my first blog, and I guess it's a long one!

Hello to everyone from Italy. Erika writing here.

I hope you’re all doing well. In the last few days, I’ve been thinking quite a lot about the Open Campus. About our first encounter in June and about what might happen in August. I am, of course, looking forward to it.

I re-read the blogging entries as well as everyone’s motivation letter (though for some odd reason, I wasn’t able to open Rosalind’s and Tom’s files – if there’s a chance you might be able to resend a .doc or a .pdf to me, my email is filmikaet@gmail.com). I also researched previous campuses, to get a better sense of what happened there.

I’m going to try and share a few thoughts/reactions.

First of all, I do agree with Tom that it is important to define a point of departure for our experience in Stockholm. Whether we call it “frame”, or “question” or “protocol”, I personally feel the need of some sort of “anchor” in order to develop our collaboration. I don’t think it needs to be thematic or content-oriented. It might simply be – and I am just using these as examples which we touched upon in June -  the idea of exploring the relationship of the work to its audience, or variations on pirating practices, or interrogating ourselves on how a residence taking place in Sweden affects our individual/collective practice.

Whatever that might be, and of course it should be agreed upon together, I trust that this element would ‘ground’ our process without sacrificing our personal approaches. I don’t mean to sound facitious, but even if we decided to center our reflection around ‘an apple’, each one of us would inevitably ‘re-direct’ himself/herself towards something we’re interested in exploring. And the fact that we’re here to collaborate will also play an essential role in this process.

I also believe that it is impossible to leave behind conceptual and theorical questions: they will inevitably come up in the work itself and in our discussions, especially when we start creating together. But taking a more focused approach will, in my opinion, allow us to ‘incarnate’ such reflections in a tangible process.

I guess what I’m trying to verbalize is my own expectation about this campus, as a fluid space where we can actually operate simultaneously within theory and practice, so that they can both be examined, yet integrated. If there are important questions which we’re asking ourselves about theatre (and your considerations are right on the spot, Marco), music, and, by extension, any art practice and culture, can we find ways to answer those questions, or at least address them effectively, through our creative/dialectic exchange?

I don’t have the answer to this question and, more importantly, I am sure that there is no univocal conclusion, but that’s exactly why I’m bringing it to the table.

Tom reminded us of important words which emerged in our conversation: "network", "fragility", "the position of theatre", "truth of the body". I would also add the tension between the micro and the macro, the idea of (multiple) persectives and (political/aesthetic/artistic) power relationships. I’m wondering if other people, in the group, recorded more meaningful words, which they would like to share. It would definitely be stimulating to continue using this blog in order to further the discussion about them.

Funnily enough, as I was rereading the words we came up with in June, I realized how poignant and current they’ve become in my own experience of the past few weeks. I am part of a group of theatre practitioners, performance artists, filmmakers, writers who have occupied the TEATRO VALLE in the centre of Rome. It’s a stunning 19th century theatre which was closed down at the end of May, due to the ongoing devastating budget cuts approved by the Italian government. 

Here’s an article from last week’s NEW YORK TIMES:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/theater/teatro-valle-in-rome-is-occupied-by-protesters.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&ref=arts&adxnnlx=1309880114-IRHzlTKRHdvdMsJnsiWHnw

The occupants decided to manifest their dissent by living inside the theatre, now for almost 4 weeks. This experience has given us a chance not only to fight for the survival of the space, which we propose to turn into a prominent centre for dramaturgical development and production. We are also drafting an official document, in which we describe and demand vital legal changes. Our objective is to obtain a more favorable legislation, thus better conditions for anyone who works, very precariously, in art and culture.

This situation is emblematic of the concept of ‘fragility’ in so many ways. The theatre has become a fertile, yet difficult, laboratory of democracy, where the tension between collaboration and contrasting standpoints is constantly present. Fragility applies, on a private and public level, to the current support of culture which I’m sure everyone of you is in some way experiencing in your own countries. Fragility connotes the geographical as well as conceptual space which has been created inside the theatre, which is in persistent transition (actually in danger!), as the police might kick everyone out at any moment. Fragility, turned into strength, was the position of the precarious people who took it upon themselves, for once, to protest with a ‘physical’ action. The body, in its truth, in the entering and inhabiting of the space of the theatre, is the protagonist of this action, which undermines an institutional power structure.

What is most amazing about this experience is that the theatre has now been open and full of people every single night. Audiences have responded by attending all sorts of events, which I wouldn’t in any way characterize as ‘shows’. Rather, they are free experiments aimed at calling, challenging, pushing all participants to react to what is happening to our culture. The main goal is to make audiences aware that theatre and, by extension, all forms of art are indispensable. Though far from perfect, this is indeed a practical way to oppose an implosion of the theatre and its menacing fragility.

Given the limitations in time and resources, the conception of these events is fast, somewhat impulsive and rough. The events themselves are imperfect, often very raw and visceral, yet they do have a real impact on the audience. My  hope is that we will be able to say the same thing of whatever we will concoct together in August.

I wanted to share this with you, as I felt it was for me some sort of strangely coincidental, yet very appropriate continuation of the trajectory we started in June. Moreover, it made me even more painfully aware of seminal issues which we can’t overlook: what is the meaning of making art, at this very moment in time, under such dire limitations? How do these extreme working conditions impact our practices? How can we respond, with those very practices, to the horrible claims made by (certainly Italian, hopefully not your own) governments that “one can’t eat (with) culture”?

Forgive me for the long email and I look forward to many more questions!

Erika