We don’t know what we’re doing and that’s ok
Spectacle and communion are 2 strands within theatre and they can be used as lenses to look at political action.
Spectacle is based on lies, their effect can be beautiful even revelatory, however they are lies all the same. That’s the game, spectacle relies upon the suspension of disbelief, spectacle is an invitation to give up what you know to be true and in exchange we enter into another world with it’s own internal logic and reality. This is largely the domain of traditional plays, the dramatic cannon of from Hellenic tragedy onwards.
Communion is based on a shared experience of reality, pretence is replaced with presence, everything we see on stage springs from authenticity and yet it still allows for each witness to connect in their own way. Everyone has their own imaginative and experiential response to the work. In this strand we find the fool and clown.
The development of spectacle in the 20th century saw the shift from representation to abstraction just as happened in other art forms. This involved moving from suspending disbelief to destroying belief itself. Nothing is what it seems, the traditional dramatic unities of time, place and character collapse into themselves in a maelstrom or kaleidoscope. In this world we never know what is real, the intentions of the creators, the distinction between play and truth, character and actor, are made uncertain and unknowable. There is no solid ground of certainty from which the audience can survey the terrain of the work. They are perpetually destabilised. All of the power rests with the creators of the work and the audience are rendered spectators.
This school of theatre has been translated into a mode of control by some people who hold power in Russia. The documentary HyperNormalisation focuses on an exponent of this practice, Vladislav Surkov, who practices perceptual destabilisation by creating a reality where authenticity seems impossible and the government’s intentions are made obscure. When both fascists and civil rights groups are publicly funded by the state the possibility of meaningful participation or confrontation seems absurd, everything has been co-opted before it begins and the logic or intention of this action becomes hard to grasp unless we see that its is designed to induce this very confusion.
Spectacle as art has valid goals and the audience have paid to experience it and are free to leave. When used as method of control, practised without consent it becomes abusive as it denies the agency of those who live under it. If it is impossible to perceive reality then informed consent can never be given. It may be pleasant or educational to experience short lived hallucinations but being condemned to live within an artificial reality is nightmarish.
What can be done to counteract such a force being unleashed on the level of global power? I’m looking towards communion for an answer.
The work I am currently interested in serves as balancing force to pretence. It begins with honest connection, vulnerability, shared space, the absence of illusion and the acceptance of uncertainty. It’s called fooling and it starts with the presenter or fool breathing on stage, aware of what they are thinking and feeling. It begins by acknowledging the audience, the lights are on them too. From here the work goes wherever the truthful impulse of the fool takes it. The work is always in a very real and powerful feedback loop between audience and fool, this connection can be felt as a physical sensation of attachment or an awareness of rhythm or subject matter somehow resonating with those who are witnessing it.
It’s a practice as pragmatic as any stage discipline, this is a way of being that can be taught and learned, there is skill to knowing yourself and staying vulnerable with the eyes of others on you, you can learn techniques that help you return to authenticity. We don’t present simple solutions but learn to be comfortable in the irreducible complexity of the present moment.
In the context of politics what does this mean? It means beginning from and maintaining a position of uncertainty. This generates acute sensitivity because everything matters. Put on a blindfold and navigate a familiar space, notice the way you walk, engage with objects, notice what you think and feel. This is where we are, presented with so much information that it is white noise. The only way to proceed is with this level of awareness.
Status has to be relinquished, there is no longer an imaginary divide between the the political players and the audience of citizens, we are all in the same small room. This being true we have to listen to each other, the feedback loop necessary for this work involves each side responding to the other. The stage is porous and direct communication is possible.
Policies can no longer be fixed, grand answers, the audience smells a big idea a mile off, it reeks of inauthenticity, they must become hypotheses to be tested, forging ahead when the way leads over a cliff is suicide.
It means both population and politicians giving up the false presentation of simplicity and certainty because it is no longer functional. The last desperate wail of a generation calling out for certain, simple stories played out in the US election and the result is both dangerous and boring. Certainty is no longer useful. The archetype of the leader as all knowing parent is in its death throws, the world is too complex. The old order is dying and the new disorder is emerging.
This way of being removes the power of spectacle to confuse and enthral us because we are no longer seeking the simple answers they are seeking to confound. The actions become ridiculous and tedious when we have the sensitivity to see beyond their manifestations and understand that the wizard of Oz behind the curtain is just your regular state gangster.
If we are sick with uncertainty, terrified of complexity and controlled by spectacle then perhaps learning how to hold power with uncertainty and vulnerability offers a way out. We don’t know what we’re doing and that’s ok.