Posts Tagged ‘hip-hop’

If Brecht were alive today he would be twittering about Kanye

Monday, November 16th, 2009

One of the things that interests me about Brecht’s theoretical project is his focus on creating work that resonates strongly with contemporary audiences. The world as he knew it was one firmly rooted in “the scientific age” of modernist utopian possibilities. He saw theater as a tool to open up fracture points in contemporary society in order to make possible a transformation in class consciousness.

He writes in A Short Organum for the Theatre:

We need a type of theatre which not only releases the feelings, insights and impulses possible within the particular historical field of human relations in which the action takes place, but employs and encourages those thoughts and feelings which help transform the field itself.

Brecht’s work, to my reading, has always concerned itself with the extremes of society, the revolutionary consciousness and potential on the one hand and the reactionary counter-revolutionary forces on the other. But as he says in the above quote we must concern ourselves with the contemporary reality. We must use the system as it is, and through an exploitation of its fracture points, transform it into a more perfect world. He makes this second point more explicitly, a little earlier, when he states that “[t]he theatre has to become geared into reality if it is to be in a position to turn out effective representations of reality, and to be allowed to do so.”

Theatre, for Brecht, was to be an Event, in the Zizekian sense, an authentic experience which fundamentally alters the experience of events not only after its occurrence but alters the experience of the past as well. The theatrical Event was to be of such a magnitude that one’s whole orientation to the social experience would be fundamentally and irrevocably altered.

So what does this have to do with tweeting about Kanye West?

What I was thinking about specifically was the extreme of contemporary hip hop embodied in the radical political critique espoused by groups like Dead Prez or BDP (KRS-One) on the one hand and such acts as Kanye and Fergie on the other. Bling bling capitalism juxtaposed against social revolutionaries mediated through contemporary performative/artistic experience. How does Kanye’s Golddigger intersect with KRS-One’s Love is gonna get cha(Material Love)? But of more interest is the question: how does the technology through which these songs are experienced interact with the audience?

What twitter does, in a similar way to other social media like blogs, facebook, myspace and so forth, is to blur the distinction between life, audience, and performance. When surveillance is total, and everyone is on camera, then everyone is an actor. So then we have the consumption of culture as a performative act. We tweet about the song we are currently listening to and fold the performance of the song into the performance of subjectivity on-line in a way that presents it immediately as commodity and reifies the subjective performance.

This is the world we are in. The “scientific age” has been passed by for the “information age” and we are no longer gears in the machine but statuses in the social group blog. So the audience/actor takes the stage and incorporates cultural commodities into the performative feedback loop. The subjective experience of identity shifts along the audience/actor continuum and becomes complicated as that experience gets mediated through various technologies. Is a retweet performative? Has the subjective experience then become another cultural object to be consumed or does it still contain the potential inherent in performance? Has the subject/object dichotomy been pulled out of the either/or world and brought into the light of both/and?

Brecht makes it clear that “[n]ot everything depends on the actor, even though nothing may be done without taking him into account. The ‘story’ is set out, brought forward and shown by the theatre as a whole.” I would argue that this extends to contemporary performative technologies.

While Brecht set out in his day to reconceive Theatre and Opera into a medium appropriate for his contemporary world I could easily imagine him shifting the very stage from the physical world to the digital world. Perhaps his performances would only appear in Second Life or as episodic narrative released via twitter.

Despite all this conjecture, the question still remains: how might these technologies be utilized to exploit fracture points in contemporary culture in order to unleash the revolutionary potential of the masses? Or to look at it a different way: is the very search for those points of fracture, and the desire for social revolution, an idea tied up with the modernist notions of a bygone era? Have the differences been so radically folded into one another that we no longer have such dichotomous existence but rather the uneasy experience of both/and?

I certainly don’t know the answers to those questions but I would love you to retweet this piece if you enjoyed it.

All content Copyleft - LucasKrech.com, please Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • RSS
  • email

Giving Birth to Decay

Tuesday, September 26th, 2006

I love doing site specific work. There is a special kind of relationship one must develop with the space. There is a predictability in theatre spaces as far as how light moves that does not exist in found spaces. There are common elements, sure, but in the end each one must be taken on its own terms.

My personal favorite spaces are ones that are run down or partially run down. Those that have a sense of old, a feeling of history. There is a wonderful sense of giving birth to something new out of the decay of the old. Reclaiming a space and giving it a new purpose. This is where my love of industrial spaces comes from. An old factory, or warehouse transformed into a living breathing entity that renegotiates its existence with the event it contains.

rebirth

In a contemporary world where everything is prefabricated and disposable, it is an important act to recycle the old. To repurpose the dying for the new.

This is why I love Hip-Hop.

Specifically Graffiti art and Scratch DJ’s. These art forms are about taking found objects, public space or prerecorded music, and through ones art repurposing and transforming the artifacts into something new, vital and alive. Bansky is very popular these days, but my real love is for train pieces and other large scale work, like Tagging Air Force One.

sh_graffity_600

The only answer, that I see, to the death of American Theatre is find a new framework within which to place the performance. The setting, which includes the theatre as much as scenery and lighting and other such elements, must be reconceived for the 21st Century. Theatre must enter into a larger socio-cultural dialog or it risks falling in on itself under the weight of its own self-referential inertia. Otherwise it will not wake up its sleeping audiences, and continue lumbering along, half-dead, and half-asleep.

All content Copyleft - LucasKrech.com, please Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • RSS
  • email

On Simultaneity – The Negotiation of Color and Music

Thursday, August 31st, 2006

One can take . . . all the themes that have been privileged until now by deconstructive strategy: that is, presence, consciousness, sign, theme, thesis, etc. One cannot imagine oneself alive renouncing all consciousness, all presence, all ethics of language: and yet this is precisely what must be deconstructed. One must try to think what it is that makes us unable to “do without.” Thus, on the one hand, the very menacing character of deconstruction. But, at the same time, it does not threaten anything because it is not a question of destroying what there is to deconstruct. Although phantasmatic, the threat is not, however, imaginary, and this explains the affective charge, the terrorized violence of the resentment and reactions against “deconstruction.” Negotiation operates in the very place of threat, where one must with vigilance venture as far as possible into what appears threatening and at the same time maintain a minimum of security – and also an internal security not to be carried away by this threat. This, too, is negotiation.
An essential aspect of negotiation is that it is always different, differential, not only from one individual to another, from one situation to another, but even for the same individual, from one moment to the next. There is no general law, there is no general rule of negotiation. Negotiation is different at every moment, from one context to the next. There are only contexts, and this is why deconstructive negotiation cannot produce general rules, “methods.” It must be adjusted to each case, to each moment without, however, the conclusion being a relativism or empiricism. This is the difficulty. That there is something like an absolute rule of negotiation that can only be adjusted to political, historical situations.
-Jacques Derrida, Negotiations

I was trying to understand the idea of simultaneity and totally failed until I realized that simultaneity does not exist temporally, but rather is an experiential moment. A popular current in music these days is the “Mash-Up” but the Mash-Up is really nothing new. In fact it is a simple evolution of what the Hip-Hop scratch DJ does. It is what early House music did. Take two otherwise unrelated pieces of music and interweave them into a new sonic experience. It is this characteristic of newness that really grabbed me. The two cease being two and become one. And in that moment of synthesis, simultaneity ceases and experience is born.

John Cage‘s Indeterminacy is a classic example of simultaneity. Yet it is a single experience of word and noise colliding in a wholly new experience. Joseph Albers was famous for his ideas surrounding color theory. He made explicit the point that colors are relational, rather than operating as a fixed system. If that is true of pigments, it is doubly true of light.

It is possible to make a common lightbulb appear blue, now green, now pink simply by altering the context in which we find this bulb. The color of light is not inherent, but rather relational. When creating a composition based upon multiple colors it is an inherent act of negotiation. The one impacting the other, each altering the fundamentals of the other. No single color can remain on its own. They are both relationally and contextually defined. The color experience, then, is an instance of simultaneity that is not simultaneity, but rather a mash-up experience.

By playing with the tensions inherent to color in the medium of light it is possible to make a figure appear at once beautiful and ugly. By defining a subject through the use of color on the one hand and contextually defining it as the opposite of that color. In a similar way one can make a distant subject more prominent than a near subject thus unsettling the notion of physical space upon a stage.

Opera is an extreme experience in simultaneity. One has music and dance and song and sculpture and light and shadow and fabric and yet no one of these elements can be successfully extracted from the whole. Rather the experience is a relational system whereby every element feeds into and both defines and negates every other aspect of the experience. The humming chorus in Madama Butterfly is a long section of an opera that is about a light cue. Yet by decentering the Subject, Butterfly, and placing her as static and passive observer, one falls even further into the thrall of the subject. In essence, she is most present when she is absent. Which in a way is the point of the opera, that she only exists as symbol, and dies the moment she becomes woman. The “Other” can only exist as a symbol, and must be denied dimensionality.

This moment does not give us any answers, nor any definitive insights into the nature of our heroine. It does however ask an important question. What is the tension inherent in the Subject? A Subject can not exist without a context whereby there are Objects. Thus, the Subject, whole within its own subjective experience, must also always already exist as Object to another. Butterfly, made Object by Pinkerton, is made Subject once again by the rising sun. And the negotiation continues.

All content Copyleft - LucasKrech.com, please Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • RSS
  • email

Creative Commons License

All text and images on this site unless otherwise noted are licensed under a Creative Commons License.