Temporary Public My research has focused on new medias use in environmental theatre/performance and its effect on audience awareness of space and landscape narratives. The creation of new media has developed new societal and environmental narratives that can be explored through the use of performance and theatrical devices such as breaking the fourth wall0. This research is set to develop a case study catalogue of performances that explore landscape and new media narratives and examine if new techniques in contemporary video projection are also redefining public space and exposing new narratives. The content of this presentation is focused on the specific archival case study of para-site by D+S studio. This work was installed at the New York Museum of Modern rt in 1987. D+S used camera and surveillance technology to investigate, surveillance culture and visual narratives by activating the public as performer and blurring the roles of actor/observer with technology interfaces. The argument I am trying to make is that by using new media devices D+S was able to activate new and unseen landscape narratives and redefine what public spaces are. Public Spaces1 Landscape Narratives From Goldberg s essay on Space as Praxis a classification of space types is created for performance. spectator space private and public space para-site In 1987 Elizabeth Diller and Ricardo Scofidio had a video installation at MM for part of the projects presentation. This video installation examined the act of voyeurism and visual culture that in inherent within the environment of the museum by activating overlapping actor observer relationship between the visitors, cameras, and monitors. Designers and artists working in landscape conditions are tapping into embedded narratives3. Landscape narratives are subject to the designer/artist in the construction of open and closed narratives. pen narratives allow for public authorship of the contextual narratives. ctor pen Narratives bserver Closed Narratives udience ctivation2 udience activation has gradations ranging form inactive to participatory storytellers. B B = authentic participation E = active viewing C C D D EE FF GG H H B = legitimate participation C = invited participation D = token participation F = symbolized participation G = controlled verbal reaction H = non-participation Image of para-site at MM. ctors and bservers are highlighted with symbols revealing the complex actor/observer relationships in the space.
Blocking and Staging Diagrams 20 Examinations of the archive materials provides a series of chronological movements that reveal how technology is used to activate to public awareness at the Museum Blank Stage Hand drawn renderings ctors Enter Space Fires visitors enter the space and are recorded by the cameras above the doors. Hand drawn renderings Recorded visitors are displayed to an empty gallery space. Monitors w/ Live Feed Chair Video Cameras Revolving Door Entrance ctors Turn bservers More visitors enter the museum. Cameras continue to act as observers First visitors enter gallery. Recognize the video screens and become aware of their process as museum goers. Gallery Space Returning to the Stage Leaving visitors are actors for the cameras again. This time with the awareness of being filmed mixing with the new actors. The lobby transitions to public-private to a spectator space. The next cycle of actors turned observers enters the gallery watching the previous visitors becoming actors again. 2 2
Narrative Landscapes21 This is the paragraph where I talk about landscape narratives and how they are revealed in by new media and how by creating a blended spectator/public/private space. Several levels of awareness are revealed Story Contextual Discourse Fields Museum as ritual and cultural institution Investigation of the Culture of vision22 Privacy wareness as performance Parasite as an idea. Happenings of new media in the landscape Technology and society Space and redefining the extents and boundaries Public Performance Feedback and awareness Interface Space
Classification and Blocking Performance and technology have been used to activate the public since early merican Independence. The following chronology takes a sample of these performances and classifies their use of new media coupled with blocking diagrams that clarify their use of space and audience activations. DTE SHW/RTIST SPCE CTIVTIN TECHNIQUE 1778 Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens Transparency of national events activates larger narrative structure Diorama Pleasure Gardens SET 1 SET 2 SET 3 Visible Lights Projection Plan stage Epic Theatre Projection Elevation 1935 Landscape Theatre 6 Gertruid Stein The combination and not a contradiction of audience and narrative Happenings Intolleranza 1960 1936 Verfremdungseffekt 7 Brecht/Epic Theatre udience alienation and awareness of being in a play 1959 18 Happenings in 6 Parks 8 llan Kaprow Deconstruction of theatrical forms total immersion theatre. udience switched seats and assigned actors tasks. CM CM B 1965 Intolleranza 1960 9 Josef Svoboda Video Projection of audience onto the stage City Maps Two Rooms 1966 City Maps 10 Lawrence/nna Halprin 1974 Two Rooms 11 Dan Graham Dancers and architects performing in the city to reveal structural narratives Public observing themselves and performance concurrently Projector Building 3:oopm 3:02pm 3:04pm 1983 Modern Projections 12 Krzysztof Wodiczko Public projections on urban architecture Modern Projections You-the City 1988 You-the City 13 Fiona Templeton 1987 para-site 14 D+S Studio 1988 Memorial Projections 15 Krzysztof Wodiczko 1996 Mugger Music 16 The Loading Deck Individual performances through urban journeys Surveillance tech as defacto actor to instigate new audience awareness Individual performances through urban journeys Utilizing new media to explore on the ground urban mapping Museum Lobby Cameras para-site Room B Gallery Monitors Camera Room B Projector Memorial Memorial Projections Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 1996-2003 prachtgleis 17 SLEM Series of pieces using a construction site for engaging audience awareness of transformation process Room Room Mugger Music Monitor Building Boundary Park prachtgelis
Footnotes/Bibliography 0. Stevenson, John. 1995. The Fourth Wall and the Third Space. Centre for Playback Theatre. 15. Wodiczko, Krzysztof. 1999. Projections. In Critical Vehicles: Writings, Projects, Interviews, 44 69. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 1.Goldberg, Roselee. Space as Praxis. Studio International, 1975. 2. Lorek-Jezinska, Edyta. 2002. rticle No.6 udience ctivating Techniques and Their Educational Efficacy. pplied Theatre Researcher No. 3. http://www.griffith.edu.au/centre/cpci/atr/journal/number4_article6.htm. 4. Images and Materials Courtesy of Museum of Modern rt rchives, NY. 16. Stanton B. Garner Jr. 2002. Urban Landscapes, Theatrical Encounters: Staging the City. In Land/scape/theater, edited by Elinor Fuchs and Una Chaudhuri, 94 118. Theater--Theory/text/performance. nn rbor: University of Michigan Press. 17. Doedens, Bruno, and Stichting Landschapstheater en Meer. 2009. Temporary Landscapes = Tijdelijke Landschappen. Deventer: SLeM, Stichting Landschapstheater en Meer : Thieme rt. 3.Potteiger Matthew, and Purinton Jamie. Landscape Narratives. In Theory in Landscape rchitecture: Reader, edited by Simon R. Swaffield, 136 44. Penn Studies in Landscape rchitecture. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002. 5. Stubbs, Naomi J. 2013. Cultivating National Identity through Performance: merican Pleasure Gardens and Entertainment. Palgrave Studies in Theatre and Performance History. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 6. Fuchs, Elinor, and Una Chaudhuri, eds. 2002. The Composition That ll the World Can See: Gertrude Stein s Theater Landscapes. In Land/scape/theater, 122 44. Theater--Theory/text/performance. nn rbor: University of Michigan Press. 7. Benjamin, Walter. 1998. Understanding Brecht. London; New York: Verso. 8. llan Kaprow: rt as Life. 2008. MC The museum of contemporary art, Los ngeles. http://www.moca.org/kaprow/galleryguide_kaprow.pdf. 18. Siapera, Eugenia. 2011. Understanding New Media. 1st ed. Thousand aks, C: Sage Publications. 19. Images and Materials Courtesy of Museum of Modern rt rchives, NY. 20. Images and Materials Courtesy of Museum of Modern rt rchives, NY. 21.Potteiger Matthew, and Purinton Jamie. Landscape Narratives. In Theory in Landscape rchitecture: Reader, edited by Simon R. Swaffield, 136 44. Penn Studies in Landscape rchitecture. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002. 22. rtist Statement from para-site, Courtesy of Museum of Modern rt chives, NY. Images Courtesy of Museum of Modern rt rchives, NY. Curatorial Collection Series 1524 9. Příhodová, Barbora. 2010. The Power of Images in Performance: Josef Svoboda s Scenography for Intolleranza 1960 at Boston pera Company. Fulbright-Masaryk Scholarship. 10. Halprin, Lawrence. 1970. The RSVP Cycles; Creative Processes in the Human Environment. New York: G. Braziller. 11. Graham, Dan. 1975. Dan Graham: rchitecture/video Projects. Studio International, September. 12. Wodiczko, Krzysztof. 1999. Projections. In Critical Vehicles: Writings, Projects, Interviews, 44 69. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 13. Stanton B. Garner Jr. 2002. Urban Landscapes, Theatrical Encounters: Staging the City. In Land/scape/theater, edited by Elinor Fuchs and Una Chaudhuri, 94 118. Theater--Theory/text/performance. nn rbor: University of Michigan Press. 14. Marotta, ntonello, and Christine Tilley. 2011. Diller + Scofidio: blurred theater. Roma: Edilstampa srl.