and meaning through our relation to it. However, working in a more social way allows us to be able to relate to one another about the piece and the experiences we are having, and so it becomes something external (Author Unknown, 2012- ABSOLUT ART AWARD 2010). This notion that art can be a living moment or experience also challenges, as Bourriaud does, what art can be and how it is defined.

15

Within artworks that use relational aesthetics as their foundation, there is often a high level of audience agency. From our earlier definition, we can understand that, within a performance context, an audience that have agency have the ability to affect, adapt or create the piece in question. This in turn, offers potential for the piece to become virtually anything; through often using a non-scripted way of working; and allows the relationships within the network to change freely. Hence, altering the experience each spectator will have. Another artist who uses agency within his work but in a more conceptual way is Felix GonzalezTorres. He is a Cuban/American artist who creates interactive installations around themes of mortality, love and loss. His work is audience-centred; spectators are often welcome to take part of the artwork away with them. In one of his best known pieces; Untitled (Portrait of Ross in L.A.), he creates a pile of sweets in a corner of the gallery and the audience are welcome to take one if they wish. This direct portrayal of the death of his partner, shown through the mountain of sweets being

Figure 4. Untitled (Portrait of Ross in L.A.), Felix Gonzalez-Torres

16

taken away gradually by the audience, shows the slow deterioration of Ross physically. The use of audience agency here is a very conceptual one, but adds another layer as The viewer is asked to take active responsibility for the making and unmaking of the work (Serpentine Gallery, 2000, p9). Through this physical involvement in the piece, the audience will have a more genuine and meaningful encounter. It is something they can interact with through touch, smell, and taste, and so pushes the level of engagement the audience has through the use of proxemics and the senses. As we know from Pallasmaas concepts, when using multiple senses we will centre ourselves within that space. Through this the audience will become more immersed within the piece and its context. The notion of consumption is something that has come through in both the examples I have looked at, and is a way of allowing the audience to interact with the piece. By using objects which purely function through our use of them; it creates a direct relation with the audience, and encourages them to be active within the piece. Through consumption, we are stimulating another of the senses, and so will create a deeper understanding, through our experience of the piece.

17

Performance Theory
Transference In Anthony Howells The Analysis of Performance Art, he talks about Freuds notion of transference, which is redirecting the feelings and meanings of one relationship onto someone or something else. In Freuds notable Fort da game, he observed his grandson who would repeatedly throw a toy away from him saying fort, meaning gone, and then pull the toy back towards him saying da meaning there. Through this, he understood that the child was redirecting feelings of loss; through repeatedly implementing these onto another object that he could have control over. This idea of transferring attitudes and emotions from one object onto another is called object substitution. In performance terms, this could be using the same object in more than one way or for more than one purpose (Howell, 2000, p142). Hence, transferring the attitudes and emotions of one thing, and implementing them on to another. A basic example of this would be using a shoe as a dustpan. Here we could implement our associations and understandings with a dustpan, and transfer them on to the shoe. This may result performatively, in us sweeping things up into the shoe and/or tipping them out again. Station House Opera use similar methods of object substitution in Roadmetal, Sweetbread. In this we see a man and woman perform in front of a screen; showing contradicting actions to the video. Through showing both video and performance in unison, we as an audience are aware of the contradictions taking place. We often see a transference of feelings and emotions towards one object or person, been projected onto another. This ambiguity works effectively in showing several actions in exactly the same way but through using different objects. For example, at 2 minutes 25 seconds, there is a chair on the floor and the male performer goes to pick it up. On the screen however, we see that the chair on the floor is in fact the man, lying in the same position. As the chair is tipped back up, we see him slowly rising from the floor. This is a direct 18

transference of feelings and emotions from one relationship on to another, which continues through the piece to tackle shocking moments of anger and domestic violence. When the actions of one object are transferred to a person though, the result is often quite humorous for us as an audience. Through using transference here, Station House Opera are able to tackle difficult issues that may otherwise cause upset. (Edmunds, B, 2012) From looking at how transference could be used in a more conceptual way, I was drawn to Michael Craig-Martins piece, titled An Oak Tree. In this artwork he placed a glass of water on a shelf with a list of questions next to the piece, stating how it had been transformed into an oak tree. This very conceptual idea of the transformation of an object, questions the audiences belief in what they are seeing. Although there is no proof of physical change, Craig-Martin asks why a transformation has to be physical. Instead it is a transformation of meaning, and gives the audience a new way of seeing the object presented before them.

Figure 5. An Oak Tree, Michael Craig-Martin

19

Another artist who works with transference in a conceptual way is Tim Crouch. In his work, he starts to challenge the power of suggestion and the meaning of what objects are, and our associations with them. In his performance, My Arm, he tells the story of a boy who decided to keep one arm above his head for the rest of his life. Not once in the performance does Crouch place his arm above his head but it is the suggestion of the action, through the narrative, that creates this visualization for the audience. Another method he uses, at the start of the piece, is borrowing objects from members of the audience, which later become characters in the narrative. This is a prime example of using transference; as each night the narrative is the same, even though what we see visually as characters will be something completely different. This further encourages the idea of suggestion upon the audience as what we are told may not correspond visually; it is a belief in the narrative that allows what we see before us to be transformed. As Crouch says, in interview with Dan Rebellato, it is a request that is made to an audience to believe that what I am is not what I am.(Rebellato, 2013, p16) The notion of agency and bringing the individuality of audience members into the piece also reappears here, through using personal items from the audience within the performance. It offers a way in for the spectators, through having some agency in what the characters in the narrative will be visually represented through. Crouch even speaks of one woman who came to him in tears at the end of the show because her watch was the mother in the narrative, and the mother died. This he feels shows the strength of belief from the audience, as he pushes them to do more in creating this narrative by investing themselves within the piece. (Rebellato, 2013)

20

Inconsistency in Performance After looking at, The Analysis of Performance Art in more detail, I realized there were three primary actions that I would need within the piece. These, Howell explains, are the fundamentals of performance and are: stillness, repetition and inconsistency. Stillness is the foundation of all performance, as it is the absence things will later grow from. It can often be a physical stillness in action that offers space for thought and understanding; similar to when viewing a painting. Although stillness is often seen as the absence of everything, stillness in action can hold great resonance in performance. From stillness come two more primary actions; repetition and inconsistency. (Howell, 2000)

Figure 6 Figures 1(a) and 1(b), Anthony Howell, The Analysis of Performance Art

21

As you can see from the diagram; these are both the speeding up of stillness but in different ways. Repetition as an action is the speeding up of stillness but in a consistent way. Repetition as copying not only mimics it also multiples the original (Howell, 2000, p30). It is a form of magnification of the present that seems to offer comfort in action. Inconsistency; the opposite of this; is the speeding up of stillness but in an unpredictable or erratic way. It can bring about change and shock to a piece whilst still being able to return to its grounding of stillness. Repetition is often seen as a stability that grows from stillness. A completely repetitive performance however can create boredom, and so moments of change through inconsistences can bring this excitement and audience interest back. In his chapter on Inconsistency, Catastrophe and Surprise Howell talks about how complete inconsistency is argued to be impossible, but can this not be said of repetition too? Something cannot possibly be repeated in exactly the same way every time. Even in inconsistencies, we will still be breathing, which in itself is a repetitive action. As Howell states Repetition underpins our inconsistencies. (Howell, 2000, p72) When looking at inconsistency in task, Howell talks of consistent inconsistencies, which are created by a string of inconsistent actions, often done through task based performance. This can be done by varying the order of the task or encouraged further by allowing the goal to remain unaccomplished. One of the main examples we hear of this in The Analysis of Performance Art, is Stuart Shermans Spectacles. From his interest in text; through previously writing poems and plays; he creates visual representations of narrative, through the arrangement of objects which he entitles Spectacles. Through the poetic substitution of words for objects and the sculptural, aesthetic and narrative possibilities of the live arrangements of things (Author Unknown, 2012, Trade Gallery), he performs simple actions and exchanges. Here, objects are often used in more than one way; similar to ideas of transference. For example, in the video of his 11th and 8th Spectacles; published by Live Art Work; we see the pencil sharpener being used whilst holding a pipe in his mouth. Several actions later, at 9 minutes 35 seconds, we see 22

the sharpenings are used as tobacco and placed in the end of the pipe. These spectacles are consistent in that there is a narrative and order to them, but inconsistent in the actions he executes. (Hewitt, 2007) You can also see within his work, the three basic actions of stillness, repetition, and inconsistency. There are moments where the objects are simply left, and we are presented with the action of stillness, to observe and understand them. However other actions, such as sharpening the pencil, are actions of repetition that reoccur several times within the piece. Most other actions are inconsistencies, as objects are not used in the same way repetitively; as each changes its use and function throughout the performance. The use of task within Shermans work seems to offer a potential and ease for executing these three basic actions. Through using everyday movements, he amplifies the notion of repetition through the actions themselves, as well as them being repetitive within our daily lives. Their familiarity to us only emphasises this, as they are something consistent we know and understand. Due to this, when inconsistencies are used we develop a heightened awareness of these changes. The use of task in Shermans work shows a minimalistic way of using these elements to the artists advantage effectively. Station House Opera are another performance company that uses everyday action and task within their work but in an inconsistent way. In their piece entitled, Mind Out, each persons mind and body are shown as two separate things. In this, each performer will have another person acting as their mind; saying the action or thought; and in turn they are the body and so display this thought physically. We often see one persons action intervened by another performer, as what each actor says and does are two different things. For example, when one character is drinking a cup of tea and another character is instructed to take a sip. (Author Unknown, 2008)

23

These contradictions however, are still done in quite a consistent way, in that, the task in hand gets completed. For example, in making the cup of tea, each character is instructed to conduct different elements of the process. Although actors have to keep swapping places and interrupting the person prior to them, the action is still completed, and eventually the cup of tea gets made. This holds the piece back slightly, as it is too consistent in its ordering and completion. The use of everyday tasks and actions and creating contradictions within them, works effectively to create contrast through these being consistent movements we know and understand. Through creating contradictions within familiar actions we, as an audience, are a lot more aware of this change in the pace and rhythm of the piece. It is something which is so simple, yet draws so much attention from the spectator.

Assembly Throughout this process, I had also been working as a performer on an agency based piece called Assembly, which explores the exchange between spectator and performer. In this piece, each time an audience member enters the space, so does a performer. That performer will then stay within the space for as long as their audience member decides to. When a new performer enters they bring with them a new action, which in turn, the performers currently on stage will start to execute. Through the use of simple actions, choreographer Nicole Conibere tries to create an environment in which the performers and spectators can be open with one another. Creating this balance in numbers between audience and performer, firstly brings equality between both groups; helping to break down the audience-performer divide. This is extended further through the openness of the performers to the audience; in allowing them to watch their actions comfortably; this barrier is again broken. Although there is never any verbal or physical contact between audience and performer, there is an exchange that takes place. It is interesting as a

24

performer to see how these relationships change throughout the piece, and so change the energy of the action. The audience here are controlling the piece they see before them, and have the ability to change the performance through their own actions. In this way, we start to see how actor network theory comes into practice, as the network itself is constantly changing. Here, each actant; audience members and performers; creates relationships and meaning between one another. When the network is stable; when all actants remain with the space; we see how the network functions in quite a consistent way. However, when an actant is removed from the network; when an audience member leaves; we see how in turn the network changes; a performer will leave. This is also apparent when an actant; audience member; is added to the network. Here we see the function of the network itself change, through the executing of a new action, sound or formation. As this was a practice piece itself; created by Nicola Conibere as part of her PHD around bodies in performance; it was interesting to see how she devised this as a way of exploring theoretical concepts. In this piece, elements such as repetition, stillness and inconsistency were used. These three components held the piece together; as the repetition of action, and of performers entering and exiting with audience members; created stability within the piece. By adding inconsistencies such as changes in actions, and also the actions themselves; some had movement and some were static; the audience kept interest in the piece, as these were moments of change and surprise. A main inconsistency was the action of dancing; which in itself when executed, changed the whole atmosphere of the piece, and made it something quite comical for the audience to be part of. Stillness was also used in actions such as sitting, standing and lying. This again, creates a contrast between the actions of movements and regains focus and questioning from the audience. A lot of these ideas I could take into my own work to give the audience consistency, as well as moments of stillness and thought, further contrasting with moments of comedy and inconsistency.

25

Practice Piece
I created my own experimental performance piece to test ideas of relational theory, using instruction based performance. I conducted this over a period of time through creating two separate pieces, the first working as a test to inform the other.

Piece 1
In this I invited an audience of twelve to come and take part in two instruction based performances. These varied through; the first being a one-on-one, and the second being a staggered performance. When in the space, there was a white square marked out in the centre of the room. Inside it were four objects: a table, a plant, a glass of water and a jug. Each audience member was given an instruction card before they entered the space, listing one action they must complete before leaving. The only other instruction they were given prior to the performance, was that they were welcome to stay in the space for as long as they liked. Video- Practice Piece Development When first trying to create an experiment to test how relational ties work, I was looking at this in a very sociological way and needed to place my piece within an art context. Referring back to an example of relational theory applied to performance; David Overends A Work on Progress focuses on putting relational aesthetics into practice. Through using Bourriauds theory of looking at how relationships are created through art, he tests how these associations are central to the experience a spectator will receive. Within his piece, he uses functional objects to allow for the audience to be active within the performance, and create relations between one another, the objects and the space. This is a very simply way of allowing an audience to participate. As each object is only active when we engage with

26

it, it pushes the audience to interactive with the performance, to make something happen. This process also allows for exchanges to take place between the spectators, through their participation with these objects. From looking at the use of proxemics and the senses within this context, the use of physical objects we can touch and interactive with will allow the audience to engage further with the piece. Through our proximity to the objects and to one another, our senses will be heightened. Using a multitude of these, including touch, we will be able to experience this environment and these objects with what Pallasmaa describes as our whole being. In turn this gives us a deeper understanding of the piece in question. The use of functional objects brings with it a familiarity for the audience, which helps encourage them to engage. As Overend tells us, at the lighting station, the lamps and torches were more active in the performance than say, the lighting desk; which fewer people knew how to operate. Here, the notion of familiarity and understanding of an object affecting our engagement with it, becomes more prominent. In this way, I wanted my audience to want to engage with the piece, and so felt that using everyday objects would make them more comfortable with this interaction. By using objects the audience has prior understanding and knowledge of, they will feel more confident in the purpose and use of it, and this therefore increases the chance of participation. The use of everyday objects also stemmed from looking at pieces by Felix Gonzalez-Torres and Rirkrit Tirvanija, which Bourriaud shows as prime examples of relational aesthetics. They are creating a scope of human relations, as the artwork themselves. In both of these artists work, they use everyday objects and actions, within which the audience have agency. The use of consumption also comes through strongly in both these artists pieces; as in Gonzalez-Torres work we are often asked to take part of the piece away with us; for example in Untitled(Portrait of Ross in L.A.) this appears in an edible form of sweets.

27

Tiravanijas work also uses food and consumption as a main element in his performance. Through using both cooking and eating within his works; which are traditionally very sociable activities; they offer a way of comfortably provoking interaction. In his piece, Pad Thai, the audience physically makes and then eats the work themselves. This notion of consumption is something I wanted to use in my own work, as our experience is heightened when we are engaging more of our senses. Through using taste, which, especially in an art context, is a sense that is rarely used by the audience, we are creating a more immersive experience. After previously looking at the placement of objects, I thought about using food or drink within this. I again wanted to keep this piece at its most basic level, and so decided on using a glass of water as my main object. This is an object of familiarity to most of us, and something that has a function both in relation to other objects and to ourselves. It is also an object that easily allows for agency, as we know its main function is through our consumption of its contents.

Figure 7 Drawings of Repetition in Action

28

After deciding to focus on the function of this object, I started to look at the actions involved in its use, and how it is something repetitive and consistent. Repetition is defined in The Analysis of Performance Art, as one of the three fundamental actions and is a movement of stability for an audience. It is something that can be sped up or slowed down, but will always be consistent. This repetitive action of drinking is also mirrored in the replenishing of the water; through the movement of pouring water from a jug into a glass. From looking at how water is consumed and then replenished; as something that again is repetitive and works in a cycle; adding a jug of water into the piece would allow for this cycle to continue. From thinking about adding an element to replenish the water, I wanted to add another way to dispose of it, other than the audience drinking it. I wanted to again use an everyday object that relied on the use of water to function. From already using the theme of consumption within the piece, I was interested in using another object that consumes water. I decided on a plant, as similar to humans it is something that needs water for survival. In this way I could create a cycle of actions through using the functions and needs of each component, including the participant. Once I had these basic elements, I also added a table to the piece to offer a place for the objects to sit, and to be moved around the space in a more dynamic way. When thinking about how these objects would function, and creating moments to contrast their innate repetitiveness, I went back to Anthony Howells The Analysis of Performance Art, to look at the idea of inconsistency. As I wanted to use actions that created repetition and were very familiar to an audience, I needed some element of change or surprise to bring interest back into the piece. Inconsistencies would be a way of creating this, whilst allowing for the performance to be able to move back into a repetitive state. After seeing Station House Operas work and their use of contradiction between real and virtual, I wanted to bring the two together and create a series of actions that contradicted each other physically, within one space. I felt this would offer the room for disorder and chaos amongst the 29

audience, whilst still holding consistency through the actions themselves. Through this, the piece would be able to shift between moments of calm and chaos, concentration and comedy. As I was very keen for the audience to experience this without any physical presence of a performer or creator, I needed a way to instruct each spectator in what to do. I decided the easiest way would be to simply issue them with an instruction card on entering the space. In this way, the spectator is very clear on what they intend to do once inside that space, and has a focus within the performance. Through this, the audience is given a level of agency within the piece but in a highly structured way. There are only some choices they can make within the rules they are given, although audience members may choose to break these; such as not to completing their action before leaving the space. However, by being asked in such a direct way, most spectators will feel obliged to complete the task in hand. Below is a list of the actions in the order I planned to use them.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Take a sip from the glass Tip water from the glass in jug Water plant with jug Move plant onto table Move table Tip water from jug into glass Water plant from glass Move glass onto floor Take sip from glass

10. Refill glass from jug 11. Move table 12. Water plant from glass

30

Here, contradictions are formed between each action, but depending on the timing between each audience member entering the space, there is still room for each action to be completed without interruption. Through using instructions within the piece, I am creating an order in which the network will function. As we know from looking at Actor Network Theory, everything within the network, whether human or non-human, will have meaning and agency within it. Through the use of action, each object has a function within that network and creates associations with the other objects, in relation to how it is used; with or against them. Through creating an ordering of actions, we will also be able to see how the network functions when each action is completed, and in contrast how its functionality, and so meaning, may change through the decisions of each audience member. I had previously intended the piece to be a one-on-one performance, as I was interested in how this would contrast to experiencing the piece as part of a collective, and how the network would change within these varying circumstances. I wanted to use one-on-one as it allows for individuality to come through. By purely having one audience member within the space at a time, there would be no one else for that individual to relate to. In this way they will act and behave as their true selves. In opposition to this, I had thought about allowing everyone into the space at the same time, to carry out their actions as and when they please. At this stage in my development, this would be too chaotic and I would need a more structured environment for this to happen. To find a middle ground between these two options, I planned to let the audience in at intervals in the second experiment. This technique had been used in a piece I performed in, called Assembly. In this, the performers and audience were let in at intervals to allow for an action to be executed, before it could be changed by the next person. This could be transferred into my own piece, as it would allow each audience member to start their action before the next spectator had the opportunity to interrupt the preceding persons with their own.

31

To generate an aesthetic for the piece, and place it within an art context, I decided to hold it within a studio theatre. Here, as we know a theatre is a place of performance, we as an audience will expect to see, or in this case take part, in a piece of live art. This was a way of framing the piece for the audience. Within this space, I could also make use of theatrical lighting to help generate the right aesthetic. Again, framing the space; but this time the physically marked out square where the actions would take place; helped to push this aesthetic further, and allowed the audience to perceive it as performance art.

Figure 8 Practice Piece 32

Analysis of Performance
In the video, we can see that in the one-on-one performance, each audience member will enter and execute their action quite willingly. It is interesting to see individuality come through here, as these actions were carried out. For example, we see some participants enter the space and execute their action quite quickly, whilst others stand nearer the edge and read their card in detail; entering with caution into the space, before completing their action. Here we see how people will behave as they truly would when in the space alone. There is no one else to compare or judge themselves against and so people can only act as their true selves. During the staggered performance, we see that the intervals people entered at were not fast enough to create contradictions within action. There is only one example we see at 13 minutes 54 seconds, where one participant is instructed to pour water into the glass and another is instructed to move the table. Here we see the table being moved with the glass on it and the first participant having to chase the table to complete her action. Although this only appears once in the performance, this is what I was trying to generate. In this moment we see both a change in the pace of the piece, as well as an element of comedy within the actions. Here, we see how the network changes through the actions of each person, upon each object. We can see how these function through the associations created between each component; people objects and space; and in turn how new meaning is created. As each person enters the space, the network itself creates new meaning through the relationships formed between each actant. Each participant will experience the network in a different way, as it is the meanings and associations they create between each actant within the space. Here, when a person enters the space, the relations between the actants already present in the network will be different each time; in turn influencing our relation to them as an audience member. Through this we can see how each component affects the network through the assembling and reassembling of its elements and so the associations between them. 33

From this performance, when looking to develop it, I would need to create more contradictions within the piece, as this was the main moment of interest in the video. Through the repetitiveness of the other actions, this moment of contradiction stood out and brought a change in both mood and pace to the piece. I also felt these contradictions may benefit from creating a competitive element to the performance, to push the participants to execute their actions with a level of urgency.

Piece 2
In this I invited an audience of twenty to come and take part in an instruction based performance, in Waverly Theatre. When let into the space, there was a white square marked in the centre of the room with twenty crosses around the outside of it, each with a card. The audience were directed to each stand by a cross and read their card, without showing anyone else. Each card contained three instructions they must complete before leaving the marked space, the first one triggered by anothers actions. In this piece I hoped to test my research area further through developing my experiment into a more structured performance; looking at creating further contradictions in actions and different encounters between people and objects. Video- Five Objects, Three Actions Development From my previous experiment I wanted to create a piece where everyone was in the space at the same time. This had been something I previously looked at but decided against as I felt it would be too chaotic. Through allowing all audience members to be in the same space at the same time, I would be able to explore Actor Network Theory in more depth; creating a set amount of actants within the network. In this way the audience themselves would be able to see how this network can change and adapt, through the relationships created between each element. Compared to my first

34

piece, where they were only aware of their own experience and agency within it, I wanted them to be able to see the network in its full complexity. In this way each actant would be able to see how the network functioned through these connections, as well as how it could break down. Given the agency each person has within the network; similar to the first piece; there was the chance that certain audience members may choose not to complete their actions. This offers the chance for the network to breakdown, through one actants actions. In this way we will be able to see how each component is vital to the functionality of the network itself. From looking at the video there was only one moment between two audience members of contradiction and this was something that stood out to me. I wanted to amplify this through creating opportunity for more inconsistencies within the performance. Inconsistencies, as Howell explains can bring about surprise and change to a piece. Through creating a string of repetitive inconsistencies I felt I could bring this element of excitement and comedy to the piece, but in a structured way. I had previously thought about using triggers, and how in creating this environment I would need some form of prompt for each person to know when to execute their action. The Street is a piece by The Theatre of Mistakes which uses triggers as one of its main components; based on the actions

Figure 9 The Street, The Theatre of Mistakes 35

of passers-by. The piece took place on a street in Kentish Town, London and involved a large group of performers inside the houses and on the streets of one particular road. In the performance if a passer-by walked up the pavement on the left, this would trigger the windows to close and the performers in the street to fall to the ground. In turn if a passer-by walked up the right side of the pavement, the windows would open again and the performance would continue. This basic use of triggers creates dynamic moments of change and shock within the piece through the use of mass movement. Passers-by have agency within the performance without having to actively take part. I could take this into my own piece by letting one persons instructed actions be another persons trigger. Through this, the person triggering the action would not be aware of it; they would only be conscious of looking for their trigger and completing their own actions. Within the actions I decided to keep the same contradictions but amplify this through allowing one persons actions to trigger several people to all do opposing things. In this way I also allowed for other problems to arise between audience members such as spacing, in particular, would be an issue. With one cue triggering five people and each of theirs triggering others, the space would be too small to hold everyone. This would create challenges in itself of, if people will enter the space straight away or wait until there is room to complete their action; as, on the cards, I do not direct how long after the trigger their action has to be completed. It would also allow me to push the network to test its complexity, through creating moments that would change the associations between each actant dramatically, as well as forcing the network into moments where it may no longer be able to function and there is a possibility of it breaking down. Below is a list of the instruction cards in order, to show how the contradictions where constructed.
1. When the lights go down, fill the glass. Take a sip. Water the plant.

36

2.

When someone tries to drink from the glass, pour it back into the jug. Place the plant on the table. Sit on the chair.

3.

If someone tries to water the plant, move it to the centre of the space. Take a sip from the glass. Place the jug on the floor.

4.

If someone places the plant on the table, move the table to the opposite corner of the space. Water the plant from the jug. Stand in the centre of the space holding the jug.

5.

If someone places the plant on the table, move the table to the centre of the space. Pull the chair under the table. Place the plant back on the floor.

6.

If the chair is placed under the table, go sit at it. Pour a glass of water. Give it to the person nearest to you.

7.

If the table moves, water the plant from the jug. Turn the chair upside down. Put the jug on the table.

8.

If someone sits at the table, move it away from them. Take a sip of water. Hold the plant.

9.

If someone sits at the table, pour the water in the glass into the jug. Move the plant onto the table. Move the table.

10. If someone sits at the table, give them the plant. Water the plant. Place the jug on the floor.

11. If someone is holding the plant, take if off them.

37

Pour a glass of water. Take a sip

12. If someone moves the plant onto the table, pour a glass of water. Keep hold of it. Walk to the corner of the space.

13. If someone is pouring a glass of water, water the plant from the jug. Take a sip from the glass. Fill the glass.

14. If someone is taking a sip of water, stop them. Take a sip. Then refill the glass.

15. If someone takes a sip of water, pick up the plant. Go sit on the chair. Place the plant on the floor next to you.

16. If someone takes a sip of water, turn the chair upside down. Take a sip. Place glass on the table.

17. If someone takes a sip of water, move the table towards the chair. Place the plant on the chair. Take a sip of water.

18. If someone takes a sip of water, pour it back into the jug. Move the jug onto the table. Fill the glass of water.

19. If someone tries to place the glass on the table, tip a sip from it. Water the pant. Place glass on the floor.

20. If someone places the glass on the floor, take a sip from it. Water the plant. Place the glass on the table.

38

Within these actions, I also decided to add instructions to create encounters between people. For example, in instruction six, the participant is directed to pour a glass of water and then give it to the person nearest to them. In this way, I wanted to create moments of encounter between audience members through using actions of exchange. This is used in both a positive and negative way, through the inclusive of actions to give an object to someone and actions to take an object away. Other instructions were created to leave the participant unsure if there action is completed or not, and so give them a choice in how to respond to this. For example, in instruction four, the participant is asked to stand in the centre of the space holding the jug. Here, another action may have been triggered so another participant will take the jug off them, but the person executing this action will be unsure when this may happen. This again leaves a level of agency to the audience member as I do not specific in the instruction for how long they must stand there, and so they have a choice in how long they decide to execute the action for. In both these actions I am again pushing the exploration of Actor Network Theory through creating moments that test the associations between each actant and challenge them to think about their impact upon the network. I chose for this piece, that I should not be present within the space. I felt, by having simply the audience and the lighting technician to create the first trigger; all having a basic level of knowledge of the piece; this would allow them to treat it as they liked. They could do whatever they wished within the space, as there was no one present to observe or control their actions. This brings about questions of the authority within the piece. As everyone within the space will have an understanding of what they have been instructed to do and the trigger which will cue them; there was no means of authority or control within the space in a physical form. I had given them rules to follow but I was not present to make sure they adhered by them. In this way, the audience can behave as they wish within the space, and so will start to take ownership of the piece. It later became apparent that my choice to not be present within the performance was the right decision, as in the piece the first trigger was missed and there were approximately four minutes 39

where no action took place. At this point, if I had of been in the space, I felt the audience would have looked to me for direction in what to do. By not being there, they were left to their own devices and although not instructed to, one audience member decided to take action and enter the marked space.

Figure 10 Five Objects, Three Actions

Analysis of Performance From the video, we can see at the start of the piece the first trigger was missed and so consequently the audience are left stood ready in their positions, looking at the space, the objects and one another. Although this wasnt intentional it worked well in bringing focus to the piece and building awareness of what was around them. In the feedback session afterwards, spectators spoke of having a heightened sense of awareness, and how this stillness created it. It built the suspense for the piece as nobody in the room knew how and when the performance would start.

40

In this way attention is instantly drawn to each component of the network before it starts to function, helping the audience observe each element in detail, including one another. Through this it allows them to generate a consciousness of what they are about to engage with and builds a foundation for challenging them to think about the network in relation to themselves. Once an audience member decided to take action and enter the space, this instantly triggered other people and the pace of the piece picked up very quickly. Although the actions were constructed to create contradictions and possibly moments of chaos within the performance, the video shows a very structured and synchronized chain of actions. There appears to be a pace and rhythm to the piece in how these actions are carried out, due to people knowing exactly what theyre doing and focusing on executing those few actions. This came across in the video as people seem quite confident and comfortable in what they are about to do when entering the space and move directly to each object. Another thing that came from the feedback session was the use of lighting. In the piece I had only given the lighting technician two instructions: When the audience are in and have all read their cards, fade the flood light down, and at the end of the piece, there will be no action within the marked space for a prolonged period of time; at this point fade the food light in, and open the theatre door. This allowed the lighting to have control and influence within the piece, as in the middle of the piece: for example, at 9 minutes 50 seconds; due to the space being left unoccupied with no action for a period of time, the lights begin to come up, which in turn caused the action to start again. This was not a trigger I had placed on a card but as I previously mentioned, I had not said how soon after the trigger takes place your action had to be completed, and so the agency was left to the audience of exactly when or if they completed their actions or not.

41

We also see moments within the video where spectators are questioning the rules they have been given and individuality starts to come through. For example, at 9 minutes 30 seconds, we see one participant is instructed to stand in the centre of the space holding the jug. Here, she holds the jug for a few seconds and then decides to leave the space. This isnt right or wrong as the decision is hers to make, as she has still completed her action. In contrast to this, we see at the very end of the piece, one participant left stood inside the marked space. Here we later found out that her final instruction was to take a sip of water. As there was no water left within the space, she could not complete this. In turn she felt she must stay within the space as the instructions stated you could only leave once completing all three actions. Although it wasnt planned for the performance to end in this way, it did due to the breakdown of the network. The actant of water was no longer present within the network and so the network itself could no longer function in the same way. In looking to develop this, the majority of the spectators said they could have carried on for longer, quite comfortably, and were eager to re-enter the space. In this sense the performance could have been continuous as I also didnt say how many times you could execute your actions. This was apparent as two audience members did repeat their actions and this could have carried on. Due to the fact some audience members didnt complete their actions, this caused the performance and network to breakdown and stop at the point it did. This in itself, is an interesting point as again the performance is being left in the hands of the audience; with different people the piece could have turned out completely differently and ended at any point. The whole performance came down to the choices the audience members made individually, within a set a rules. In this way, I feel the performance works effectively in demonstrating the use of relational theory in practice. We can see how the relationships between objects, people and space are created through assembling and reassembling, and how the network broke down when audience members chose not to complete their actions, as well as how the network functioned when people did execute their 42

actions. The prolonged stillness at the start of the piece helped the participants to become conscious of each component of the network and place themselves within that tracing of associations. Each individual audience member had agency within the piece, and had to make choices of whether to participate or not, when to conduct their actions, at what pace, if to repeat them et cetera. In this way, the audience create the piece in question.

43

Space and Place

After previously having researched around space and place in relation to non-traditional theatre spaces, the main element I had wanted to take from this was how it allows for a more immersive experience. I started off by looking into why theatre makers for site specific performances use this way of working and how they feel it benefits their audiences experience. After reading, Art into Theatre by Nick Kaye, I became very interested in his notion of an active environment. Here, he describes this as reading symptoms not turning them into signs. . . if theyre cold, theyre cold(Kaye 1996, p223). I was really intrigued by the reality of this for the audience and how something was actually happening; instead of being represented. This idea of wanting to create something real for the audience is a way of inviting them in, so they become immersed in the experience. By creating art or performance work in such spaces, it breaks down the boundaries and expectations associated to theatre, allowing the spectators to be more open and interactive with the piece. In Kayes later book, Site-specific Art: Performance, place and documentation, he references Mike Pearson, artistic director of Brith Gof, who talks of how for the audience there is no single viewpoint. No way to stand outside it to try and define the material (Kaye 2000, p55). Here, I believe, he means that as the audience becomes involved in the piece there is no separation between them and the performance; they are part of the same world and space. Louise Ann Wilsons work is a prime example of creating an immersive experience through sitespecificity. She creates site-specific performance exploring the relationship between rural landscape and human life events (Wilson, 2013). Often, through durational walks she leaves trails of objects, moments of performance, photographs and recordings to help her audience piece together and reimagine the narrative of the land. In one of her best known pieces, Fissure, she tackles the subject

44

of her own sisters death through the use of the land. During this piece she takes her audience on a twelve mile walk through the Yorkshire Dales, stumbling upon these different elements and clues.

Figure 11 Fissure, Louise Ann Wilson

Through using components in her work that challenge a variety of senses, she is creating a very active and engaging experience for her audience; allowing them to become immersed within it. As we know from earlier looking at Pallasmaas theories, when using more than one of our senses we have peripheral vision. This means we centre ourselves within that space; in relation to everything within it; compared to focused vision which distances us from that space. Within this performance, due to the use of multiple senses, the audience are able to place themselves within the piece, resulting in a more immersive experience. Through using small elements embedded into the land, Wilson manages to create this narrative in a very subtle way. By using the existing features of the land, through working with geologists and

45

neuroscientists, to find connections between both body and landscape, she creates a collaboration of the two. Here, she describes this in interview with Lyn Gardner: "I wanted to take people into a cave, a place underground where you could journey into the darkest place, and emerge back into the light," she explains. "We no longer have the language or the rituals to talk about death. This creates the space to do it."(Gardner, 2011) This attitude towards creating site specific pieces allows her to integrate her work into the land, through finding these connections and then creating the piece around them. Here the site is vital to the creation of the work. The importance of integration into the site is key to the meaning of the piece in question, as many site specific artists believe that the piece is only an artwork in that one place; that to move the work is to destroy the work. Taking the site in question and building a relationship between it and the art or performance piece is vital to creating a strong meaning and context behind it. If it does not relate to the site then why should it be placed there? In, One Place After Another: Site-Specific Art and Locational Identity, Miwon Kwon gives key examples of where public art has failed due to this lack of connection between art and site. Titled Arc, created by Richard Serra, which was constructed in 1981 and after much controversy was taken down in 1989. In this piece, he created a minimalist sculpture through an open space of land in front of the Jacob Javits Federal Building, Manhattan. Through its lack of consideration to the site in which it was placed, within a short space of time many workers of the federal building were petitioning for its removal. This is an early example of artists creating site specific pieces through merely placing their work within an alternative site. At this point in time, site specific art showed no relation between the artwork and the site; it was simply an extension of the gallery into an outdoor space. This example shows how the relationship between art and site is key to the success of the piece, and how both should work together to create a coherent meaning and context.

46

In Site-specific Art; Performance, Place and Documentation, Kaye goes on to look at Brith Gofs work in more depth, which foregrounds the notion of location in performance. They attempt to look at the concept of place through its identity and the presence of its past. By creating pieces which take narrative directly from the site they can allow the place to speak for itself whilst adding layers of meaning to this through their work. Clifford McLucas and Mike Pearson explain how there is an exchange that takes place between site and performance; talking of it as a complex overlaying of narratives, historical and contemporary, [creates] a kind of saturated space, . . . everything is potentially important(Kaye, 2000, p54). Going back to look at the identity of the place in Fissure, we can see how although Wilson is bringing her own narrative to the site, which is introduced to the audience at the start of the piece. She also incorporates local history, namely the lives (and deaths) of the men who worked on the nearby Ribblehead viaduct in the 1870s (Gardner, 2011). Here, she is not only adding elements of her own narrative but is relating them to the history of the site. Through incorporating local history she situates the performance firmly within this specific site, and allows for the history of the land to become yet another component within the piece. As Kaye suggests, The site may offer: a particular and unavoidable history; a particular use (a cinema, a slaughterhouse); a particular formality (shape, proportion, height); or a particular political, cultural, or social context. Through Louise Ann Wilsons piece she is engaging with the history of the site and the use of the land; through incorporating narratives, as well as the physical forms of the land; in a metaphorical way, and connecting with the cultural and social context, through the use of local significant events and narratives. From this she is creating a relationship with the site through multiples methods, bringing the connection between the two closer for her audience. This works cohesively not to overshadow the heritage of the site, but to complement it and use the landscapes history to the advantage of the artist. 47

Calke Reframed
In this project I worked with the National Trust site of Calke Abbey to create a piece in response to it. In this, I chose to work within the Lime yards area which was previously used for the excavation and production of lime, peaking in the early nineteenth century. Through this installation I wanted to create a connection between the past and present context of the site, through an immersive experience. Video Creating experience In creating a site specific installation within Calke Park, I was keen to create an experience or encounter for my audience. The area I chose to work in within the site was The Limeyards. I wanted to use this area as compared to the house; which is frozen in time; it is still a very active and live space. I had always wanted to create an experience through my piece, whatever form it may take and so this site seemed to work well in relation to that. Within relational theory this creates an added component, through working with site. As everything working within the network has meaning to it; through it associations to other components. When viewing site specific art we, as an audience, will take the site itself as part of that network, developing associations and connections with it in relational to the piece itself. Here, through the site been an environment of physical engagement and sensory multitude, we as a public, would expect to engage with it through sight, sound, and touch. Touch is a key factor within this, as from looking at earlier theories from Pallasmaa in The Eyes of The Skin, we know that touch is one of the bodies oldest senses and most sensitive to a variety of textures, weights, temperatures, et cetera; creating a deeper understanding of the things around us. In this way, through having the added element of the site, which is something we can physically

48

touch and interact with, will allow us to understand the space fully. Hence, we as an audience, will be able to create more depth in its meaning and our understanding of it. Through using an outdoor space for my piece, I could place it within an already very active area, setting a context for the audience, of a space they will expect to engage with physically. Working outside of a theatre or gallery space in this way offers a framework for the piece; of interaction and immersion. Here, the environment itself will extenuate this notion of experience through, as Kaye calls, an Active Environment.

Integration of physicality of site Creating an artwork within a site however brings with it ideas around integration. When previously looking at Louise Ann Wilsons work, I thought her way of exploring the land and using what was already there was vital to creating a relationship between art and site. In this way, I wanted to use the land to my advantage; through it already being a space of beauty, it was difficult to think about physically placing anything within it. This would only take attention away from the site itself when I wanted was to draw focus to it. Through adding minimal physical elements to the landscape, I could instead allow the space to speak for itself. I decided to do this through the placement of frames within the landscape. This allowed for focus to easily be drawn for the audience, as used in traditional exhibition form; the frame itself creates a composition of the elements that are within it. This forces the audience to question the components of the framed space and so create meaning from them.

49

Figure 12 Calke Reframed, Calke Abbey

This again brought me back to the idea of relationality within my piece. After previously looking at the work of Louise Ann Wilson, I was drawn to how she creates narratives within a landscape but in quite a fragmented way. The use of multiple components within her work questions the audiences relationship to the piece, as each element has to be understood within the wider context of the complete installation. Each piece alone will not create the same meaning and understanding of the narrative. However, when we as an audience, place these together, its complexity becomes more apparent. Another element I wanted to add to this, to help build the narrative, was text. Originally after looking at the idea of exhibiting the land, the use of texts and frames had become apparent as a way of contextualizing a space for an audience. This built another component into the piece for the audience to create meaning and understanding from. Through later adding the use of sound to the piece I could interact with a multitude of senses; sight, sound, and touch. This, I felt, would give the audience a more immersive experience through the notion of proxemics and the senses. From earlier research, we know that when using more than one sense, it allows us to centre ourselves within that space, as we are using our peripheral vision. This in 50

turn engages us with the site we are within. Through engaging multiple senses, the audience will become more interactive with that space and will place themselves within it.

Integration of historical, social and political context As well as physical integration, it was important to develop this relationship between the artwork and the site further. Through using narratives that came from the land and relating them to modern day issues, I could build a strong connection to the site through past and present, political and social issues. When researching into the site of the Limeyards, I was interested in the people who inhabited the area and when looking into the lime kiln workers, came across a story of how homeless people would come to the kilns at night to keep warm, but were often found dead in the morning by the lime kiln workers. This led me to look at how homelessness and poverty was an issue for the people who worked the land at the time and is something that is still present in society today. I related this to modern day issues of poverty to create a narrative commenting on the topic, both past and present. Though incorporating the history of the land into the piece itself, I could strengthen the art-site relationship. As we know from previously looking at Kayes, Site-specific Art: Performance, place and documentation, taking the identity and presence of the history of the site can create more depth to the piece, through this layering of meaning. In Louise Ann Wilson, Fissure, we see the history of the site integrate with Wilsons own chosen narrative. Through creating a collaboration between design concept and the underlying narratives of the land, she allows a way in for her audience; as they can relate to events that physically happened within that specific site. However, they are also encouraged further to connect this with the narrative Wilson wishes to tell. In this way, depth of meaning is created through layering together multiple narratives that consolidate a singular concept. 51

Working with the site physically, also allowed for developments in my ideas to come through. After focusing on the concept of poverty and homelessness I realised that all the spaces I had chosen to use were areas of shelter, reinforcing my concept through the physicality of the site. There were also sounds that came from each space; as I took recordings whilst there; that evoked certain human movements. For example, in one space you could hear the occasional dripping of water and there was a pool at the very back of the kiln. This, I felt, could link to the physical action of washing or taking a bath. This reinforced my own narrative of people physically inhabiting the spaces, through combining narratives of the history of the land, as well as using physical features and sounds of the site. Then relating this through to modern day social and political issues, I could create a depth to my piece that integrated my own concepts into the site. It creates an environment where everything is potentially important. (Kaye, 2000, p54)

Relationality Through using a variety of components in my piece such as space, frames, text and sound I could develop this idea of creating a disjointed narrative. Through separating the frames and text from the sound, it added various elements to stumble upon, and gave the audience agency in how they experienced the piece and made those connections. After the framing of the space, the next element I added was text. Through subtly attaching this to the corner of each frame we, as an audience, will come across narrative. These narratives describe physical objects that are not present within the space, creating a contradiction between what we see and what we are told; challenging our perceptions as an audience.

52

Figure 13 Calke Reframed, Calke Abbey

From ideas of transference; where feelings and emotions from one object/ person are transferred onto another we can see; here, we are asked to do a similar thing of transferring these onto a space. This is a question of asking the audience to believe that what they see before them is what they are being told, instead of what is visually there. From looking at Tim Crouchs work in particular, we know that this asks the audience to invest more of themselves within the piece and challenges their perception of what we see in contrast to what we know; as they have to believe this transference has taken place.

Adding the element of sound to the piece helped highlight this fragmented way of creating narrative. From having the sound centred within the spaces of focus, it is also another way of drawing attention to that particular place. From the frame we may faintly hear the sound extending out of the space, and so it draws further investigation into what that sound is and how it may relate to the other components; text and space. It is a method of using relational theory to question an

53

audience about the works meaning and challenges them to view the piece in relation to everything around it. As we know from looking at Actor Network Theory, everything works within a network. Each component within it, whether human or not, will have meaning and agency within the functionality of the network. In turn, if components are added or taken away from this, its meaning will change. In my piece, from using a variety of components meaning is created between each one in relation to everything around them, including the audience. Through creating this within an active environment we can see how the network becomes more complex as everything within the site is a component, and so creates its own associations. Here, we can also see how when sound is taken away the network will still function but may generate different meanings and understandings from an audience. In this way it was vital to create text that held the same context and potency as the sound. Although this was through a different medium, and so would create a slight change in meaning, these two elements needed to back one another up to allow the overall concept of the network to remain the same. Through creating moments that are left to the audience to find and explore, the piece itself becomes one of personal experience. Although the spaces, narratives and sounds are always a consistent, the way and order in which they are encountered by an audience can alter dramatically between each person. In this way, we are free to create our own experience through this journey, by having agency in how we view the piece and the level of engagement we wish to have with it. Relational theory plays a key role here, as it is the connection between each component that creates the narrative as a whole. As an audience, we will come across the frame, text, and sound separately, but it is the relations we draw between them that creates meaning.

54

Analysis of Video From the video, we can hear how the sound reverberates through the spaces, with some areas allowing sounds of different sites to merge and form a new context. This creates new associations between the sites, as we can often hear sounds from other spaces close by to the one we are investigating. In this way, the sound leads the investigation into the spaces and guides the audience to areas they may not have visually noticed. Sound here, adds a strong element to the piece and without it the audience may feel less emerged within the spaces. It is a component the audience cannot choose to disregard; compared to the frame and text; and so creates an atmosphere and experience around them whether they choose to engage or not. Through this piece, we can see how each component comes into play. Moving through the site we come across frames, sounds and texts in varying orders. This allows us as an audience to investigate and explore each element individually. Through moving between sound, text, and visuals, we build a connection with the piece through a multitude of senses; heightening our engagement and immersing us within the piece. From placing the piece within an active environment, we are setting a framework for the piece and so our audience are expectant of interaction. Through leaving each element to be explored by the audience, they have agency in their engagement with the installation. In this way they can build a more complex relationship with the piece, as they determine their own relations to each element and in turn their own experience.

55

Conclusion
From looking at the use of relational theory and audience agency within a performance context; we can see how associations are formed, and the impact they can have upon an audience. Through the application of these theories onto my own practice, I can look at how these relations are created in more depth; referring to specific examples which I have developed from concept to realisation. This creates the opportunity for me to test how the network itself can be pushed further; through these associations between each actant; and the impact they can have. From looking at ideas behind Actor Network Theory, we can see how connections are created between an audience and the piece in question; through the placement of each element, and the associations these create. In turn, we know that each actant has agency within the network and its function. When adding or taking away an actant, the network in turn will change and create new meaning. Through this, we can see how giving an audience a high level of agency within the piece, allows them to become more engaged and interactive with it. Through each participant being a component in the network; giving opportunity for them to have agency within it; this allows them to be able to change the function of meaning of the piece itself. This gives them an awareness of their relation to the work, and so allows them to experience it in a more immersive way.

By looking at performance theories put forward by Anthony Howell, as well as relevant artists and devisors within relational aesthetics, I had a strong foundation for the creation of my own practice piece. Through this I was able to test and push the relationships created within a network, and in turn, the network itself. Through allowing the audience to have agency within the piece, we can see how it draws focus towards the choices they have made, and how this affects the network they were part of. This gives great resonance to each participant through generating an awareness of the

56

network, and so heightening their consciousness of each element. In turn this allows the participant to create a deeper understanding of the piece in question. Through further investigation into these relational ties within an alternative space; looking at site specific works; we can see how further-developed relationships are created. With the added component of site, another actant is brought into the network; that has a depth of meaning, through its social, political and historical context. This creates a more complex network for the audience to be part of, and so stretches their understandings and perceptions of the artwork or performance. Looking in depth at my own practice; as the foundation of my research; helped to consolidate the importance of the relationships which are created within art and performance. Through relational theory, we can allow an audience to generate an awareness of the network; within which everything exists. In turn this pushes the audience to create a deeper understanding of the piece in question, and its meaning within a larger context. In this way, relational theory can offer a method of challenging an audiences understandings and perceptions of the world around them; which is, to some degree, what every art form endeavours to achieve.

57

Bibliography
Author Unknown, (2007), Michael Craig-Martin, Illuminations Author Unknown, (2008), Mind Out, Station House Opera, http://www.stationhouseopera.com/project/6138/5/ Author Unknown, (2010), Adrian Howells, British Arts Council, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7btf8Tdg_s Author Unknown, (2012) Part of The Process: Nicolas Bourriauds concept of relational aesthetics may give designers a new set of tools, http://www.eyemagazine.com/feature/article/part-of-theprocess Author Unknown, (2012), ABSOLUT ART AWARD 2010: Interview with Rirkrit Tiravanija, ABOSLUTworld, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gjc6vt1yEE Author Unknown, (2013), Liberating Experiences: Rirkrit Tiravanijas Recipes for a Communicative Art, http://www.db-artmag.com/archiv/2006/e/5/1/465.html Author Unknown, (2013), Stuart Sherman: Spectacles (1975-89), http://www.tradegallery.org/ Abercrombie, N and Longhurst, B., (1998), Audiences A Sociological Theory of Performance and Imagination, London; Sage Publications Ashery, O., (2009), Dancing with Men, London: Live Art Development Agency Ashery, O., (2012), Marcus Fisher: Say Cheese: 2001-2003, http://oreetashery.net/work/say-cheese/ Banks, D., (2012), A Brief Summary of Actor Network Theory, http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/12/02/a-brief-summary-of-actor-network-theory/ Bourriaud, N., (2002), Relational Aesthetics, Dijon : Les presses du rel 58

Brown, N., (2012), Edward T.Hall: Proxemic Theory, 1966, http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/13 Cork, R., (2006), Michael Craig-Martin, London : Thames & Hudson, in association with the Irish Museum of Modern Art Dictionary.com, (2012), Experience, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/experience

Edmunds, B., (2012), Roadmetal, Sweetbread, Station House Opera, http://www.stationhouseopera.com/project/6130/5/ Foucault, M., (1967), Of other spaces, France: Architecture /Mouvement/ Continuit, accessed online, http://freebooks.uvu.edu/SOC1010/index.php/ch19-collective-behaviors.html, date of access 28/10/12 Foucault, M and Sheridan, A., (1991), Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of The Prison, London: Penguin Foucault, M., (1995), Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of The Prison, New York: Vintage Books Freeman, J., (2010), Blood, Sweat and Theory, Faringdon : Libri Publishing Gardner, L., (2011) Louise Ann Wilson's maps of the mind, http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/may/09/louise-ann-wilson-fissure Gardner, L., (2013), Mind Out, http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2008/nov/26/mind-out-bactheatre-review Goldberg, R., (2001), Performance Art: from Futurism to the present, 2nd Edition, London: Thames and Hudson

59

Hammond, R., (2012), Intro to Sociology: Chapter 19- Collective Behaviours, accessed online, http://freebooks.uvu.edu/SOC1010/index.php/ch19-collective-behaviors.html , access date 28/10/12 Hewitt, C., (2007), Liveartwork DVD: Issue 5, Liveartwork Hoffman, J and Jonas, J., (2005), Perform, London: Thames and Hudson Howell, A and Templeton, F., (1977), Elements of performance art: derived from exercises contributed to workshops by performers with The Ting: Theatre of Mistakes, 1974-76, London: The Ting: Theatre of Mistakes Howell, A., (2000), The Analysis of Performance Art: A Guide to its Theory and Practice, 2nd Edition, Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Howell, A., (2013), Performances; The Street, http://www.anthonyhowell.org/archive/perf1.htm James, J., (2012), Tate Moderns waster of space: why wont interactive art leave me alone? http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2012/aug/16/tate-moderninteractive-art-tanks Kaye, N., (1996), Art into Theatre: Performance Interviews and Documents, Amsterdam: Harwood Academic. Kaye, N., (2000), Site-specific Art: Performance, place and documentation, London: Routledge. Kwon, M., (2004), One Place After Another: Site-Specific Art and Locational Identity, Massachusetts and London: The MIT Press Latour, B., (2007), Reassembling the social; an introduction to actor network theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press

60

Le Bon, G., (1896), The Crowd; A Study of the Popular Mind, London: Fisher Unwin, accessed online, http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/445/pg445.html, access date 9/11/12 Merriam Webster Dictionary, (2012), Agency, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agency Oliveira, N., (1994), Installation Art, London: Thames & Hudson Overend, D., (2011), A Work on Progress, Journal for Artistic Research, http://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/?weave=8669&x=0&y=0 Pallasmaa, J., (2005), The Eyes of The Skin: Architecture of The Senses, Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Rebellato, D., (2013), Tim Crouch Interview, http://www.danrebellato.co.uk/news/2013/3/19/timcrouch-interview Serpentine Gallery, London, (2000), Felix Gonzalez- Torres: [catalogue of an exhibition held at the Serpentine Gallery, London, 1 June - 16 July 2000], London: Serpentine Gallery Shaughnessy, N., (2012), Applying Performance: live art, socially engaged theatre and affective practice, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Todd, B., (2013), Interview with Time Crouch, http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1291721.interview_with_tim_crouch/ Tufnell, B., (2002), Hamish Fulton: walking journey [catalogue of an exhibition held at] Tate Britain, 14 March - 4 June 2002, London: Tate Publishing Wilson,E., (1976), The Theater Experience, New York: McGraw-Hill Wilson, L., (2013), Louise Ann Wilson, http://www.louiseannwilson.com/

61

Wright, E., (2012), Sunday Feature: Crowd Psychology, BBC Radio Three, http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01jyzff Zerihan, R., (2012), Study Room Guide on One to One Performance, Live Art Development Agency, http://www.thisisliveart.co.uk/resources/Study_Room/guides/Rachel_Zerihan.html

Videos (Own) Practice piece 1 Five objects, Three actions Calke reframed

Acknowledgements Matthew Hawthorn- Video editing Adam Davies- Lighting Technician for Five Objects, Three Actions

62

Images
Figure 1- Say Cheese, Oreet Ashery, (2001-03), http://www.endlesstales.ch/artists/oreetashery.html Figure 2- Looting Rioter London August 2011, Riots in London Trigger Reactions on the Internet, (2012), http://molempire.com/2011/08/10/riots-in-london-trigger-reactions-on-the-internet/ Figure 3- Example of the Panopticon, Foucault and social media: life in a virtual panopticon, (2012), http://philosophyforchange.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/foucault-and-social-media-life-in-a-virtualpanopticon/ Figure 4- Untitled (Portrait of Ross in L.A.), Felix Gonzalez-Torres, (1991), http://caad.msstate.edu/wpmu/bharvey/2011/02/22/objects-of-perpetual-renewal/ Figure 5- An Oak Tree, Michael Craig- Martin, (1973), http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/craig-martin-an-oak-tree-l02262 Figure 6- Figures 1(a) and 1(b), Howell, A., (2000), The Analysis of Performance Art: A Guide to its Theory and Practice. Page 7. Figure 7- Drawings of Repetition in Action, (2013) Figure 8- Practice Piece, Waverley Theatre, (2013) Figure 9- The Street, Howell, A., (2013), Performances; The Street, http://www.anthonyhowell.org/archive/perf1.htm Figure 10- Five Objects, Three Actions, Waverley Theatre, (2013) Figure 11- Fissure, Louise Ann Wilson, (2011), http://www.louiseannwilson.com/ Figure 12- Calke Reframed, Calke Abbey (2013)

63

Figure 13- Calke Reframed, Calke Abbey (2013)

64