Saturday, June 18, 2016

Comment on Bourgeois Feminism, Literary Criticism, and The Magic Flute

***This was meant to be posted as a comment on the thread, "Bourgeois Feminism, Literary Criticism, and The Magic Flute," but it was too long and it wouldn't let me post it. If I was a more conscientious scholar I might spend some time here editing, but I don't want to be late for Hamlet, so I will publish my perhaps indulgently-lengthy thoughts here:


I'm grateful that our blog has evolved to a stirring dialogue, as much as I've found new appreciation for the monologue here in Germany ;)

Kim, in the spirit of dialogue, I urge you to go beyond being offended here! If Jake was wrong, HOW was he wrong? I'd rather pick apart his argument and find the weaknesses than just know that you felt he was off-base.

Christopher, I also hear your umbrage and appreciate the fact that we call each other out when we write with less detail and thought than we should. In generalizing about our program I neglected to acknowledge the thought-provoking and challenging readings and discussion your class offers us, and will continue to offer us. While I agree that my writing on this was insensitive, and more importantly, lacking in depth of discussion, I still wrestle with my question.

I appreciate the intellectual challenge I found in our theater history class in the past year, and I look forward to global. Yet I often feel that I am not going deep enough, merely because my time is spread so thin. Jake's post brought this up for me. And I do think I'm correct in saying that in the curriculum we have as actors, the large majority of our time is not devoted to reading and responding to reading. I am wrong to say that it isn't encouraged at all, but I sometimes think I should be doing more. But then I reach a dilemma, because I also feel that I should be doing more to train my voice, my body, and the acting instincts that will shape my instrument.

It is a larger question than a critique of the program we are studying within, and I would perhaps have been wiser in my previous post to lift it from our context. And perhaps because I am faced with this program in which I feel like I never have quite enough time, I am forced to engage with this question. What is it that I must focus on as an artist? What makes an artist for the theater? Someone who has impeccable strength and flexibility in the body and voice? A depth and breadth of thought that includes input from the great writers and thinkers of our cultural history? Access to deep emotional life and willingness to give of one's self on stage? I imagine there is a beautiful combination of all these qualities (and more that I am not articulating here) that may emerge from a training program such as ours.

Here in Berlin, I have been inspired by artists who embody these qualities, but if I'm honest in asking myself, I think I notice them more when they are distinct strengths. A few that come to mind:
Yael Ronen - I admire for her ability to craft a story that is at the same time politically provocative, but also theatrical and brings the audience on an intimate, emotional journey. I have no sense of whether she has spent time training her body and voice, but I am assuming she reads and really does all her homework in Christopher Cartmill's Global Theater course ;)

Lars Eidinger perhaps offers an example of the combination of skills I hope to develop. His use of his instrument on stage is absolutely captivating. He knows exactly what he's doing in every moment. In speaking with him, I also get the impression that he thinks deeply about his choices in a way that is informed by a form of scholarship, likely the type of scholarship we are working on in Global and in this past year's courses.

Other artists that stood out for me I didn't get to speak to so I don't know where they speak from and what perhaps they focused on in their training...Leander Haussmann, Antonia Bill, Claire Marshall, Simon McBurney, etc.

I'm sure this conversation will have to continue beyond the blog, and this dialogue has certainly advanced my reflection process here. I still wrestle with the role of the artist in our social-political-cultural context, as well as struggling to find my own path to artistry. Here in Berlin, outside of our Mason Gross sphere, I have had the opportunity to reflect, to question, to examine myself and my context. This is an invaluable opportunity. I seek to continue finding opportunities to question myself, my training, and the larger context we operate within, but also I hope to balance the questions with trust, and patience, and belief in the beating heart that brings us all to this work.

Thank you all for pushing me, and calling me out when I'm wrong, and inspiring me to stay curious. I'd love to continue this dialogue here even as we all depart from Berlin, and of course hope to continue the conversation via other channels as well.

1 comment:

  1. And I think also we are not doing enough to examine the practice. One class or one professor are not and should not be enough to call it finished or mark it paid. I'm pretty good at what I do but not that good.

    What sometimes is difficult in the world in which we move — this is truly beyond Mason Gross or even the theatre community in general— is deep anti-intellectualism. A suspicion or outright antipathy to thoughtful examination. As if to challenge our beliefs somehow weakens them instead of strengthening.

    To study the theory behind the practice is to inform the practice not hinder it.

    I know that that's what your asking, seeking. I can't wait to continue.

    ReplyDelete