Chapter two mainly covered the documentation and recreation of ritual. Between all the confusing diagrams, restorative behavior was discussed in terms of authenticity.
Restorative behavior is representational and a reflection on previous situations, people, and emotions. Many of these can be expected behaviors based on cultural prefrences, the shy bride on her wedding day is an example in western culture of said expected restorative behavior. The unwavering emotions of a boy undergoing tribal innitiation rights, even the passion of Christ play is an example of restorative behavior.
The chapter was trying to examine the authenticity of theatrical anthropology; when the rituals, environments, and stories are retold overtime by different generations (or different perspectives) are the recreations of the theatrical performances genuine?
To explain how we try to recreate an 'authentic' experience, but adjust it to fit to contemporary society, Schechner first used the example of widelife parks that we create. We try to replicate the environment of the wildlife in the park with folliage and terrane, yet we'll include technological implementations of touring monorails, concession stands, and souvenir shops. The animals did not eat their natural diet, nor did they exist in an environment that was habitual to them, but the brochures to the park prided itself on the "genuineness".
To connect this example to theatre, the religious sect of Shakers is mentioned. The Shakers no longer exist, as their religious beliefs excluded marriage and reproduction. When they were in their prime, they were famous for their form of worship of synchronized dance performances and song. There was little to no documentation of Shaker dancing, except for drawings or paintings from the 19th century that create a romanticised portrait of the Shakers.
It was based on these images that choreographer Doris Humphrey created her piece 1938 piece The Shakers. While some of the performance elements to the piece attribute to Shaker culture, there is no guarantee of authenticity to Humphrey's interpretation of what Shaker dancing was like. However, her piece became the go-to reference for what Shaker dancing was like despite no real connection to their culture. Because her piece was recorded through Laban notation, it could be reacreated by any performance troupe and further preserve a piece that is not authentic.
Dance scholar Maricia Siegel told me that after The Shakers people regarded Humphrey as an authority on Shakers; she recieved letters concerning them and her advice was solicited. But it wasn't until 1955 that Humphrey even met a Shaker. (Schechner, 47)
Authenticity on historical events, the theatrical interpretation, and restorative behavior is also mentioned in the practices of the villagers of Magendo in Papua New Guinea. There is a bird dance performance based on the death of a boy named Wok. Whether the boy actually existed, or if he only survives in folklore is up for speculation. But the story of a boy killed by a spirit (or angry uncle) for entering a tribal temple that was reserved for innitiated members, evolved into a mythology attributing the tribes achievements/advancements to the spirit of the deceased boy.
The theatrical representation of this story is a tribal performance of male and female combined choreoraphy, mimicking the movements of birds to embody the lamentations and mournings of Wok's mother. The performance is not an exact retelling of how Wok was killed, but an example of restorative behavior and how it shaped their culture.
Also mentioned was the 1980's documentary Altar of Fire, which documented the 1975 performance of an 3,000 year old Indian rite in Kerala called agnicayana. It appears the main purpose and funding of documenting these rites was to record and preserve a dying tradition, yet everything about the filming's process was criticized for making the experience unauthentic. Having a filmcrew present in the area drew in more visitors and tourists, who often interfered with the ceremonies and footage when they wandered in. Additionally, having it documented on film catagorized it more as a performance for viewers than a ritualistic practice.
Despite being an essential part of the agnicayana, the fight involving goats that could not be filmed due to the nature of the violence, and the sensitivity of the film's potential audience.
When people want to see the agnicayana they will not go to Kerala (where it may not be performed again), they will rent Altar of Fire. [...] Theories will be built on items extrapolated from strips of restored behavior. (Schechner, 63)
No comments:
Post a Comment