Pedestrian Performance and Geographies of the Stage
I’m currently writing up the second half of my first epic chapter which involves two sections: Site and Non-Site. Within each section I present an array of case studies of Pedestrian Performances that I analyse, focussing specifically on how the action of walking is utilised within them.
With regards to site, I’ve found it pretty simple to both find case studies due to the fact that pedestrian performance as a object of research stems from site-specific performance. However when looking at Non-Site, it becomes a little tricky. On paper, pitting site vs its seeming opposite seems to be an interesting and perhaps logical direction. It allows me to examine walking and where it sits dialectically between these two sites. However, Smithson’s model incurs difficulties when we apply performance to it, and trying to find the right case studies for it becomes difficult. I’ve realised that it is often not possible to place a performance in one camp rather than the other and therefore had to create a set of criteria that can be freely contested in order for me to effectively find an appropriate location for each case study.
The Conventional Stage
- Defined by the principle purpose of the architectural structure it resides in: a theatre, studio, arts centre
- Clear divide between audience and spectator
- Audience’s generally remain stationary within their designated area, whilst actors are able to move in front of them.
The Promenade
- A difficult one, which I have chosen to define as presenting a separated stage. Here the conventional stage is fractured into multiple stages.
- There is still a divide between audience and spectator even if it is an imagined one built on the omniscience of the performer. However there is also a divide between performers, bridged by audience members.
- Audiences are allowed to move between the gaps between performers: audience and performer overlap.
The Site
- Defined generally by an emphasis on place: mostly in places not originally designated as theatres: factories, swimming pools, churches
- The boundaries between performer and audience can be physically/imaginatively illustrated or audiences can themselves choose to perform also.
- Depending on the nature of the performance, audiences have full reign of a site or areas for them are established by the performers.
The Non-Site
- Defined by the site, a fragment of the site brought elsewhere as a signpost to it: pointing to something that cannot be physically reached. While site uses presence to illustrate absence, non-site does the reverse, directing you outwards. However, there is a feedback, a reflection between the fragment in front of you and the place it originated from.
- As in site, the divide between audience and performer can be of varying degrees here. In fact performers do not need to even be present, meaning that an audience member can take on such a responsibility for themselves.
- Generally, the types of pedestrian performance I would place in this category are performative papers or performances that are concerned with a walk that has already taken place or takes place elsewhere.
These definitions can be freely contested, as all of the geographies above overlap with site-based promenade performances and non-site performances taking place in the conventional stage. However, what I’ve come to realise in my research is that walking has a real tendency to throw the definitions of types of staging into a state of flux, but also reasserts them.
