BEAT = Brooklyn Experimental Artists in Theater

The dates are August 17-27 and TdlF will be performing 4 times during those 10 days.  This festival will be curated, meaning there are no applications for interested artists.  We simply need to meet you and see your work.  If you want us to see your show, or arrange a viewing, please let me know asap by filling out the contact form at the top of this page.

Otherwise, to learn more about BEAT go here:

BEAT Festival

I can confirm that we will be performing Seneca’s Medea at the BWAC Cultural Space in Red Hook on July 23/24th!  If you’ve never been to BWAC to see their quarterly arts show, it’s a very charged community and it takes place in an awesome warehouse.

(If you know me, then you know how obsessed I am with awesome warehouses…)

So, put that on your calendar.  You’ll be seeing both Phase I and Phase II…the mystery will be unveiled.

More to come.

SS

This contact, this living shared relationship, is what normally constitutes theater.  It is precious and elusive.  It challenges many to give their lives to its search.  An invisible and yet palpable connection between performer and viewer is sought demanding the highest concentration, openness, sensitivity and verbal/physical acumen.  It is an extraordinary art.

Our current project, Seneca’s Medea, explores the themes of betrayal, revenge, magic, spirituality, motherhood and isolation (amongst others).  On a certain level, we’re viewing the intricate process that a mother goes through after a devastating abandonment by her husband.  The story beautifully reveals the process that she undergoes to appease her feelings of betrayal leading her to a profoundly horrific act of retribution.  In the end, we are left with devastation and release, a stunning combination.

Being a myth however, we aren’t merely allowed to appreciate this story from the point of view of plot, character and story.  There is more here than psychology, pain and action.  In fact, what is on display is a very simple demonstration of deeper forces in collision.  The story, the “play”, is a vehicle to reveal these forces in action.

A great play does this universally.  Take “Hamlet” for instance, quite possibly the world’s greatest drama.  In this play, we have a young man visited upon by a ghost who confirms that his intuition is correct, that all is not what it seems.  He endeavors to find the truth, which leads him into unimaginable places psychologically and emotionally, causes him to murder, confront his mother, trick his uncle, and trust virtually no one.  Who cannot identify with some aspect of this search?  We all can of course.  No person, presented with a merely decent production of “Hamlet” will be left abandoned without a doorway into the drama.

These forces are universal, they are not confined within a certain social strata and aren’t cloaked with any specific culture.  This is greatness, and is what any theater artist seeks in his/her work.

If this is the case, doesn’t this then open up the possibility for other forms which reveal human forces at play?  Do we need then to be confined to using the same form for our search – this “play”, or can we invent others perhaps as suited, or more-so, to the task?

We are certainly ingrained and habituated to a structure which reigns worldwide.  We begin with a playwright who (hopefully) explores universal human forces in a play.  This script then finds its way into a producer or directors’ hands who then chooses to fulfill this written challenge in performance.  He/she finds some actors to play these roles, a vision of the piece is decided upon, and the elements combine into a whole: the performance, at which an audience witnesses the work and leaves the theater feeling moved, or not.

But.

Is this the only way?  Are there other forms that can both reach an audience and challenge them (us) to open our minds into viewing the stage, and world, differently?  Can we move away from this tyranny of words into something possibly more theatrical?

Brave contemporary theater artists have been asking this question longer than I have been alive.  An early pioneer was Edward Gordon Craig, who as a designer, moved away from pure realism into something more theatrical, emotional and direct.  The literal was challenged, and he proved it could be an illuminating direction in this art.

Another would be Samuel Beckett, who with words, stripped the theater bare into probing questions actively with an audience: “What does this mean? What does anything mean?”

Two individuals that I would like to highlight in particular are Robert Wilson and Merce Cunningham.  Wilson continually asks the question: Is our world predominantly visual or verbal?  He incorporates stunning and vivid shape, light, and montage to bring deeply mysterious themes into stark relief.  He has found that, in the theater, the visual goes further than the verbal.

Merce Cunningham, before Wilson, wondered if dance could be viewed with as much interest without a story as with.  He divorced his movement from literal story, character and plot, and explored over his long and meaningful life, pure movement: dance as a series of steps and shapes which had no overt meaning at all, leaving the process of ascribing meaning totally up to us, the audience.

By virtue of this, Merce was allowed to also let musicians and designers the pure freedom to work as they wished.  They were collaborators, yes, but in a more purely magical way.  On the opening night, they would (for the first time) blend their disparate elements and see what they had.  The result was awesomely dynamic and always surprising.  One could never “know” what to expect.

Is theater to be more like this?  Totally unexpected, magical, surprising and challenging?  Is it a more visual form or verbal?  Is the next direction of theater towards more story and character, or possibly, to something we don’t quite know?

With any art-form, it is critical that the artist consider the time in which he/she is working.  I witness around me a more and more visual world emerging.  Ours is a landscape dominated by images, windows and multiplicity.  I argue that no art-form can be considered truly contemporary unless it embraces these aspects.

Thus, the end of the tyranny of the play.

Antonin Artaud saw this long ago (outlined in his stunning and radical “The Theater and It’s Double”).  It is quite feasible that he evoked these themes long before the world was ready for it.  His personality bleeds through those pages, his sacrifice and emotion palpable in every word.  Possibly this power frightened many, and caused others to toss him away as “too radical” or “crazy”.  Looking back, was he nothing short of a visionary?

My question with Seneca’s Medea comes from my background and interest in artists such as those outlined in this article.  Many years ago, I began to wonder, if there was a way of working in the theater which could depart from the conventional “play” structure into something more visual, contemporary and universal.

One limitation that the play is forever bound by is language.  If you don’t speak the language of the presented world, you are essentially omitted from the experience.  One could make the argument that the experience is still worthwhile and meaningful, but the subtlety and directness of the story is clearly lost in this relationship.  Is there a way to relate to audiences in ways that aren’t limited by language?

One universal aspect which interests me is: relationship.  Many years ago, I began to wonder if a direction of work was open to me that explored theater, relationship and the visual.  I created my movement theater work Ashokh as a beginning to exploring this vital question.

I observe in Merce’s work an extraordinary gift of shape.  Suddenly, from seemingly nowhere, there emerges a montage of shape that is undeniably “theatrical”.  It exists, it stuns, it touches the sublime, and then it vanishes.  This is a purely visual phenomenon, one that touches me in a way that is inexplicable.  It doesn’t reach me as a “Southern American”, nor as a “Voter”, nor as a “Man”, but rather it reaches me in a way that is purely human.  Anyone alive could witness that moment, see this shape emerge, complete and vanish, and feel that “something just happened”.  It might not make sense on a literal level, but on a more primal and essential level, something is moved.

Could this phenomenon be brought to the theater?  Could it exist in and amongst actors or is it reserved for dancers only?  And, could it co-exist with another activity?

What I am exploring in Seneca’s Medea is the question of relationship; the relationship between two separate acts of theater that exist in the same place and time.  One created with the classic structure in mind, adhering to the playwright’s vision and intent.  The other, a more open exploration of the visual.  This suddenly allows us to explore purely visual forms as well as specific activities, which by their very nature, inspire story, character and plot.  Confused?  Go to a playground and observe a young boy build a fort out of sticks or the group of girls deeply involved in the imaginary world of dolls, voice and character.  Isn’t it completely natural, in the face of this, to wonder “what next?”.

Between these 2 separate pieces, is there a relationship?  What is the nature of this relationship?  CAN these 2 works co-exist, or does the presence of one destroy the other?  Is it possible that the presence of one can illuminate the other?  And, perhaps most importantly, can a third element appear between the 2 that is universal and purely accessible by any and all?

This search for a universal language in the theater, initiated by Artaud (seen as physical, in the body) continued by Peter Brook (Orghast, Conference of the Birds), Robert Wilson and Merce Cunningham, is it a true path or just a fancy idea?  Can something universal be discovered and reproduced, if only for a brief moment?

Ultimately, that is the question.  “The thing” brought in the title of this document is this and only this: a pure experience of theater, a moment where the sublime meets the senses and an inner movement happens.  This movement is one of discovery, of openness, of something purely human.

It is the only “thing” that matters.

(Note this film is rather crude, and was basically taken for our archive.  For the August performances, a more complete filming will take place)

We’re now onto Phase II, with work slated to begin in May and performances in later June (dates TBA).

Thanks and enjoy!

Saturday & Sunday shows are completely booked now.

The Thursday performance is at 930pm and Friday’s is at 830pm. Both will be held at:

Jaya Yoga Center
1626 8th Avenue
Brooklyn, NY
(Corner of 8th Ave & Windsor Place)

I urge you to book asap as seats are truly going quickly.

Also, here’s a link to some pics from our Saturday rehearsal (with thanks to Theresa Sgobba, the photographer):

“This day shall see a deed that ne’er shall be forgot”

I am very proud to announce the four upcoming work-in-progress viewings of Seneca’s Medea.  The venues we will be in are quite cozy so I strongly advise you to reserve a seat in advance (see below).  We will allow for walk-ups, but only if there are unreserved seats.

CAST:

Medea: Judith Barnes
Nurse: Jennifer Fisher
Creon: Thomas Cox
Jason: Stephen Shelley

Phase I of the project is the very simple presentation of Seneca’s work.  We have very minimal implements and staging, exposing the work in its barest, most powerful form.   Our goal is to convey this tragic and profoundly riveting story in the most intimate, simple way possible.  The performances listed in this announcement are the Phase I viewings.

Phase II will culminate with performances in early June where we construct a second piece to coexist around the simple Medea play.  Those performances will, again, be a work-in-progress viewing for a long weekend.  Finally, our wish is to be accepted into this year’s Fringe Festival in August to present the entire work in its final form.  More on Phase II and our August performances to come.

Below is the information for the Phase I performances from Thursday, March 31-Sunday, April 3.  If you would like to come, I urge you to reserve a seat asap.  Seating is very limited.  There is no charge for these viewings (donations, however, are greatly appreciated)

DATES:

Thursday, March 31st, 9:30pm, Jaya Yoga Center, Park Slope
Friday, April 1st, 8:30pm, Jaya Yoga Center, Park Slope
Saturday, April 2nd, 7:00pm, Old Stone House, Park Slope
Sunday, April 3rd, 4:00pm, Old Stone House, Park Slope

ADDRESSES:

Jaya Yoga Center
1626 8th Avenue
Brooklyn, NY
(Corner of 8th Ave & Windsor Place)

Old Stone House
336 3rd Street
Brooklyn, NY
(Western edge of park flanked by 4th Ave & 3rd St)

To reserve seats, please email tdlfete@gmail.com.  Due to very high demand, we urge you to reserve your seat(s) asap.  You will receive an email response as confirmation of your reservation.

Thank you to Jaya and Carla for this relationship!

Medea: Tatyana Yassukovich

Dancer: Brett Howard

Dancer: Shari Cavin

You may view the film here:

Ashokh

1) All performances can be played for anyone, anywhere at anytime

2) All productions are portable, and begin with an empty space

3) We embrace a spirit of economy; the implements of performance are chosen carefully seeking items that can serve a plurality of purpose to the work

4) In an effort to open the art-form, we strive to reduce the power of language in the theater emphasizing more visual, kinetic and plastique aspects of performance

5) Our work is a search for a ‘something’ which is purely theatrical; a shape, a relationship, a feeling that can only be discovered in theater

Elaborations

1) Our work is a search for a performance aesthetic which can touch any willing spectator.  Inspired by modern dance’s de-emphasis on story, character and emotion, we seek to, similarly, open the theater art which is currently largely synonymous with language and story (the “play”).  In this way, our work can be open to non-english speaking individuals and touch something which is purely theatrical.  This we define as that incomparable moment when a relationship is made between audience and performer.  When, if only for a brief moment, a connection is made.  A story told in words establishes contact, but is there a deeper connection to be made which is separate from character, action, plot and emotion, ie – the basic outer shape and image of living.

2) It is our intention to travel the world doing theater.  Therefore, we must be portable.  As part of each performance, the creation and maintenance of the space is included as an element in the evolution of the piece.  There is no backstage or offstage.  There are no crew or stagehands.  Each piece is wholly facilitated by the players themselves.  Nothing is excluded, in other words.  Everything is an element of production.

3) All objects used in the work shall serve a variety of purpose.  Our intention is to work with as few devices or properties as is possible.  Everything is carefully chosen to have a multitude of function within the work, thus reducing the demands placed upon anything other than ourselves and the ideas being researched.  We wish to make naked the intangible aspects hidden within the work.  This requires emphasizing minimalism and economy.

4) What is more synonymous with theater than language and story?  We believe that there is more to the artform than mere words, plot and character.  Our work does not intend to destroy an author’s work, character and style.  Rather, we intend to expand our work in the direction of something more open and purely theatrical.  We hope that this destroys the tyranny of words functioning mostly to engage the mind and rather to touch the imagination via the senses seeking contact with the spirit.

5) Ultimately, there is a moment in the theater we seek.  This is a moment when, for some unknown reason, from some unknown place, a connection is made.  It often sounds like “yes”, it feels warm and familiar, it excites the mind and compels us each to privately (or not) celebrate life.  It is these moments, and these moments alone, which separate the theater from the other non-performance arts.  These moments open our imaginations and cause us to simultaneously question life and delight in it.  The point of our work is to discover these moments and share them with you.

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”

~Albert Einstein

Words are interesting, and necessary, but not the most important aspect to a theatrical event.  The most purely theatrical form that I’ve ever witnessed is dance – and in particular, modern dance.  Many plays are better suited to film, for example – thus making the theatrical element dispensable.  So then, the question which interests me is – how to make theater important, and not simply a forum for story and words.

Empty Theater.  Without another form, more traditional and conventional, E.T. would not work.  But, with something else there to support it, it can exist.  The aim then is to have 2 differing works occuring simultaneously, that do not distract from the other but that support the other.