Pop-up Politics: permeability, place, audienceship + political forms Bethany Wells, 25 January 2015 A wide ranging discussion that, on reflection, fell into three sections: I: The inherent politics of temporary events Connotations of pop-up. ‘Pop-up’ as a strategy has been co-opted by retail, brands, marketing to such an extent that it can feel tired/cynical. There is a need for communities to have ownership over place and space, and not have art done ‘to’ them. But there is also value in art being a disruption, how to retain the rebellious, radical feel of festivals. By necessity, artists have always been nomadic, made work where it is affordable; this has an urgency to it. To what extent are all artists implicit in the front-line of urban gentrification? Are there any forms of performance / communal assembly that are able to resist, by their structure/design, commercial take-up. Nick suggested genuine silliness may be immune to co-option by commercial interests/marketing. Play can be disruptive; do forms of play have an in-built political, or a communal element to them? Difference between a pure spectacle , and work which asks more of the audience, e.g. requires some kind of agency on the part of the audience to complete the experience . People know when they are being sold something. They can read it a mile off. The need to trust in your own intention as an artist; the energy you bring to the public space; ‘if you hold out your hand they will take it’. As long as the audience remains central to your work. Be clear about what you want them to experience. The idea of showmanship. Street performance is very aware of the relationship ‘in the moment’ with the audience; adapts to local context or changing conditions. Agile as a quality. What is the driving force for the pop-up e.g is it driven by the artist, needing a space to work, or is it driven by the space/audience - looking at a space and responding to the needs/opportunities there? There is a difference between making work with and making for specific places or communities. Do we have a responsibility to stay, to engage with a community beyond or past the lifetime of the event? For some this was important, for others, more interested in the long tradition of the artist as outsider; turn up, bring something that would never have been ‘home-grown’ by that community. That is refreshing too; not everything has to be made with or by the community. Is your work about solving problems you see or asking the questions that you feel need asking? Discussion about the value of the temporary event leaving not only a positive memory in space, but also a gap/vaccum. Reference to Alfredo Jaar's counter-hegemonic interventions: he realised there was no gallery in the area he was working in, built one, out of paper, before burning it down after the exhibition: ‘he did not want to impose on the community an institution they had never fought for’. He has a ‘pedagogical strategy of never imposing his own vision but instead bringing people to articulate their own needs’. Are we talking about Politics with a capital P? Is it a Political event that is popping up or is it more about the inherent politics in setting up temporary events? Is performance in the UK today political enough? Example of protests turning into sites of creativity . Pop-up performance can be aligned to political movements, e.g. activist, transition. II: The edges of site-based performance Looking at why we take work outside the theatre building: to escape the supposed passivity of the institution, to bring more edges and contexts into the work. It's not only a question of what the work is, but the precise placement of it. e.g. the same piece in different locations takes on different meanings . The idea of taking away the fixed frame to view work and how that reshapes the work. Being aware of the ‘Vector’ of engagement with place you want to employ: do you want to ‘insert’, ‘place’ work, ‘reach’ an audience, shake up, make a point, grow/collect a work, engage/include? What relationship does the performance have with the space: - using the space as a host, not trying to have a long term impact but raising awareness of its use - insert something very different, a counter-energy to the everyday - light-touch; e.g. just the memory of the event will remain - leave something permanent Be careful that we are creating spaces, not taking spaces away . Access points to your event: the difference between how something is read as an invited/ticketed audience, vs an accidental audience. Difficulty of having a clear message to many different audiences. What is read as satire to an invited audience, can be seen as insulting to an accidental audience, who haven't come to the work through the performance ‘frame’. Looking at what happens at the edges of events, e.g. processional, public pieces/installations; if someone is curious or tags along, how are they assimilated, brought into the event? . Can we build permeability into the DNA/structure/guidelines/policy and communicate to hosts/ushers of an event. Example of phones being used as access point into a piece. Only those who come through that induction are ‘in on it’. The performance is invisible to all others. Do you consciously decide not to explain the event? To emphasise the other-ness/bizarre-ness of the intervention. Secrecy, exclusivity; how to maintain the feeling of specialness of an event, without being exclusive to an informal audience. Example of Secret Cinema meeting points, with a dress code, ID cards. For those in the know it feels special. No permeability to accidental audience . Activist groups are good at leafleting, flyering, rights and responsibilities of if you join their group. Could we think of ways of explaining the event differently to invited and accidental audiences. Or design it so that even if they don't have the same experience as a ticketed audience, the experience isn't negative. Concept of ‘audienceship’: managing the agency of an audience. Discussing the audience experience as key to the structural design of the work. There will always be rogue elements to site-based work. Some work has a ‘heavy roller’ attitude to public space, e.g. setting up specific conditions to control the space, while others do not attempt to ‘flatten’ out the conditions and accept what they find as the site. Discussion of public art; how sometimes it is only discussed in terms of what it brings economically to an area, rather than its value as art. III: The changing purpose of art Provocation of Chantal Mouffe: ‘Agonistics’: 'According to some thinkers, the commodification of culture is such that there is no space anymore for artists to play a critical role' - can art still play a critical role? The job of art has changed. The need to be clear sighted as to the aim of your work. Art has moved from being representational …now to the idea of ‘flocking’ - but where next: How does performance get actively involved with the changing democratic landscape? Capitalism / ‘immersive’ strategies are encroaching on everyday life e.g. pop up retail parks, temporary marketing events, guerrilla strategies for corporate products, sponsorship = the performative nature of contemporary culture. What does this ask of performance. Where does performance go in response? The inherently embodied nature of politics today. Looking at what the political form your work takes, before adding political content. Q: to look further into: What do we mean about the ‘political form’? What new forms of assembly, gathering, performance/watching can we design? What are our aims: . BW: I'm interested in spaces or experiences that are both seductive and critical at the same time. Ways of being in space, in public. Including performance that is invisible, using the rules of a space - hosted by a space, not looking to change it. Using quasi-public space as a site. Don't necessarily have to transform a space or engage with its users/residents to use it in your work. Looked at the ideas in Adventure 1, revealing to the audience the qualities/rules of corporate space . Using phones as a prop, to enable certain kinds of behaviour . Question also about the value of un-mediated space, e.g. is it refreshing to have to leave your phone at the door. What atmosphere does that result in? - Who was here: I didn't take everyone's name down, but here are the ones I did. Please add your name if you'd like: Michelle Walker @michelleyascapi @HatFair Jonathan Petherbridge @jpeth Nick Cassenbaum @nickcassenbaum Bethany Wells @preparedtobe Tassos Stevens @tassosstevens Rosalie White @rosaliewhite8 Billy Barrett @billybarrett123 Rose and others! - Links + Further research: BOOK/IDEAS: Agonistics, Chantal Mouffe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yHX_6FGsvs TALK: 7th Feb, event in Leeds: Scenographic City https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/scenographic-city-tickets-15004193948?utm_source=Ludus+PEOPLE: Mehmet Ergen - theatre-maker, Arcola PROJECT: The Roof is on Fire http://vimeopro.com/suzannelacy/oakland-project/video/39865636 FESTIVAL: Inside Out Dorset Festival: Extraordinary events in extraordinary places http://activateperformingarts.org.uk/inside-out PROJECT: Warmth Mobile Sauna http://cargocollective.com/warmth Tags: Audience, Site-specific, Invitation, Community, site-specific, audienceship, SPACE, installation, street performance, showmanship, space, community, festival, engagement, spectacle, technology, urgency, invitation, gentrification, nomadic, Technology, agency, ownership, Politics, audience, radical, Engagement, politics, public, temporary, Festival, place, intervention