Virtual Scholars

An imagined form of scholarship…

Archive for September, 2008

Wave Theory

Tonight, I sat spellbound… rapt by the drama in constant construction upon the stage (at the West Yorkshire Playhouse) and gripped – if silently – by the vacant seat beside me. This was the second time I got to see Waves, Katie Mitchell’s recent theatre adaption of Virginia Woolf’s complex and experimental novel The Waves (1931). And for a second time I came out in awe of the complexities of the modern human experience and painfully aware I’d never be able to share adequately in what I had just seen. This time around the sensation was doubly acute – which is quite fitting you might say (had you seen the production) since the entire performance is purposively and elaborately decentred.

…Someone speaks, yet the words come from another; someone walks, yet the sound of their footsteps is traced by another; someone raises a glass in the dark, yet upon the screen it is seen held in an entire mise en scene; people pass through a revolving door, yet it is only the sound of a battered old suitcase rocking gently upon the floor…

 

Roland Barthes writes lovingly of Japanese Bunraku puppet theatre, which he describes ‘practices three separate writings … to be read in three sites of the spectacle: the puppet, the manipulator, the vociferant: the effected gesture, the effective gesture, and the vocal gesture’. The connection is made with Brecht’s alienation effect (indeed this is one of its origins), since Bunraku ’shows the gesture, lets the action be seen, exhibits simultaneously the art and the labour, reserving for each its own writing’:

As Brecht had seen, here citation rules, the sliver of writing, the fragement of code, for none of the action’s promoters can account in his own person for what he is never alone to write. As in the modern text, the interweaving of codes, references, discrete assertions, anthological gestures multiplies the written line, not by virtue of some metaphysical appeal, but by the interaction of a combinatoire which opens out into the entire space of the theatre: what is begun by one is continued by the next, without interveal (Barthes, Empire of Signs)

Yet, the three separate writings of Bunraku are wildly extended in Waves. An array of props are stacked up on metal shelves on each side of the stage, as if the whole performance were coming out of a huge, cobwebbed garden shed. At any given time, someone is reading from the novel (in paperback) – copies passing between hands, as others act out the scene, often with tableaux vivants (screened live on stage) constructed before your very eyes using desk lamps and a small collection of props.  Every little action has its sound effects added separately. You watch as someone paces up and down upon a stone slab to give the echoing footsteps that relate to the imagery upon the screen and as described in the pages of the book itself.  With fluidity, yet precision, the actors move about becoming characters, offering voices, adding ambient sound, directing scenes and piecing together the decor.  This is theatre. It cannot be replicated outside of its time and space, it cannot be recorded or transmitted (on my way to the theatre I had news of a digital blackout at work, no internet, no network… yet sitting in the theatre this evening such ‘drama’ was like an alarm clock buried and forgotten on a beach somewhere). Of course, following a performance or event of this kind, all that is left at one’s disposal are the excited gestures and compliments – ‘you really had to be there’! …and in time all that remain are the ‘thrilling’ write ups: 

Katie Mitchell’s extraordinary production of Virginia Woolf’s experimental novel The Waves at the National Theatre is that rarely sighted beast, a performance where theatre and video come together so seamlessly and complement each other so exquisitely it is as if Mitchell, her actors and video artist Leo Warner have created an entirely new art form.

Just as Woolf in her 1931 modernist novel was attempting an experiment in form and struggling to bring the novel into the 20th century, so Mitchell – the radical force beating in the heart of the National Theatre – is pushing theatre kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Waves is about the very act of creativity itself, the tools we use to make art and the self we sacrifice to do it… (The Guardian Theatre Blog…)

 …the ‘problem’ of Waves (and that vacant seat beside me) can be drawn up in terms of quantum mechanics, in wave-particle theory. From Newton through to Einstein the mistake was to consider matter in terms solely of particles and light in terms of waves. Yet, by the beginning of the twentieth century quantum theory began to reveal the opposite: matter having wave properties (a particle-wave duality) and light discrete particle properties. ‘The solution to this confusion and contradiction is simple once known. Describe reality from One thing existing, Space (that we all commonly experience) and its Properties. I.e. Rather than adding matter particles to space as Newton did, we consider Space with properties of a continuous wave medium for a pure Wave Structure of Matter’ (On Truth and Reality). Katie Mitchell’s Waves provides just such a Space through which all the elements ebb and flow. Actors and setting are never single ‘particles’ but rather a medium, a continous wave medium. Virginia Woolf grasps the workings of the human mind in this same undulating fashion, indeed she was writing at a time when the world shook with this new physics and a new set of artist impressions. She sought to bring the ‘waves’ of our minds to bear upon a shared space and reality, to reveal something further about our own medium and its collective resonances. In fact, as the director notes in an article on bringing the novel to the stage, it is with Virginia Woolf herself that the very format of the adaptation begins:

Woolf wrote The Waves between July 1929 and late 1931. But its genesis can be traced back to 1927, when she recorded in her diary on February 21:

Why not invent a new kind of play – as for instance
Woman thinks: …
He does.
Organ plays.
She writes.
They say:
She sings:
Night speaks:
I think it must be something in this line – though I cannot now see what. Away from facts: free; yet concentrated; prose yet poetry; a novel & a play. [The Guardian...]

Of course, in wi-fi times, wave-particle theory is more easily conjured to mind (or at least conjured upon the fact-finding screens we have before and between us). I sent out numerous txt messages this evening. In part, I knew what was going to happen. I’d seen the performance before. I knew I was going to be faced again with the fact that whatever I saw was immediately lost to the room. But as I sent and recieved those messages (woman thinks:… He does … Night speaks…) there was nonetheless a realm, a combinatoire of interaction, ‘what is begun by one is continued by the next, without interveal’. So, perhaps, after all, that vacant seat tonight was the best seat in the house… for it is precisely all things being ‘out of joint’ that I now want to remember, to gather up from the ’very act of creativity’ I witnessed this evening, and ‘the self we sacrifice to do it…’

‘Now to sum up,’ said Bernard. ‘Now to explain to you the meaning of my life. Since we do not know each other (though I met you once, I think, on board a ship going to Africa), we can talk freely. The illusion is upon me that something adheres for a moment, has roundness, weight, depth, is completed. This, for the moment, seems to be my life. If it were possible, I would hand it you entire. I would break it off as one breaks off a bunch of grapes. I would say, “Take it. This is my life.” (The Waves)

(…perhaps see you at The Duke Theater on 42nd Street?)

The waves broke on the shore.

Along it came…

I bundled everything into my bag and soon it was heavy again. As ever it was a race against the clock. I checked to see I had picked up everything (the usual feeling, in such a hurry, of having forgotten something crucial lingered). But, I had all the bits and pieces I needed to read in preparation for teaching and of course Marquez’s 100 Years of Solitude (the title set by R. in preparation for my trip to Bogota, the page quotas by our reading group of two!)… There was just enough time, I thought, to get to the library to get that book about blogging (again for teaching), which I’d not been able to get last week because of such early closing times.

I hurried up to the first floor and headed straight to the shelf location 301.231. I spotted it finally down on the bottom shelf and swiftly plucked it from its position. I was all but away again when I noticed a title along the thin tall spine of a neighbouring book: The Digital Film Event. Interesting, I thought and shifted the weight of my bag slightly to be on my way again. Yet, no I couldn’t quite leave it there for a ‘next time’ (and so allow it to be lost to those spaces of lost volumes that ever haunt me). I let my bag down to the floor to free myself to collect up this second book. The pages are glossy I thought. Pictures, some in colour. And what is this, a filmscript in the middle? Could not compute. I was definitely intrigued. Could be a red herring, maybe a little self indulgent (though who am I to talk!). But the back cover did it, ever aware of the ticking clock, my eyes skated over the top few lines:
 

FILM / VISUAL STUDIES / POSTCOLONIAL STUDIES

Endless travel in cyberspace, virtual reality, and the dream of limitless speed: technology changes our sense of self. In her new book, Trinh Minh-ha explores the way technology transforms our perception of reality. 

Yes the word travel appeared I thought, a good omen and cyberspace, which would seem to help knit together our wandering plans and the insistence with which I write this blog. Suddenly the book became such precious cargo. Still with little sense of what it actually contained (and what does it really matter when set against the inspiration it offered), I hurried down to the library desk as if someone might reach out of the shadows and take it from me before I had the chance to have it issued to my name… As I ran the book’s barcode through the machine I became aware of a whole host of new possibilities (if only I could write them down here as quickly as I thought of them). Only yesterday as I half described the plans (or at least their moods/modes) R. and I have dreamt up for my visit, you said to me (as you sat perfectly, cross-legged upon that massive bed) ‘…and you could do more films’. The suggestion startled me for a moment (but that is hardly new) and I think I gave a non-commital reply, but it went quick and direct to my other mind (the one that can’t function in real-time).

R. … I think we have been thinking too small. Let’s not just look to the films and books of Robinsonesque adventures (and other associated Species of Spaces), let’s make our own. In our ever best attempts to refashion Bovard and Pecuchet for the 21st Century, I think we ought to turn our hand to being media artists. We’ll go the whole hog and invent a globalised installation.

I have been writing this, trying to archive my thoughts, as I travel back on the train. As I step off at the station and enter the usual commotion of commuters, I sense all the connections in my head dissipate (a desparate feeling under the circumstances). Still, I hang on to these words saved. It could be a real turning point. I really sense it could be a turning point (something we must discuss during our next skype call). Of course in previous literatures, this remark, which issues as if literally ensconced in the hurlyburly of modern life, might seem to reveal a contrived attempt, or re-presentation, of the transient. Yet, since I am able to type and transmit these words upon my mobile phone, we can’t so easily judge one’s verisimilitude.

…and this simply all feeds into the ideas of the author of The Digital Film Event, Trinh T. Minh-ha. As the backpage blurb continues:

“We are all engaged in social rituals in our daily activities,” she writes, ” and by remaining unaware of their artistic ritutal propensity, we remain ‘in conformity.’” Her goal, as a thinker and an artist, is to transform our understanding of technology and speed so that we are able to “turn an instrument into a creative tool and to step out of the one dimensional, technologically servile mind.”

The paradoz that “stillness contains speed within it” is central to Trinh’s concept of the digital apparatus. With her signature amalgam of feminism, postcolonial theory, Eastern philosophy, and practical understanding of filmmaking, Trinh Minh-ha presents a much-needed advance in our understanding of the real in a technological age.

R. … welcome to The Letters in Red 2.0…

At my R.eader’s Request

R., following your concerns over the translation of the short extract from Proust’s The Guermantes Way used in my previous post, I have decided not to replace the translation, but at least to offer a direct comparision as a supplement to the original post.

As you’ll remember the extract I used is an episode in which the narrator is awaiting a telephone call from his grandmother. I used a fairly recent translation by Mark Treharne for a 2002 Penguin Books publication, which reads as follows:

The dear one, the voice of the dear one speaking, are with us. But how far away they are! …I could feel more acutely how illusory the effect of such intimate proximity was, and at what a distance we can be from those we love at a moment when it seems we have only to stretch out our hand to retain them. A real presence, the voice that seems so close – but is in fact miles away! But it is also a foreglimpse of an eternal separation! Many times, as I listened in this way without seeing the woman who spoke to me from so far, I have felt that the voice was crying out to me from depths from which it would never emerge again, and I have experienced the anxiety which was one day to take hold of me when a voice would return like this (alone and no longer part of a body which I was never to see again) to murmur in my ear words I would dearly like to have kissed as they passed from lips forever turned to dust.

You are quite right that it reads very differently from the much earlier translation by C.K. Scott Moncrieff and Terence Kilmartin (which I print below from the 1981 Chatto & Windus publication). I had placed in brackets at the end of the above extract in my previous post  a simple note of authorship: (Proust) – but of course your reasonable query into the tone of the translation only serves to highlight the naviety of such an appellation. So, rather than now disrupt the flow of my previous post, I offer here, by printing the earlier translation, a form of correction or at least supplment (your thoughts as ever are gratefully appreciated, as is your continued viligance):

It is she, it is her voice that is speaking, that is there. … I felt more clearly the illusoriness in the appearance of the most tender proximity, and at what a distance we may be from the persons we love at the moment when it seems that we have only to stretch out our hands to seize and hold them. A real presence, perhaps, that voice that seemed so near – in actual separation! But a premonition also of an eternal separation! Many were the times, as I listened thus without seeing her who spoke to me from so far away, when it seemed to me that the voice was crying to me from the depths out of which one does not rise again, and I felt the anxiety that was one day to wring my heart when a voice would thus return (alone and attached no longer to a body which I was never to see again), to murmer in my ear words I longed to kiss as they issued from lips for ever turned to dust.

 

Dedicated to ‘You’

In those loving postcards once sent from the Bodleian, the philosopher Jacques Derrida notes it is necessary we demonstrate a letter always, and therefore ought not ever arrive at its destination, ‘it is not a misfortune, that’s life, living life’…

I sit in bed writing this, a couple of weeks on from the visit. It is raining outside and looks cold. Because ‘you’ were not there with me then, I put this jumble of jottings down, as much as possible a kind of private viewing of the Cy Twombly exhibition at Tate Modern. In particular, I draw attention to the penultimate room:

This room brings together Twombly’s two versions of the Quattro Stagioni, or Four Seasons, which were painted when he was approaching his mid-sixties. They loosely follow a tradition in which each season also represents a different stage in life: spring is young and vital, summer sensual, autumn idle, while winter sees death encroaching. (Tate Modern)

The paintings are large canvases, over 3 x 2 metres. The two sets show a draft version and then a final version (amazing to see the initial ’sketch’ on such a large scale). It is fascinating to see how the fluid, even random movement of paint is in fact carefully thought through. The eariler versions show a very conscious design, yet are not nearly as a vital as the final set. The Seasons offer a centerpoint to the exhibition, which is subtitled as ‘Cycles and Seasons’. I looked up in turn at these massive canvases. The Summer has now passed and Autumn is here (it is getting colder as was said only the other day) and soon it will be Winter when everything must hibernate, before Spring comes round again when it all begins (or at least began)…


Quattro Stagioni, I: Primavera (1993-5)

 

“I dedicate” has no meaning other than the actual gesture by which I present what I have made (my work) to someone I love or admire. This is just what Twombly does: bearing only the dedication’s inscription, the canvas “vanishes”: all that is given is the action of giving … These are limit-canvases, not in that they involve no painting … but because the way the notion of oeuvre is suppressed – but not the painter’s relation to somone he loves (Roland Barthes)

In anticipation of the Cy Twombly exhibition I always had in mind to write something. His work fits with…


Quattro Stagioni, II: Estate (1993-5)

…my interests to take semiotics apart, to explore a certain ‘adventure’ of a so-called sub-semiotic.

Before anything else, there occur … paper, canvas, pencil, crayon, oil paint. Twombly imposes his materials not as something which will serve some purpose but as an absolute substance (Roland Barthes)

But like the marks upon the canvas, the ‘facts’ as Barthes suggests, I can’t get past the fact I was with ‘you’ as I walked over Millennium Bridge and saw the advertisement upon the former power station façade, shouting out the coming exhibition. Going away with only an umbrella that day, there was hope for a return visit.

 

Quattro Stagioni, III: Autunno (1993-5)

Twombly’s art consists in making things seen – not the things he represents … but those he manipulates. [...] We might think that in order to express the pencil’s character it would have to be pressed hard, emphasized … Twombly thinks the opposite: by withholding the pressure of substance, by letting it come to rest quite causally, so that its texture is somewhat scattered, matter will reveal its essence … this is pencil. …we might say that the being of things is not their heaviness but in their lightness (Roland Barthes)

Given I had arrived into London alone I had tentatively invited my Dad to meet me at the exhibition, but as I suggested it his voice trailed off on the phone …I could only think of that moment in Proust’s The Guermantes Way when the narrator is awaiting a telephone call from his grandmother. In this case the whole apparatus of the telephone is of course much less embedded in everyday life; the call must be taken at the local post office. Being reminded of the novelty of the phone helps remind us of the strangeness and preciousness of another’s voice:

The dear one, the voice of the dear one speaking, are with us. But how far away they are! …I could feel more acutely how illusory the effect of such intimate proximity was, and at what a distance we can be from those we love at a moment when it seems we have only to stretch out our hand to retain them. A real presence, the voice that seems so close – but is in fact miles away! But it is also a foreglimpse of an eternal separation! Many times, as I listened in this way without seeing the woman who spoke to me from so far, I have felt that the voice was crying out to me from depths from which it would never emerge again, and I have experienced the anxiety which was one day to take hold of me when a voice would return like this (alone and no longer part of a body which I was never to see again) to murmur in my ear words I would dearly like to have kissed as they passed from lips forever turned to dust (Proust)

 [For a note on the specific translation used here see my subsequent post At my R.eader's Request]

Quattro Stagioni, IV: Inverno (1993-5)

‘Modern’ art, he had said (other than works such as Salvador Dali’s and Picasso’s), was not really his thing – not when it resembled the painting of a child!

…words occur readily enough (“drawing”, “graphism”, “scratching”, “clumsy”, “childish”), immediately followed by an embarrassment of language… (Roland Barthes)

But there is a radical honesty in the ‘childish’ marks and it says (to me) the frisson between people should never be constrained:

To paint involves a certain crisis, or at least a crucial moment of sensation of release … and by crisis it should by no means be limited to a morbid state, but could just as well be one ecstatic impulse (Cy Twombly)

Twombly’s art … does not want to take anything; it hangs together, it floats, it drifts between desire… (Roland Barthes)

In amongst that drift, in that crisis, I will always know what I want. You don’t need to hide things much to end up burying it all so soon… that is why I relished the opportunity to stand before the marks and swirls of Cy Twombly (and why your absence there holds such presence). Like dreamscapes of automatic writing, which are not tethered by the constraints of language and society, the vitality of these painting stood over, no less loomed over, the sadness of ‘our’ defeat and retreat…