Intermediality and Politics Theatre and Performance

Downloaded from UvA-DARE, the institutional repository of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) http://dare.uva.
nl/document/503072
File ID Filename
503072 Introduction: Intermediality and politics in theatre and performance
SOURCE (OR PART OF THE FOLLOWING SOURCE): Type Dissertation Title Intermediality and politics in theatre and performance Author G.S. Dapp Faculty Faculty of Humanities Year 2013 Pages 332
FULL BIBLIOGRAPHIC DETAILS: http://dare.uva.nl/record/459124
Copyright It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use.
UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance
Introdu)tion* Intermediality and Politi)s in T(eatre and Performan)e

Perhaps this is the f$ndamental parado9 .$ilt into the concept of media as s$ch. ) medi$m >$st is a Bmiddle4C an in3.et2een or o3.et2een4 a space or path2ay or messen er that connects to thin sTa sender to a recei#er4 a 2riter to a reader4 an artist to a .eholder4 or Fin the case of the spirit$alist medi$mG this 2orld to the ne9t. The pro.lem arises 2hen 2e try to determine the .o$ndaries of the medi$m. UVW The medi$m does not lie bet"een sender and recei#erL it incl$des and constit$tes them. W.N.T. Mitchell4 'hat Do (ict res 'ant) 25554 25%
The most intri $in and4 at the same time4 fr$stratin e9perience for a scholar is 2hen he or she enco$nters a ,chic'en3and3e , pro.lem. -y this I mean a sit$ation 2hich is essentially rec$rsi#e in str$ct$re4 2hich forms a feed.ac'3loop that s$spends the simple ca$se3and3effect lo ic into thresholds of m$t$al interaction. While the res$lt seems clear Fchic'ens do lay e s4 and e s hatch chic'ensG4 the ro$te to it is a challen e4 as are the concl$sions that are to .e dra2n from it. The attempt to ma'e any statement t$rns into a constant ne otiation and str$ de ree as the e BneedsC the chic'en. a.o$t ,politics4, ,intermediality4, ,theatre4, and ,performance, le4 as it cannot a#oid to the same pres$pposin somethin that is also its conse6$ence! the chic'en BneedsC the e In the same sense4 2ritin
pres$pposes many components4 some of 2hich refer to4 .$ild on4 or distin $ish themsel#es from another. ;ach concept has its o2n disco$rse4 2hich in t$rn implies certain r$les of approach and ,tal' a.o$t, it. The disciplines of political and media philosophy meet theatre and performance st$dies and form a process of interaction 2hich cannot entirely a#oid interdependence. This m$t$al infl$ence ma'es it #ery diffic$lt to determine a , erminal cell4, as it 2ere4 a shared point that can .e $sed as a .asis for disc$ssion and from 2hich e#erythin else can .e deri#ed. This preface tries to fill this #oid .y creatin an artificial startin point4 an o$tline of the theoretical reflections4 2hich appears in a state that is .oth the .asis for and the prod$ct of my analyses. The title of this dissertation deli.erately points to this pro.lem. -esides tryin to s$mmariEe the contents and pro#ide the reader 2ith an idea of the contents 2ithin the .re#ity of the tile4 I also 2anted to Fintermedially4 as it 2ereG capt$re the process of ar $mentation4 2ritin 4 and readin . The title $nites fo$r comple9 concepts into a synta9 2hich is declarati#e in nat$re .$t mi ht >$st as 2ell .e $nderstood as interro ati#e. The concepts4 in t$rn4 maintain a de ree of separation and point to a si nification that lies some2here in .et2een and in the 2hole. They .rea' o$t of the apparent
13
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance si nification of the implied sentence and dra2 attention to the intricacy that lies in their interplay. ;ach 2ord declares o2nership of its o2n contents4 meanin 4 history4 etymolo y. Xet the same applies to e#ery sentence that assem.les4 str$ct$res4 $nites4 or occasionally clashes its contents. -$t if this is tr$e4 then the meanin 4 the si nification of a sentence is more than its elements. It points to a process4 an enco$nter .et2een its constit$ents that contains and transcends each indi#id$al element4 the 2riter4 and the reader. In this sense4 the follo2in reflections see' to raise the 6$estion of 2hat these terms mean indi#id$ally and 2hat meanin deri#es from their interplay and the str$ct$re in 2hich they appear. In other 2ords4 ho2 does the conte9t of theatre or performance affect the meanin of each indi#id$al termA 1ati &Mtt er calls s$ch a process ,m$ltista.le, Fsee &Mtt er 25134 n.p.G41 and proposes concei#in of it in the form of a meta3pict$re of a B#orte9C2 2hich capt$res the 2ay an analysis that incl$des mediality as an epistemic o.>ect is conditional to the process of transmission .et2een media and perception. In this process4 it is impossi.le to refer to ,one ori inal medi$m, Fibid*G4 >$st as it is impossi.le to determine any ,one ori inal concept, in the interplay of the title of this dissertation. &Mtt er directly lin's this to intermediality and there.y pro#ides an important methodolo ical .asis for the process I ha#e o$tlined in the title of this dissertation. In del#in into this process4 I therefore s$ est that the reader approach 2hat seems initially a circ$lar str$ct$re as a spiral 2hich4 2ith each re#ol$tion4 arri#es at 2hat appears to .e the same point4 .$t 2hich incl$des ne2 aspects and has there.y mo#ed to another plane. This is all the more tr$e for the fi#e performances I analyEe in the co$rse of this dissertation! the concepts there.y f$nction as analytical tools that contri.$te to the si nification of the performances4 .$t are also refined and e9panded .y the performances. The first concept4 the term ,intermediality4, has ained pop$larity since the 1995s. The increasin $sa e4 ho2e#er4 does not translate into a clarification of the concept. =n the contrary4 the e9pandin disco$rse on intermediality remains di#erse and lea#es the concept some2hat diff$se. The same is tr$e for the o.>ects of st$dy 2hich ha#e .een descri.ed as ,intermedial., Instead of enco$nterin one $nifyin trait or techni6$e the scholar faces #ast differences in approach 2hich
1 2 I am $sin an $np$.lished man$script for the .asis of my citations. The paper in 6$estion 2ill .e p$.lished in "rench translation in :ecem.er 2513 in +i,re s re le -h./tre et l01nterm.dialit. en 2ran ais, Montreal. For this reason I will also omit page numbers in my reference and just refer to the year. Mc?$han 2as the first to lin' the effect of media on sense perception to the ima e of a B#orte9C Fsee Mc?$hanHPar'er 19694 191G. &Mtt er4 in t$rn4 refers to W.N.T. Mitchell,s concept of B@orte93;ffectC F(ict re -heor34 19954 *5G 2hen comparin the #orte9 to a meta3pict$re 2hich descri.es ho2 a .eholder,s perspecti#e shifts in the process of perception .et2een medi$m and mediated F&Mtt er 25134 n.p.G. +he points o$t that a theatre performance Bappears to .e identical 2ith the media that constit$te it4 .$t also opens $p and sta es perspecti#es on the media4C Fibid*G and there.y constit$tes a m$ltista.le process she descri.es as a #orte9. Mitchell descri.es another instance of s$ch a m$ltista.le relationship in the interplay of fi $re and ro$nd as descri.ed .y 4estalt psycholo y4 2hich plays an important role in Chapter 14 section B:econstr$ctin The Perception Process.C
1%
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance incl$de almost e#ery form of ,)rt4, independent of content or enre. NSr en ;. MSller e#en ar $es for treatin and $sin intermediality as a search term FS chbegriff4 MSller 25154 32G rather than as a concrete concept. This is f$rther complicated .y the fact that 2hile these concepts s$ est the in#ol#ement of a m$ltiplicity of media4 there is a reat #ariance of 2hat the #ario$s scholars concei#e $nder the term ,media4, as 2ell as 2hat specific mediality is in#ol#ed. What is more4 2hile the prefi9 ,inter, indicates a specific relationship of the media in#ol#ed4 the distinctions from other concepts s$ch as m$ltimediality4 transmediality4 or intermedia43 e#en interte9t$ality4 are often .l$rry at .est. While MSller in the face of the #ariety of concepts and approaches to intermediality applies the term S chbegriff4 W.N.T. Mitchell descri.es a similar dilemma on a eneral le#el of media and proposes an approach of Baddressin mediaC Fsee Mitchell 25554 251ffG rather than attemptin to B$nderstand mediaC as Marshall Mc?$han proposed Fsee Mc?$han 2551G!% >$st as each 2ord of the title operates on its o2n .$t conditions Fsyntactically4 percept$allyG the conte9t in 2hich it appears4 Mitchell,s statement in the epi raph affirms that the same applies to media. The concept of ,politics, is similarly comple9 and contri.$tes a ran e of meanin s and implications not only on its o2n .$t also in the limitin conte9t of Btheatre and performance.C5 It is
3 ,Intermedia ( a 'ey term of the 1965s ( not only implies the inte ration of ne2 media and materials into )rt and a transition to2ards performati#ity and process4 .$t also places mediality at its core4, BIntermedia ( als Eentrales +tich2ort der 65er Nahre ( .ede$tet nicht n$r die Inte ration ne$er Medien $nd Materialien in 1$nst $nd den Y.er an ins Performati#e $nd ProEeZhafte4 sondern rSc't Medialit0t ins [entr$mC F-Sscher 25514 158G. Indicati#e of the #ariety of approaches and the concept$al differences is the 2ay Nay :a#id -olter and &ichard 8r$sin refer to Mc?$han 2hen callin their 2555 .oo' 5nderstanding 6e" Media. The title there.y ill$strates the pro.lematic of definin mediality! it implies that the ,ne2, F2hich in this case means ,di ital,G media follo2 different r$les or prod$ce a different meanin than ,old, media4 and necessitate a redefinition of the concept. The distinction .et2een theatre and performance comprises a disco$rse in itself that is #ery specific Fsee for instance MetEler 25554 BPerformanceC 31ff4 BTheater.e riffe4C 33*ffG. My reflections4 in t$rn4 f$nction on a #ery f$ndamental in#ol#ement of mediality in performati#ity that is at 2or' .oth in theatre and performance and ma'e any f$rther distinction $nnecessary. FIn 1ntermedialit3 in -heatre and (erformance, Chapple and 1atten.elt do not e#en address the differenceG. The reason I refer to .oth concepts in the title is to indicate that my e9amples fall into .oth cate ories. The terms ,performati#ity, and ,theatricality, re6$ire clarification. -oth terms are a part of a 2ell3esta.lished disco$rse and refer to a specific relationship .et2een action and perception independent of conte9t. Theatre can .e performati#e and ,reality, can .e theatricalL it depends on 2hat specific relationship .ecomes apparent andHor dominant. ,Theatricality, is enerally considered to contain an ,as if,36$ality 2hich lea#es a certain do$.t a.o$t the act$al stat$s of the actions4 and 2hich can also contain semiotic f$nctions. ,Performati#ity4, in t$rn4 constit$tes ,facts, and lea#es little do$.t a.o$t the act$al stat$s of the actions associated 2ith it. "or instance4 it is d$e to its theatricality that theatre can sta e a 2eddin 2itho$t act$ally marryin the performers4 2hereas the performati#ity of an official 2eddin ceremony is #ery clear a.o$t its stat$s and conse6$ences. +ee for instance -alme 2551aL -oenisch 2556aL :olenc 2512L -$rns 19*2L :a#isHPostle2ait 2553L "\ral 2552L "ie.ach 2552L "ischer3?ichte 255%L "reedman 1991L 1r0mer 25534 255%L ?ee'er 2551.L MSnE 1998L &oselt 2551L &Mtt er4 25534 2558.4 2513L +chramm 1996. This sit$ation is complicated in an intermedial conte9t 2ith the conscio$s in#ol#ement of mediality 2hich4 as 1r0mer asserts4 possesses a performati#ity of its o2n Fsee 1r0mer 2553G. )s a conse6$ence4 2hen some mise$en$sc%nes are approached from an intermedial point of #ie24 the concept$al distinction dissol#es into a threshold4 2hich means that 2hat the performances sta e is neither clearly theatrical nor clearly performati#e. My analysis of Christoph +chlin ensief,s ,)'tion, Bitte liebt sterreich 7 erste e rop!ische Koalitions"oche Fsee Chapter 24 section BThresholds -et2een Theatricality and Performati#ityCG ma'es this partic$larly apparent4 .$t it is also plays a role in &imini Proto'oll,s threshold .et2een theatre and ,reality, Fsee Chapter 1G and is important in
15
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance common practice amon theatre oers and critics to $se the attri.$te ,political, in respondin to performances that in one 2ay or another deal 2ith social pro.lems or contro#ersial topics4 or are in themsel#es contro#ersial. In fact4 a cate ory 2ith the attri.$te ,political, seems to e9ist for almost all artistic enres. 7o2e#er4 the types of 2or's4 enres4 media4 and approaches that are associated 2ith this cate ory are di#erse4 2hile the reasons 2hy a performance or 2or' of art is attri.$ted to this cate ory are often #a $e4 and occasionally amo$nt to nothin more than a tacit ass$mption. +ometimes a declaration .y the play2ri hts4 theatre ma'ers4 or directors4 that may appear in the form of a criti6$e of the socio3political en#ironment or as a statement fa#o$rin a specific ,political, ideolo y4 leads to a eneral association of their 2or' as ,political, Fe. .4 -ertolt -recht4 ;r2in Piscator4 )$ $sto -oal4 )riane Mno$ch'ine4 and Christoph +chlin ensief amon many othersG. -$t this certainly cannot mean that e#erythin they do is a$tomatically ,political, or4 con#ersely4 that 2or's 2hose creators do not ma'e any s$ch e9plicit declaration are .y definition not ,political., Performances that are e9plicit in their intention to .e ,political, re6$ire somethin .eyond that intention to .ecome ,political., In fact4 the #ery notion of performance implies a connection .et2een content and meanin Fin the sense of a performance of or abo t somethin G or .et2een performer and meanin Fa performance b3 someoneG. )fter all4 theatre is4 as 7annah )rendt p$ts it4 Bthe only art 2hose sole s$.>ect is man in his relationship to others4C for BU...W the tan i.le identities of the a ents in the story U...W can .e con#eyed only thro$ h an imitation of their actin C F)rendt 19984 18*7188G. Xet 2hen )rendt $ses this connection to ar $e that theatre is Bthe political art par excellenceC Fibid*G it is important to remem.er that )rendt,s concept of theatre .$ilds essentially on the model of 8ree' tra edy and of 8ree' democracy Fsee Chapter 14 section BIndi#id$al Corporeality and the Politics of )estheticsCG. This concept relies stron ly on the idea of imitation and a clear distri.$tion of roles4 as 2ell as a direct interaction .et2een h$man .ein s 2itho$t the in#ol#ement of media or mediations. It also foc$ses on te9t3.ased performances4 an approach 2hich .ecomes pro.lematic in the conte9t of performances that fall 2ithin the cate ory that 7ans3Thies ?ehmann calls postdramatic F?ehmann 1999G or performances that are entirely non3te9t3.ased. The sit$ation is alto ether different 2hen enco$nterin other forms of ,political )rt, 2hich can .e e#en more a.stract H less content3oriented Fe. .4 an enco$nter 2ith an a.stract paintin 4 a sc$lpt$re4 or m$sicG. )nd Nac6$es &anci<re as one of the pre#alent c$rrent philosophers in the area of politics declares o$tri htly that 2e Bno lon er li#e in the days 2hen play2ri hts 2anted to e9plain to their a$dience the tr$th of social relations and 2ays of str$ lin a ainst capitalist dominationC
terms of the political si nification of a performance from a post3fo$ndational perspecti#e.
16
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance F&anci<re 25594 11G. This means that the connection .et2een ,politicity, and ,content, m$st .e more comple9 than it may seem initially. ) te9t 2itho$t apparent ,political intention, can attain ,politicity, simply thro$ h temporal distance4 for instance in statements 2hich are no2 considered ,politically incorrect., )nd also the re#erse is concei#a.le! a te9t 2hich seemed hi hly ,political, on its o2n can lose this stat$s in the co$rse of a performance. The politicity m$st ha#e another ori inL in fact4 it seems to ha#e a de ree of independence4 almost as if it 2ere an additional element in .et2een the others4 2hich emer es or disappears d$rin a performance. This also means that if it is percei#ed to .e ,political, yet the ,material, pro#ides no o.#io$s s$pport for this ass$mption4 then perception plays a .i part in the desi nation of any politicity. Politicity4 then4 is a m$ltidirectional and ,m$ltista.le, process4 in 2hich the percei#er plays a role e6$al to the ,prod$cer, in the .roadest sense. It .ecomes clear that the comple9ity of these concepts means that their $se in any form of statement is conditional and relational. =ne m$st in6$ire not only a.o$t the nat$re of ,politics4, .$t also a.o$t the relationship of these 2or's to ,politics, that ma'es them ,political., This #ery 6$estion already indicates that there is a difference in terminolo y and that the meanin of the terms ,politics4, ,politicity4, and ,political, needs to .e caref$lly distin $ished. This .rin s $s to the ne9t 6$estion! is there a specific oal in#ol#edA What happens 2hen the oal is achie#ed4 and 2hat if it is not achie#edA =n the .asis of these #ery preliminary reflections I propose that there are se#eral factors that affect the stat$s of a performance as ,political,! its stat$s as ,)rt4, or4 more precisely4 the in#ol#ement of aestheticsL the in#ol#ement of mediality in performati#ity and other modes of h$man interactionL and last .$t not least the interplay .et2een perception and si nification. ;ach of these concepts has its o2n disco$rse and poses its o2n pro.lems and challen es4 complicated e#en f$rther .y their interaction. )s a conse6$ence4 rather than attemptin to pro#ide definite ans2ers4 this dissertation sets o$t to e9plore these 6$estions in terms of these factors4 ,addressin , them4 as it 2ere. I am partic$larly interested in the connection of the ,politicity, of a performance to strate ies that I 2o$ld call ,intermedial., The first4 introd$ctory step in this e9ploration is a .road o#er#ie2 and critical e#al$ation F2itho$t any claim to completenessG of the e9istin approaches that are rele#ant in the conte9t of theatre and intermediality.
1*
The Concept of Media

,UVW )s a medi$m4 theatre in its mode of e9ec$tion is insepara.ly connected 2ith seein and that 2hich seein ma'es accessi.le.,6 ( )le9ander Nac'o. and 1ati &Mtt er4 B). der +ch2elle des +icht.aren4C 25534 235 We ha#e to accept that there simply has ne#er .een a separate history of theatre and media in the first place. Theatre itself is a media technolo y that $tiliEes4 at its #ery heart4 other media to transmit and store4 2hile it hi hli hts4 at the same time4 the process of processin information. ;ssentially4 theatre is a semiotic practice4 2hich incorporates4 spatialiEes and disseminates in sensorial terms Fth$s! performsG the contents and co niti#e strate ies of other media UVW. Peter M. -oenisch B)esthetic )rt to )isthetic )ct4C 2556a4 113
While there is consens$s that theatre ses media4 or at least that certain medial relations are at 2or' in theatre4 the 6$estion a.o$t 2hat constit$tes a medi$m4 and 2hat the $se of media means for the stat$s of theatre itself4 is hi hly contentio$s. In li ht of the 2ay modern media technolo y has introd$ced #ast chan es in the o#erall social fa.ric* and has affected theatrical con#entions and e9pectations of a$diences4 this de.ate .ecomes ine#ita.le and cr$cial. This is all the more tr$e 2hen approachin theatre follo2in )rendt as a realm that closely resem.les the +ocial in the sense that it is constit$ted and conditioned .y the interrelationship of h$man .ein s Fsee )rendt 19984 18*7188G. The e9perience of the increasin in#ol#ement of media in h$man interrelationships si nificantly complicates not only the )rendtian $nderstandin of theatre .$t the h$man condition in eneral. +ince its .e innin s in the 1965s4 the field of media st$dies has $nderta'en to ma'e s$ch relationships more accessi.le to critical disco$rse and has prod$ced a 2ide #ariety of o.ser#ations and approaches. =ne approach considers media as a stora e container for content8 Fstora eG4 another ta'es a technolo ical point of #ie2 Fincl$din for instance Philip )$slander9G4 2hile another foc$ses
6 BU...W das Theater als Medi$m UistW im @ollE$ $ntrenn.ar mit dem +ehen $nd dem sicht.ar 8e e.enen #er.$nden.C In their paper Nac'o. and &Mtt er are mainly interested in the role of ima es in theatre and therefore emphasiEe #is$al perception. In the present conte9t4 ho2e#er4 I s$ est e9pandin this statement and spea' of perception in eneral. 3 6ote: 2or the sake of readabilit3 1 "ill cite non$8nglish # otations in translation in the text and pro,ide the original in a footnote* 5nless stated other"ise, all translations are m3 o"n* The most o.#io$s e9ample is the in#ol#ement of ,social media, in all realms of h$man life4 from lo#e Fe. .4 ,online datin ,G to death Fe. .4 mo..in 4 anno$ncin massacresG4 from politics Fe. .4 ,)ra. +prin 4, opinion polls4 election campai nsG to entertainment Fe. .4 ,Wartainment4, #ario$s ,Idols,G. +$ch an approach4 for instance4 appears in 1ittler4 2ho Bproposes a #ery handy f$nctional $nderstandin of media identifyin the processin 4 transmission4 and storin of information as the three ends to 2hich media are the meansC F-oenisch 2556a4 156G. -$t this approach has m$ch older roots4 as )rendt,s description of 2hat amo$nts to a medial f$nction at the core of the Classical 8ree' stri#in for e9cellence 9ariste einG ill$strates! BThe tas' and potential reatness of mortals lies in their a.ility to prod$ce thin s ( 2or's and deeds and 2ords ( 2hich UVW are at home in e#erlastin ness UVW F)rendt 19984 19G. Philip )$slander defines mediality in terms of the opposites ,li#e, and ,mediatiEed,4 as can .e seen in his statement that4 B)s soon as electric amplification is $sed4 one mi ht say that an e#ent is mediatiEedC F)$slander 19994 2%G.
* 8
18
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance primarily on comm$nication Fincl$din Cla$de +hannon15 or Noachim "ie.ach11G. =pinions
re ardin the conse6$ences of media are also di#er ent4 ran in from a cele.ration of ne2 means and possi.ilities4 and more critical approaches Fs$ch as -recht,s enco$nter 2ith technolo yG4 12 to o$tri ht media3pho.ia F-a$drillard,s concept of sim lation comes to mind4 see -a$drillard 19*8G. =f special importance are the reflections of Marshall Mc?$han4 2ho is often credited as one of the ,fo$ndin fathers, of the discipline. Mc?$han emphasiEed the importance of media in social relations Fa comm$nity4 after all4 is .$ilt on comm$nicationG and com.ined the f$nctional and conse6$ential analysis into an anthropocentric approach to media .y placin the h$man .ein at the centre of medial relationships. Mc?$han proposed that media f$nction as e9tensions of the h$man senses and .ody Fsee Mc?$han 2551G.13 This is most o.#io$s in tele3technolo y Fincl$din tele3 comm$nicationG that allo2s a h$man .ein to percei#e thin s that are o$tside the reach of its nat$ral senses. -$t it also allo2ed Mc?$han to descri.e as media e#erythin that chan es h$man perception or social str$ct$res. In 5nderstanding Media4 for instance4 Mc?$han incl$des money4 railroads4 roads4 2ords4 tele#ision4 satellites4 money4 the printin press4 clothin 4 2eapons4 n$m.ers4 ho$sin 4 cloc's4 ames4 radio4 telephone4 and many more in his list of media. This list4 ho2e#er4 sho$ld not .e $nderstood as listin media in an a.sol$te sense .$t rather as indicatin medial f$nctions that emer e 2hen applyin a medial perspecti#e. Mc?$han there.y also mo#ed a2ay from content analysis to2ards a str$ct$ral H f$nctional analysis4 epitomiEed in his famo$s aphorism! BThe medi$m is the messa eC FMc?$han 25514 8G. This .road approach has reaped 2ide criticism as critics s$ch as Werner Wolf feel that a definition follo2in Mc?$han,s notion of media as e9tensions B2o$ld prod$ce too many media
15 +ee +hannon 19%8. 11 ,I concei#e a Bmedial e#entC to comprise all comm$nicati#e processes in 2hich a prod$ction and its ma'er do not meet immediately4 Bali#e4C .$t .ecome accessi.le Fre#eal themsel#esG to perception4 e9perience4 reception H recei#er only in a separate H separa.le form4, B]nter einem ,medialen ;rei nis, #erstehe ich alle 'omm$ni'ati#en @or 0n e4 in denen sich eine Prod$'tion $nd deren Macher nicht $nmittel.ar4 leichsam ,le.endi , .e e nen4 sondern sich in einer #on den Machern a. elMsten H a.lMs.aren 8estalt der Wahrnehm$n 4 der ;rfahr$n 4 der &eEeption H den &eEipienten #ermitteln Fdar.ietenGC F"ie.ach 25514 %9%G. 12 ,-recht co$ntered the sheer e$phoria of "$t$rism 2ith an alternati#e that did not deny the socio3transformati#e force of technolo y. In his speech a.o$t the f$nction of .roadcastin he associated the ne2 technolo y of the radio 2ith a eneral political emancipation. -recht demanded the transformation of .roadcastin from a distri.$tion apparat$s to a comm$nication apparat$s in order to transform the role of the recipient into that of a prod$cer4, B-ertolt -recht elan es4 der .loZen Techni'e$phorie der "$t$risten ein alternati#es Modell ent e enE$setEen4 ohne da.ei die &olle der Techni' als esellschafts#er0ndernde 1raft E$ le$ nen. In seiner &ede S.er die "$n'tion des &$ndf$n's stellt er die damals ne$e &adiotechnolo ie in den :ienst einer all emeinen politischen ;manEipation. -recht forderte die ]m2andl$n des &$ndf$n's #on einem :istri.$tionsapparat in einen 1omm$ni'ationsapparat4 der die &olle des &eEipienten in eine des Prod$Eenten #er2andeln sollteC F:in'la 25514 128G. 13 )s Peter Wei.el points o$t4 this idea already appears in 7enri -er son,s B +a signification de la g erreC F1915G 2here -er son notes that each ne2 machine is a ne24 artificial or an that e9tends the reach of the nat$ral or ans Fsee Wei.el 19894 98G.
19
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance e#en 2ithin one literary enre s$ch as dramaC FWolf 25114 2G. While some people ha#e al2ays fo$nd Mc?$han,s approach pro.lematic4 the .road definition of media ma'es it possi.le to incl$de f$nctions that other approaches miss. "or instance it allo2ed Mc?$han to reco niEe that media condition perception41% and introd$ce 2hat Mc?$han referred to as shifts in Bsense ratiosC FMc?$han 25514 19G as manifestations of ad>$stment to an e#er3chan in en#ironment. This re#ealed medial f$nctions at the core of the +ocial and made it possi.le to analyEe chan es to society that a ne2 medi$m and its ne2 relationships imposed. It also pro#ides an important connection to theatre and performance4 2hich deals 2ith h$man relationships4 and in its simplest form consists of the relationship .et2een a performer and a spectator. )s a performance concerns the creation of si nification some2here 2ithin this relationship and $ses media to sta e and comm$nicate this relationship4 :erric' de 1erc'ho#e s$ ests that the fo$ndation of the theatre as ro$nd for the senses4 c$lti#atin a a c$lt$ral instit$tion coincided 2ith the inc$rsion of media technolo y in the form of the alpha.et. Theatre4 accordin to de 1erc'ho#e4 there.y .ecame a trainin ne2 form of attention and the s'ills necessary to cope 2ith the ne2 conditions of life Fsee de 1erc'ho#e 19954 *2G. While de 1erc'ho#e,s hypothesis seems o#erly deterministic it ill$strates t2o note2orthy points! F1G it indicates a medial f$nction of the theatre that e9tends .eyond its direct contents and ta'es on a social f$nctionL and F2G it refers to a transformation of the h$man sensori$m that is tri ered .y media and affects h$man interaction. This second f$nction is also #ery prominent in Mc?$han,s concept of medial e9tensions to the h$man .ody Fthis .ecomes an important feat$re in my analysis of I neo$s, li# id skin in Chapter 3G. While Mc?$han,s anthropocentric approach is #ery $sef$l in the conte9t of theatre4 it is also important to 'eep in mind that Mc?$han is a polariEin fi $re in the scientific comm$nity. Mc?$han often $ses aphorisms and p$ns to ma'e a point4 2hich W.N.T. Mitchell considers a Bmessy4 metaphorical and associati#e lo icC FMitchell 25554 258G. Mc?$han,s claims are often s$pported .y len thy 6$otations of others 2itho$t incl$din critical reflection on the conte9t of passa es. )nother easy tar et for criticism is his sto$t Catholicism 2hich may ha#e .een a reason for a 6$asi3reli io$s o#ertone that seems to imply a promise that $nderstandin media can pro#ide sal#ation from all media3ind$ced pro.lems. +a"s of Media F2hich 2as p$.lished posth$mo$sly in 1988 .y his son ;ric Mc?$hanG oes e#en f$rther and seemin ly offers the hope of predictin certain medial conse6$ences. )nd Mc?$han can also .e considered to .e himself an ill$stration for and a #ictim of a media machinery! the fact that he rose 6$ic'ly to the stat$s of a pop3c$lt$re
1% This is also the core of ;ri'a "ischer3?ichte,s notion 2hich holds that mediality and perception are ine9trica.ly lin'ed to each other Fsee ChappleH1atten.elt 25564 16G.
25
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance ,oracle, 2ith T@ appearances4 cameos in mo#ies FWoody )llen,s :nnie ;all1<G4 and ser#in as ad#isor for politicians and companies4 did not really help his scholarly credi.ility. 16 In this sense4 .ecomin a media star res$lted in an e9perience of the dar' side of media e9pos$re4 earnin him discredit4 as 2ell as the e9perience of the ease 2ith 2hich the e9pos$re can also #anish. )t the same time4 one co$ld say that Mc?$han,s pro.lematic style is also his reatest asset as it ma'es his .oo's not only capti#atin to read4 and e#ocati#e in insi hts4 .$t most importantly tho$ ht3pro#o'in . )t times his style e#en seems to operate on a p$rely artistic3associati#e le#el Fpartic$larly the .oo's p$.lished 2ith ^$entin "iore4 -he medi m is the Massage4 196*4 and "ar and peace in the global ,illage4 1968G. This re#er.erates 2ith Mc?$han,s notion of the artist as Bthe antennae of the raceC FMc?$hanHMc?$han 19884 %*G4 a.le to percei#e the Bact$al ne2 effects from any ne2 en#ironmentC FMc?$hanH"iore 19684 185G. In this sense4 the enre of )rt offers the chance to ta'e a step .ac'4 as it 2ere4 and loo' at and reflect on the +ocial .y means of ( paraphrasin &anci<re ( the #ery distance it ta'es in respect to this sphere Fsee also &anci<re 255%.G. Mc?$han referred to his methodolo y as ,pro.es, 2hich e9plore processes of medial f$nctions in an en#ironment that is constantly chan in ! BU...W UCWharacteristic of all media4 UV isW that the ,content, of any medi$m is al2ays another medi$mC FMc?$han 25514 8G. Instead of positin a definiti#e concl$sion4 any pro.e 2ill re#eal ne2 media f$nctions4 >$st as ne2 de#ices and tools appear e#ery day and ma'e possi.le thin s that $sed to .e impossi.le or re#eal aspects that 2ere impercepti.le. The rec$rsi#e str$ct$re $nderlyin his o.ser#ation 2hich s$pports this analysis also introd$ces another important aspect4 namely that a medi$m can a.sor. For4 to $se a term introd$ced .y Nay :a#id -olter and &ichard 8r$sin4 BremediateC1*G another medi$m For4 at the least4 its f$nction H contentG. The same applies to Mc?$han,s .road and m$ltifaceted approach to media4 2hich e#ol#es and transforms as it spreads thro$ h #ario$s .oo's and papers4 incl$des #ario$s phases4 2itho$t4 ho2e#er4 .rin in it to ether into a definition or empirical H impersonal lo ic. I s$ est that4 analo o$sly to 2hat Mitchell calls for4 Mc?$han,s approach sho$ld .e $nderstood as an attempt to descri.e media Frather than ,$nderstand, themG4 as an or anic process that tries to capt$re a process constit$tin mediality4 2hich itself e#ol#es and chan es o#er time and
15 :nnie ;all* :irector! Woody )llen. Writers! Woody )llen and Marshall -ric'man. M8M4 19**. 93min4 colo$r. 16 B&eactin a ainst his style4 scholars also dismissed Mc?$han .eca$se he ref$sed to .e made acco$nta.le for his theory and .eca$se he .ecame a pop$lar c$lt$re fi $re in the mass media4 2hich 2as considered to .e an $northodo9 2ay to promote scholarly acti#ity. U...W 7e also re>ected p$.lic doc$ments and other e#idence normally $sed in historical research .eca$se he claimed that e#idence only e9presses conscio$s tho$ ht patterns. "or e#idence4 he t$rned to art and artists4 as the ,antennae of the race,C F8ross2iler 19984 183G. 1* -olter and 8r$sin t$rn this capacity into a definition! B) medi$m is that 2hich remediates. It is that 2hich appropriates the techni6$es4 forms4 and social si nificance of other media and attempts to ri#al or refashion them in the name of the realC F-olter and 8r$sin 19994 65G.
21
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance 2hose comple9ity inherently e#ades analysis.18 This has ca$sed pro.lems as some scholars Fincl$din Mitchell4 see Chapter 14 section B:econstr$ctin The Perception ProcessCG only cite selected 2or's F$s$ally 5nderstanding MediaG and there.y miss some clarifications that appear later on in Mc?$han,s oe ,re. The same selecti#e readin and pop3c$lt$re pre>$dice has lead some scholars to mis$nderstand Mc?$han,s reflections as proposin a p$rely optimistic o$tloo' Fsee for instance Mitchell 25554 256G.19 It is also important to remem.er that 2hile Mc?$han may ha#e .een o#ertly reli io$s he ne#er claimed to .e a prophet4 and certainly accepted the possi.ility that his ,predictions, 2o$ld contain fallacies.25 While some statements did not come tr$e in the 2ay he foresa2 Fincl$din the alle ed o.solescence of #ario$s mediaG many of his predictions ha#e pro#en to .e s$rprisin ly acc$rate. I do not st$dy the acc$racy of Mc?$han,s o.ser#ations4 .$t $se his concepts to ether 2ith other approaches as tools to st$dy the medial relationships at 2or' in a theatrical H performati#e en#ironment. ) point of connection .et2een the 2ide ran e of medial properties can .e fo$nd in +y.ille 1r0mer,s phenomenolo ical approach21 to media that oes .eyond a comm$nicati#e or ,container, concept of media. -y foc$sin on the process of interaction .et2een media and h$man perception 1r0mer posits that4 phenomenolo ically spea'in 4 the prod$cti#e sense For4 pace Mc?$han4 ,messa e,G of media is ,not an increase in prod$cti#ity .$t 2orld creation, 22 F1r0mer 19984 85G. @ill\m "l$sser had already descri.ed media in terms of a transmission process 2hich in#ol#ed the h$man .ody as a medi$m in the $nderlyin ,information process, of di ital media F2hich he compared to an ,electronic memory,G. This lead him to ar $e a ainst any attempt to reify this
18 +ee for instance _ina +$tton,s 19*5 inter#ie2 2ith Mc?$han4 in 2hich he disc$sses his notion of fi $re H ro$nd. 7e states that he did not $se this concept in his earlier 2ritin s4 tho$ h he considers its implications are already implicit in Bthe medi$m is the messa eC Fsee +$ttonHMc?$han 19*5G. Mc?$han considered his ,ne2, concepts as clarifications to his ,older, concepts that capt$re aspects that he felt 2ere not clear eno$ h. Mitchell ill$strates this 2hen comparin Mc?$han,s approach to ?$hmann,s system theory entirely on the .asis of 5nderstanding Media* Mitchell seems $na2are of Mc?$han,s ,fi $reH ro$nd, distinction4 2hich is stri'in 2hen he calls for pict$rin the process of Baddressin mediaC in terms of the #ase ill$stration 2hich Mc?$han also $sed Fsee also Chapter 14 section B:econstr$ctin The Perception ProcessCG. 19 Mc?$han himself #ie2ed his position as ne$tral and simply foc$sin on the processes4 statin that he Bne#er e9pressed any preferences or #al$es since -he Mechanical Bride* @al$e >$d ments create smo in o$r c$lt$re and distract attention from processesC F?etter to Nonathan Miller 19*54 as cited in Molinaro et al. 198*4 %55G. I ha#e also heard that Mc?$han apparently reacted to criticism of his concept of the global ,illage as an o#erly positi#e model .y replyin that these critics ,o.#io$sly ne#er li#ed in a small #illa e .efore., 7a#in ro2n $p in a small to2n myself4 this statement certainly carries a lot of tr$th for me4 .$t I do not ha#e a so$rce to .ac' $p this reference. 25 The famo$s scene in :nnie ;all comes to mind4 in 2hich Mc?$han co$nters o.no9io$s claims re ardin his theories .y sayin BXo$ 'no2 nothin a.o$t my theories. Xo$ mean my 2hole fallacy is 2ron C Fsee Mitchell 25554 253G. 21 1ati &Mtt er 2as the first to systematically apply 1r0mer,s media theoretical reflections and define theatre as an intermedial e#ent F,-heater als intermediales 8reignis4, see &Mtt er 25534 1*3ffG and has pro#ided an important fo$ndation of my o2n $nderstandin of intermediality and theatre. 22 B_icht ?eist$n sstei er$n 4 sondern WelterEe$ $n ist der prod$'ti#e +inn #on Medientechnolo ienC
22
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance process into a concept of a medi$m4 incl$din any notion of the ,+elf, F"l$sser 19894 51(52G.23 -$t if this process f$nctions the 2ay "l$sser proposes then the media ha#e to .e lar ely ne$tral4 an element of transmission that lea#es the information intact.2% The conte9t of theatricality4 and partic$larly the in#ol#ement of a perception frame2or' that #ia semiosis re3frames and conditions the si nification of 2hat is .ein percei#ed4 re#eals a pro.lem 2ith this approach! .y ma'in phenomena accessi.le to perception4 theatre clearly f$nctions as a medi$m4 .$t it also conditions the si nification of 2hat it ,performs., )nd it does not ta'e a stretch of mind to reco niEe that this is not a special ca,eat applica.le to theatre4 .$t also applies to other media4 and4 as I 2ant to stress4 also to di ital media.25 1r0mer seconds "l$sser,s ar $ment a ainst the possi.ility of any media ontolo y Fsee 1r0mer 25534 82G426 .$t does so on the .asis of an inherent element of performati#ity in mediality. +he deri#es her approach of a ,metaphysics of mediality, F1r0mer 25534 83G from differentiatin Mc?$han,s anthropocentric approach and ?$hmann,s system theoretical reflections!
,Media phenomenaliEe and there.y ma'e the ta'in of relations possi.le. -$t in Bma'in apparentC media transform4 and occasionally e#en $ndermine4 that 2hich .ecomes apparent. -y the po2er of its mediality a performance al2ays contains also a s$rpl$s in re ard of that 2hich is .ein performed. The notion of Bperformati#ityC aims at capt$rin this s$rpl$s of $se in
23 ,The pra9is of electronic memory forces $s UVW to ac'no2led e the ac6$isition4 processin 4 and transmission of information that relies on o.>ects Fas mental s$pport str$ct$resG UVW .$t in a sense passes thro$ h these o.>ects F2hich the term Bmedi$mC impliesG. This practice forces $s to reco niEe these o.>ects Fincl$din o$r o2n .odyG as media of the information process. )ny attempt to reify this process4 for instance .y localiEin it in a medi$m4 is nonsense. In li ht of the practice of electronic memory one m$st therefore a.andon all reifyin concepts of this process Fs$ch as Bso$l4C Bspirit4C Bidentity4C BI4C or BselfCG4, B:ie Pra9is mit ele'tronischen 8ed0chtnissen E2in t $ns U...W das ;r2er.en4 +peichern4 ProEessieren $nd Weiter e.en #on Informationen als einen ProEeZ E$ er'ennen4 der sich E2ar a$f 8e enst0nde F8ed0chtnisstStEenG stStEt U...W4 a.er diese 8e enst0nde e2issermaZen d$rchl0$ft Feine Tatsache4 die mit dem -e riff ,Medi$m, emeint istG. :ie Pra9is E2in t $ns4 all diese 8e enst0nde Fin'l$si#e $nseren ei enen 1MrperG als Medien des InfomationsproEesses E$ er'ennen. ;s ist ein ]nsinn4 diesen ProEeZ #erdin lichen E$ 2ollen4 ihn et2a in ir end einem Medi$m lo'alisieren E$ 2ollen. :aher sind alle #erdin lichenden -e riffe dieses ProEesses Fet2a ,+eele,4 ,8eist,4 ,Identit0t,4 ,Ich, oder ,+el.st,G im ?icht der Pra9is mit ele'tronischen 8ed0chtnissen a$fE$ e.enC F"l$sser 19894 51(52G. 2% &oesler emphasiEes this aspect 2hen notin that4 ,"ollo2in "l$sser4 media denote the mode in 2hich information or a messa e is distri.$ted. ) .asic tenet of all media4 accordin to "l$sser4 is to maintain the information they distri.$te4 2hich is not to .e chan ed4 transformed or 2ron ly interpreted4, BMedien S.erha$pt .eschrei.en nach "l$sser die Weise4 in 2elcher Information oder eine -otschaft #erteilt 2ird. ;in 8r$ndsatE aller Medien ist fSr "l$sser4 daZ die E$ #erteilende Information erhalten .lei.en soll4 daZ sie also .eim @erteilen nicht #er0ndert4 #erformt oder fehlinterpretiert 2irdC F&oesler 25514 %%3G. This approach resem.les Cla$de +hannon,s model4 2hich considers the distortion of information as ,noise4, that is4 as an e9ternal element that is not part of the mediality itself. 25 Chapple and 1atten.elt descri.e the mod$lar concept of di ital media ?e# Mano#ich de#elops in -he +ang age of 6e" Media Fsee ChappleH1atten.elt 25564 1*G 2hich can acco$nt for a restr$ct$rin and transposition of ,.loc's4, .$t remains #a $e a.o$t the nat$re4 modality4 and si nification of media. 26 ,The distinction of medi$m and form is relati#e UVW This means 2e cannot cate orically sort the 2orld into o.>ects that are media and those that are not. ) media ontolo y is impossi.le., ( B:ie ]nterscheid$n #on Medi$m $nd "orm ist relati# U...W Wir 'Mnnen also die Welt nicht 'ate orial sortieren in :in e4 die Medien sind4 $nd solche4 die es nicht sind. ;ine Medienontolo ie 'ann es nicht e.en.C
23

contrast to its pro ram. Phenomena are al2ays richer than 2hat 2e ma'e of them.,2* F1r0mer 25534 83G
In s$.>ectin the phenomena to a process of performati#ity rather than ne$trally transmittin them4 the media in#ol#ed Fincl$din e#ery indi#id$al h$man percei#erG condition the si nification of the phenomena. This point of #ie2 finds s$pport in 7ans -eltin ,s li'enin of media to a performance4 a mise$en$sc%ne in itself4 2hich constit$tes and conditions the act of perception Fsee -eltin 25514 25G. -eltin emphasiEes that media f$nction as a ents in a process at the core of 2hich the h$man .ody Fand not any specific contentG is sit$ated as performin or percei#in entity Fsee -eltin 25554 352G. While -eltin is mostly interested in the role of mediality in the conte9t of ima es in the .roadest sense Fas a part of his Bild"issenschaftG4 1r0mer,s approach concerns perception in eneral! ,;#erythin that is accessi.le to h$man .ein s in perception4 comm$nication4 and co nition4 is accessi.le #ia media4,28 F1r0mer 25534 83G. Perception and mediality4 in other 2ords4 mar' an interplay 2hich BcreateUsW meanin f$l spatial realities and in#o'eUsW a sensorial4 phenomenolo ical e9perience U...WC F-oenisch 2556a4 115G. In short4 there is no perception 2itho$t media. )t the same time4 perception $s$ally does not concern media .$t seems to direct the percei#er,s attention ,directly, to phenomena. 1r0mer indicates this f$nction 2hen notin that ,Media f$nction in latency. Where#er 2e interact 2ith media4 2e $s$ally foc$s on "hat media transmit and ma'e accessi.le, 29 F1r0mer 25534 81G. 1r0mer calls this the aisthetic ne tralit3 of media4 in 2hich the mediality in#ol#ed is ne$tral to perception4 2hich she ill$strates .y li'enin this f$nction to a 2indo2 pane! the 2indo2 pane only .ecomes percei#a.le if somethin disr$pts the medial transmission Fe. .4 dama e to the lassG and in re#ealin the transportin medi$m dra2s attention to the process of mediation Fsee 1r0mer 19984 *%G. =ne co$ld say that the disr$ption .ecomes a ne2 medi$m that mediates the mediality of the 2indo2 pane. This4 in t$rn4 .rin s $s .ac' to 1r0mer,s ar $ment a ainst a media ontolo y4 as it lin's the medial f$nction directly to perception4 or4 as -eltin s$ ests4 attention!
The more 2e pay attention to a medi$m4 the less it can hide its strate ies. The less 2e ta'e note of a #is$al medi$m4 the more 2e concentrate on the ima e4 as if ima es 2o$ld come .y themsel#es. When #is$al media .ecome self3referential4 they t$rn a ainst their ima es and steal o$r attention from them. F-eltin 25554 355G
2* BMedien ph0nomenalisieren $nd machen also -eE$ nahme mM lich. :och indem Medien ,erscheinen lassen,4 2ird das4 2as da.ei erscheint4 E$ leich transformiert4 manchmal a$ch $nterminiert. 1raft seiner Medialit0t .ir t ein @ollE$ immer a$ch einen Y.ersch$ss e enS.er dem4 2as #ollEo en 2ird. )$f dieses +$rpl$s des 8e.ra$chs e enS.er seinem Pro ramm Eielt die &efle9ionsfi $r der ,Performati#it0t,. :ie Ph0nomene sind stets reicher als die -e riffe4 die 2ir $ns #on ihnen machen.C 28 B)lles4 2as Menschen .eim Wahrnehmen4 1omm$niEieren $nd ;r'ennen , e e.en ist,4 ist in Medien e e.en.C 29 BMedien 2ir'en in ?atenE. Wo immer 2ir e2Mhnlich mit Medien $m ehen4 richten 2ir $ns a$f das4 2as Medien #ermitteln $nd #orstelli machen UVW.C
2%
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance Con#ersely4 if perception al2ays in#ol#es a medi$m4 and if the medial f$nction directly depends on attention and has the potential to rec$rsi#ely refer to f$rther layers of mediality4 then ,UVW intermediality is a f$ndamental principle for the medial sphere, 35 Fsee 1r0mer 25534 85G. This also plays an important role in Werner Wolf,s definition of medi$m4 2hich posits that!
Medi$m4 as $sed in literary and intermediality st$dies4 is a con#entionally and c$lt$rally distinct means of comm$nication4 specified not only .y partic$lar technical or instit$tional channels For one channelG .$t primarily .y the $se of one or more semiotic systems in the p$.lic transmission of contents that incl$de4 .$t are not restricted to4 referential ,messa es., 8enerally4 media ma'e a difference as to 2hat 'ind of content can .e e#o'ed4 ho2 these contents are presented4 and ho2 they are e9perienced. FWolf 25114 2G
I find this definition note2orthy in t2o aspects! F1G the modifier Bas $sed in UVW intermediality st$diesC indicates that the concept of intermediality has implications for the definition of a medi$m4 2hile F2G despite the attempt to remain a.stract and comprehensi#e4 the aspect of perception is missin and the 'ey2ords ,messa e, and ,transmission, fa#o$r a directionality oin from a sender to a recei#er. While I prefer the phenomenolo ical dia nosis of intermediality4 it is too eneral to set it apart from other concepts s$ch as m$ltimediality or transmediality that ha#e .een employed to descri.e #ario$s forms of $sin and sta in media in a theatrical conte9t. )s a ne9t step I 2ill therefore sit$ate 1r0mer,s o.ser#ation in the conte9t of a short o#er#ie2 of some of the rele#ant positions pertainin to intermediality in theatre.
Intermediality and Theatre31

,Intermediality is an epistemic condition of media co nition., 32 Sybille Krmer !rf"llen Medien eine Konstitutionsleistung,# $%%&, 82 0-heatre is a medi m "hich is constit ted b3 the processing and transformation of co ntless medial distinctions and markers nder the condition of a perspecti,i=ation* 1n the theatrical realm a process of performing 9inter&medialit3 takes place b3 means of the differentiation, m t al transposition and config ration of media "hich make percei,able the ,isible and the a dible* :s an intermedial e,ent theatre opens p and performs perspecti,es on the media "hich it stages*0>>
35 BU...W Intermedialit0t UistW ein fSr die +ph0re des Medialen r$ndle endes Ph0nomen.C 31 +ince the disco$rse on intermediality does not distin $ish .et2een specific types of intermediality pertainin to theatre and performance4 and since this section concerns the specific medial mechanisms of intermediality in performati#ity and does not refer to any concrete e9amples4 the s$.headin only refers to theatre. 32 BIntermedialit0t ist eine epistemische -edin $n der Mediener'enntnis.C 33 B-heater ist ein Medi m das gekenn=eichnet ist d rch das (ro=essieren nd -ransformieren n=!hliger medialer 5nterscheid ngen nd Markier ngen nter der Beding ng ,on (erspekti,ier ng* 1m ?a m des -heaters findet ein (ro=ess des @oll= gs ,on 91nter&Medialit!t statt in der Ae"eiligen Differen=ier ng, "echselseitigen Bbertrag ng nd Konfig rier ng ,on Medien, die Sichtbares nd ;Crbares = r 8rschein ng bringen* -heater als intermediales 8reignis erCffnet nd ins=eniert (erspekti,en a f die Medien, die es = r 8rschein ng bringtD U^$otation italiciEed in the ori inalW.
25

1ati &Mtt er4 2remdheit nd Spektakel4 25534 185
:espite For may.e .eca$se ofG its definitory pro.lems4 intermediality is a concept that has proliferated in many disciplines. It .e ins as a critical concept in the st$dy of literat$re4 and the first $sa e can .e traced to +am$el Taylor Colerid e in 1812 Fsee +chrMter 19984 1G4 2ith :ic' 7i ins applyin the term in the 1965s "l$9$s concept of intermedia. -ar.ara -Sscher states that the concept of intermedia mar's the inte ration of ne2 media in the )rts4 as 2ell as the transition into reco niEin medial relationships as a process Fsee -Sscher 25514 158G4 .$t 7en' =osterlin points o$t that $nderlyin 7i ins,s concept is a notion of intermediality as occ$rrin in .et2een separate media. This .ecomes apparent in the 2ay it is translated into intermedial terms .y NSr en ;. MSller! BIntermediality does not mean an addin of different medial concepts nor a sit$atin 3in3.et2een3 media of separate 2or's4 .$t an inte ration of aesthetic concepts of separate media in a ne2 medial conte9tC FMSller as cited in =osterlin 25534 36G. MSller,s definition4 in t$rn4 oes .eyond the realm of the )rts and incl$des Bsocial4 technolo ical4 and media3related factorsC FMSller 25154 19G4 2hich4 ho2e#er4 comes at the cost of constit$tin a S chbegriff Fsearch termG that B2ill not deli#er the system of systems that so many media theorists ha#e .een hopin forC FMSller 25154 32G. While MSller,s .road definition ma'es it possi.le to incl$de medial relationships across all disciplines4 the notion of a search term ma'es his approach impractical! simply a#oidin any critical enco$nter .y prefacin the post$late of an impossi.ility to achie#e consens$s may .e deescalatory .$t does not f$rther the disco$rse. ]nderlyin my analyses is the proposition that intermediality is a process in 2hich the interaction .et2een media dissol#es medial specificity into a threshold. What characteriEes this threshold as intermedial is the 2ay in 2hich it creates a need to determine a medial specificity Fi.e. determine medial .o$ndariesG 2hile also ma'in apparent that any s$ch specificity is $ltimately contin ent. )s 2e 2ill see4 this has #ast conse6$ences for the in#ol#ement of the spectator and the res$ltin si nification. The fo$ndation of this approach is 1r0mer,s o.ser#ation that a phenomenon is em.edded in a medi$m4 and per#aded .y its medialityL ,2hat a medi$m presents may appear in another medi$m .$t ne#er entirely 2itho$t a medi$m, 3% F1r0mer 19984 83(8%G. )nd .eca$se mediality incl$des a mechanism of aisthetic ne tralit34 media .ecome percei#a.le4 ,epistemic o.>ects4, only 2hen a medi$m ,performs, another medi$m and there.y transforms it into a ,form3in3
3% BWenn 2ir hin e en eine -otschaft empfan en4 so ist diese ,in, einem Medi$m e e.en. In einem Medi$m ist et2as ein eta$cht $nd #on ihm so d$rchdr$n en4 daZ es a$Zerhal. des Medi$ms S.erha$pt nicht E$ e9istieren #erma U...WL $nd 2as in einem Medi$m #orlie t4 'ann #ielleicht in einem anderen Medi$m4 nicht a.er 0nElich ohne Medi$m e e.en sein.C
26
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance a3medi$m, F1r0mer 25534 85G. This means not only that any notion of separate or indi#id$al media is the res$lt of an a.straction Fibid*G4 .$t also that in interactin media condition each other. In other 2ords4 2hile the notion of separate media is necessary to percei#e media4 this separation is mar'ed .y a process of interaction and e9ists only in distinction from another medi$m. Within this distinction .oth media m$t$ally condition each other4 as 2ell as the separation. In short! medial separation constit$tes a threshold4 a process4 rather than an a.sol$te. W.N.T. Mitchell echoes this approach from the perspecti#e of @is$al C$lt$re +t$dies4 2hen ma'in the follo2in proposition re ardin the modes of media in affectin perception and si nification4 their mediality!
?et $s try o$t4 as a co$ntera9iom4 the notion that all media are mi9ed media4 and see 2here that leads $s. =ne place it 2ill not lead $s is into mis $ided characteriEations of a$dio#is$al media li'e cinema and tele#ision as if they 2ere e9cl$si#ely or BpredominantlyC Fechoes of the he emonic fallacyG #is$al. The post$late of mi9ed4 hy.rid media leads $s to the specificity of codes4 material4 technolo ies4 percept$al practices4 si n3f$nctions4 and instit$tional conditions of prod$ction and cons$mption that o to ma'e $p a medi$m. It allo2s $s to .rea' $p the reification of media aro$nd a sin le sensory or an For a sin le si n3type or material #ehicleG and to pay attention to 2hat is in front of $s. FMitchell 25554 355G
Mitchell th$s fa#o$rs a model of intermediality that foc$ses on the perception process as ta'in place in a m$ltimodal intermedial realm of m$t$al infl$ence4 rather than on a sta.le o.>ect that consists of specific medial relations or modes of perception. )n o.>ect does not contain the intermedial process4 rather the intermedial process conditions the o.>ect # a its perception. )ccordin ly4 the o.>ect For4 at the least its si nificationG chan es as one shifts attention to other elements or medial f$nctions. "reda Chapple and Chiel 1atten.elt capt$re this comple9 stat$s 2hen spea'in of a rhiEomatic str$ct$re of intermediality Fsee ChappleH1atten.elt 25564 19G4 an in3.et2een of softenin .o$ndaries4 and a mi9in of spaces4 media4 and realities FChappleH1atten.elt 25564 12G4 2hich relies hea#ily on -olter and 8r$sin,s concept of remediation4 .$t does not incl$de any mention of Mc?$han,s ro$nd2or'. What is pro.lematic in their approach is the $nderlyin notion of space that frames their statement FBUTWhe intermedial is a space 2here UVW4C ibid*G. )s &Mtt er points o$t4 this spatial notion implies a irreconcila.le d$ality4 as is ass$mes that theatre Bpro,ides a space4 or sta e4 for intermediality4C 2hile intermediality itself Bseems to inha.it or operate in a space in3 .et2eenC F&Mtt er 25134 n.p.G. 8i#en the ine9trica.le connection .et2een mediality and perception4 space is f$rthermore not an a.sol$te .$t also emer es in condition to mediality.35 I s$ est instead that intermediality sho$ld .e considered a mode of perception4 a process4 2hich in#ol#es the reco nition of the in#ol#ement of se#eral interactin media4 and the $ncertainty re ardin their
35 This is implicit in Nac6$es &anci<re,s description of )rt as framin Ba specific space3time sensori$mC F&anci<re 255%.4 n.p.G.
2*
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance .o$ndaries or separation. This foc$s on perception also mar's a difference from other approaches to intermediality 2hich foc$s on specific relations of media as constit$tin intermediality. Instead of referrin to indi#id$al theories4 I 2ill t$rn to Nens +chrMter,s critical o#er#ie2 of approaches. This o#er#ie2 identifies fo$r disc$rsi#e fields4 2hich he considers to .e characteriEed at .est .y a rad$al distinction Fsee +chrMter 19984 1354 and 25114 2G. This o#er#ie2 6$ic'ly re#eals that approachin intermediality from the direction of medial interrelations falls prey to definitory $nclarities and cannot s$fficiently distin $ish itself from other modes of medial relations. 36 The first approach4 2hich +chrMter la.els s3nthetic intermedialit3 proposes a f$sion of media to form a Bs$per3medi$mC Fsee +chrMter 25114 2G or intermedi$m3* F+chrMter 19984 1G. 7e s$ ests that in condemnin B,monomedia, as forms of social and aesthetic alienation4C this approach contains a socio3political dimension and a $topian idea of Bholistic types of e9istenceC Fsee +chrMter 25114 2G. )t the same time4 +chrMter points o$t that this concept re6$ires a certain de ree of media specificity4 2hich means that the synthesis $ltimately ta'es place in perception Fsee +chrMter 25114 3G. :espite its Bsharp distinction .et2een intermedia and mi9ed mediaC F+chrMter 25114 2G4 this approach remains #a $e in its relation to the notion of m$ltimediality Fsee +chrMter 19984 135G. The second approach4 formal or transmedial intermedialit3 foc$ses on shared str$ct$res or modes amon #ario$s media as a terti m comparationis F+chrMter cites ,narration, as an e9ample for s$ch a transmedial mode4 see +chrMter 25114 3G that ma'es it possi.le to aesthetically Bre3realiEeC concepts and principles from one medi$m in another F+chrMter 19984 1364 and 25114 2G. The pro.lem 2ith this approach is that it implies and str$ les 2ith Ba.stracta.le medial aprioriC F+chrMter 19984 1%1G that need to .e media3 n3specific so that a transfer can ta'e place .et2een media4 .$t also need to .e media3specific so that the transfer is reco niEa.le Fsee +chrMter 19984 1%1(1%2G. +chrMter points o$t that the $nderlyin trans3medial mode essentially appeals to con#entions of other media Fsee +chrMter 19984 1%5G and4 .y positin and .l$rrin the distinction .et2een media4 red$ces their specificity to BstylesC F+chrMter 19984 1%1G. This also means that4 contrary to the opinion of some scholars4 38 trans3mediality is an element For specific typeG of
36 "$rthermore4 +chrMter post$lates that each different disc$rsi#e field FmodelG of intermediality also implies and applies a distinct concept of media F+chrMter 25114 6G. 7e concl$des that the point of depart$re sho$ld not .e definitions of media .$t deri#in definitions of media on the .asis of the Bintermedial fieldC Fibid*G4 re#er.eratin 1r0mer,s reflections on intermediality. +chrMter4 ho2e#er4 oes f$rther and s$ ests that the notion of sin le media 2ithin an intermedial field amo$nts to a BpoliticsC F ibid*G. 7e considers this politics a preliminary fifth cate ory4 ,irt al intermedialit3 or politics of intermedialit3 F+chrMter 25114 2G altho$ h he remains rather #a $e re ardin the meanin and implications of this concept of politics. 3* +chrMter cites :ic' 7i ins and N$d Xal'$t as proponents of this idea4 see +chrMter 19984 1. 38 1atten.elt4 for instance4 2rites4 BThe concept of transmediality is mainly $sed in art and comm$nication theoretical disco$rses for referrin to the chan e Ftransposition4 translation etcG from one medi$m to another. This transfer may apply to the content Fto 2hat is represented4 the storyG or to the form Fin formalistic terms 2e mi ht say to the
28
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance intermediality rather than a separate cate ory. The third approach4 transformational intermedialit34 and fo$rth approach4 ontological intermedialit34 are closely related F+chrMter compares them to ,t2o sides of the same coin4, +chrMter 19984 1294 ,flip sides4, 25114 2G. -ransformational intermedialit34 accordin to +chrMter4 .$ilds on processes of representation F+chrMter 25114 2G or reference F+chrMter 19984 1%%G4 in the sense that one medi$m represents or refers to another. The inter3medial component there.y consists not in the direct representation .$t in the critical distance that s$ch a relationship allo2s!
=ne medi$m refers to another and there.y it can comment on the represented medi$m4 2hich 2o$ld allo2 ma'in interestin inferences to the Bself3conceptionC of the representin medi$m. )nd it can also represent the represented medi$m in s$ch a 2ay that its e#eryday4 BnormalC states of .ein are defamiliariEed or4 as it 2ere4 transformed. F+chrMter 25114 5G
The intermedial relationship4 in other 2ords4 is the reflection on mediality that the defamiliariEation inherent to the process appeals to.39 )t the same time4 this approach implies a strict specificity of media and cannot acco$nt for the m$t$al conditionin of media4 2hich4 ho2e#er4 is a lo ical conse6$ence! if the representation of one medi$m in another allo2s critical insi hts in one direction4 the same m$st also apply to the opposite direction. Entological intermedialit34 in t$rn4 ass$mes that media al2ays e9ist in relation to other media F+chrMter 25114 2G4 2hich incl$des4 for instance4 1r0mer,s position that the notion of 2hat +chrMter refers to as monomedia is the res$lt of an a.straction. +chrMter spea's of a differential definition of media that stems from a precedin intermediality F+chrMter 19984 1%*4 and 25114 5G and essentially forms neolo isms on the .asis of e9istin terminolo y Fsee +chrMter 25114 5(6G. ;#en tho$ h +chrMter sets o$t to define 2ays of tal'in abo t ,intermediality, rather than intermediality itself F+chrMter 25114 2G4 his analysis implies a definition of intermediality .ased on specific modes of interaction amon media. If 2e then compare this to Werner Wolf,s approach4 2hich holds that intermediality is Bthe participation of more than one medi$m of e9pression in the si nification of a h$man artefact UVWC FWolf 19994 1G4 it .ecomes clear that the mere in#ol#ement of media ma'es it impossi.le to distin $ish intermediality from other forms of medial interaction. Wolf re#ised his definition in 25554 statin that intermediality BU...W applies to any trans ression of .o$ndaries .et2een con#entionally distinct media U...W and th$s comprises .oth ,intra3, and ,e9tra3 compositional, relations .et2een different mediaC FWolf 25554 252G. I find this re#ised approach pro.lematic as4 F1G it remains $nclear 2hat characteriEes or tri ers s$ch a trans ression and4 F2G the #ery notion of a trans ression of .o$ndaries implies a clear distinction of media and does not
principles of constr$ction4 stylistic proced$res and aesthetic con#entionsGC F1atten.elt 25584 23G. 39 "or the connection of this medial defamiliariEation or @erfremd ng in the conte9t of -recht,s epic theatre see :app 2556.
29
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance specify its effects. Instead4 I 2o$ld ar $e that intermediality is not the transgression .$t rather the negotiation of .o$ndaries in a relationship of inherent am.i $ity that emer es from an a2areness of mediality. Con#ersely4 if 2e approach intermediality as denotin a relationship .et2een media and perception4 it follo2s that intermediality is not a techni6$e4 a tool to prod$ce a concrete ,o.>ect4, .$t a ne otiation of the constit$ents of the f$ndamental process of its emergence. We can th$s set inter$ mediality apart from m lti$mediality .y notin that 2hile m$ltimediality reco niEes the in#ol#ement of m$ltiple media4 their .orders are m$ch more clearly defined4 2hich4 in interplay 2ith their aisthetic ne tralit34 res$lts in an immersi#e en#ironment that does not ele#ate mediality to the stat$s of an epistemic condition. In this sense4 a 4esamtk nst"erk4 2hich +chrMter places in the cate ory of s3nthetic intermedialit3 F+chrMter 25114 2G4 is m$ltimedial rather than intermedial. In the conte9t of #is$al perception4 7ans -eltin defines intermediality as a practice that places a conscio$s reflection a.o$t the mediality FB MedienstilCG at the core of the process of .eholdin a 2or' of art%5 F-eltin 25514 %8G. 7e emphasiEes a critical dimension of the interaction .et2een ima e and medi$m that manifests itself in the inherent con$ndr$m of ,.ein appearance,%1 F-eltin and 25514 %9G4 2hich can easily .e e9panded to encompass the interaction
.et2een media and perception in eneral! media are not only Bintermediary .y definitionC F-eltin 25554 31%G4 .$t also Bact as intermediaries amon themsel#es in that they mirror4 6$ote4 o#erlap4 and correct or censor one another. They often coe9ist in layers 2hose characters #ary accordin to their position in historyC Fibid*G. This means that as soon as mediality .ecomes a conscio$s part of perception4 the in#ol#ement of media affects the stat$s of the phenomena4 and th$s the si nification. This is d$e not only to the $nclear .o$ndaries and stat$s of media in#ol#ed4 .$t also to a historical dimension! -eltin e9plicitly incl$des the element of medial re3co nition Fi.e. .ein a.le to reco niEe and identify the essential difference of media4 see +chrMter 199*4 1%5G as e#o'in the re3 co nition Fand memoryG of other media4 2hich re6$ires4 and at the same time enhances4 an ,a2areness of the coe9istence or ri#alry of #ario$s media,%2 F-eltin 25514 %9G.
%5 BIntermedialit0t ist eine #er.reitete Pra9is in der Eeit enMssischen 1$nst4 2o immer die &efle9ion S.er den Medienstil ins -e2$Ztsein der Wer'.etracht$n erSc't 2ird.C %1 ,Intermediality itself is only a specific form of the interaction of ima e and medi$m. This interaction contains the con$ndr$m of being and appearance o#ernin the 2orld of ima es4, BIntermedialit0t ist ihrerseits n$r eine .esondere +pielform in der Intera'tion #on -ild $nd Medi$m. :iese Intera'tion .ir t in sich a$ch das &0tsel #on +ein $nd +chein4 das in der Welt der -ilder herrscht.C %2 ,Intermediality UVW e#o'es ima es 2e 'no2 and remem.er from other transportin media4 and re6$ires the a2areness of a coe9istence or ri#alry of #ario$s media4, BIntermedialit0t U...W r$ft -ilder a$f4 die 2ir a$s anderen Tr0 ermedien 'ennen $nd erinnern4 $nd setEt das -e2$Ztsein #on der 1oe9istenE oder &i#alit0t #erschiedener Medien #ora$s.C
35
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance =f co$rse4 the realm of theatre and performance is a special case as it in#ol#es #ario$s modes of perception. =ne of the reasons 2hy some scholars find the notion of theatre as a medi$m pro.lematic is that it .$ilds on corporeal presence and ,li#eness, Fsee also Chapter 14 section BMediality and its Thresholds! ?i#eness in an Intermedial ;n#ironmentCG in the .roadest possi.le sense. "$rthermore4 theatre possesses the $ni6$e capa.ility to incl$de other media 2itho$t chan in the medi$m itself4 altho$ h it may affect its stat$s or si nification 2ithin the theatrical frame2or'.%3 )t the same time some medial f$nction is clearly in#ol#ed4 2hich is 2hy 1atten.elt proposes to #ie2 theatre as a h3permedi m Fsee 1atten.elt 25564 3*G4 and -oenisch a Bf$lly transparent medi$mC Fsee -oenisch 2556a4 112G. 1atten.elt,s notion of theatre as a h3permedi m is pro.lematic as this concept4 follo2in the definition .y -olter and 8r$sin4 is stron ly lin'ed to di ital technolo y4 most nota.ly the comp$ter%%L di ital technolo y4 ho2e#er4 cannot contain corporeality4 it can only all$de to it in its a.sence. &Mtt er also ad#ises a ainst this concept on the ro$nds that4 BIf theatre is a.le to sta e media in the process of intermedial transpositions in terms of theatricality in order to open $p different perspecti#es on mediality4 then theatre cannot .e identical 2ith a hypermedi$mC F&Mtt er 25134 n.p.G. In fact4 definin theatre as a medi$m epitomiEes 2hat +chrMter critiEes as the approach of definin a medi$m and then $sin this definition to deri#e a notion of intermediality Fsee +chrMter 25114 6G. While it seems feasi.le to spea' of a mediality of theatre in the conte9t of an immersi#e medial en#ironment Fi.e. m$ltimedialityG that ,contains, its elements and does refer to mediality4 the conte9t of intermediality defies any s$ch concept. Christopher -. -alme 2as one of the first to reflect the implications of the realm of theatre .ac' to the concept of intermediality. -alme proposes an approach to theatre that does not ,UVW define its o.>ect of research in contradistinction to other media4 defensi#ely as it 2ere. &ather4 it sho$ld approach theatre as a medi$m4 2hich is f$ndamentally intermedial4 that is4 eared to2ards e9chan e,%5 F-alme 2551c4 681G. -alme sees the $nderlyin concept of intermediality as opposed to
%3 This can ta'e place4 for instance4 in a p$rely semiotic fashion. %% +chrMter4 in fact4 emphasiEes an independence of intermediality from the comp$ter and di ital technolo y in eneral4 on the ro$nds that ,UVW transmedial relationships .et2een media al2ays e9isted on the le#el of Frelati#eG $nspecific medial str$ct$res s$ch as rhythm4 seriality4 narration etcetera U...W. Xet one has to admit that4 at any rate4 the concept of intermediality chan es historically and that the term BintermedialityC emer es only 2hen the comp$ter introd$ces a ne24 #irt$al form of intermediality4, B;s 20re sicher falsch anE$nehmen4 dass Intermedialit0t allererst mit Comp$tern entsteht4 schon 2eil transmediale -eEieh$n en E2ischen Medien a$f der ;.ene Frelati#G medien$nspeEifischer +tr$'t$ren 2ie &hythm$s4 +erialit0t4 _arration etc. schon immer e9istiert $nd die ,reine, $nd ,speEifische, +el.stidentit0t eines e e.enen Medi$m s$.#ertiert ha.en. Weni stens m$ss a.er ein er0$mt 2erden4 dass Intermedialit0t sich historisch #er0ndert4 dass mit dem Comp$ter eine ne$e4 ,irt elle )rt dersel.en $nd in deren 8efol e erst der -e riff ,Intermedialit0t, a$fta$chtC F+chrMter 25524 B6. "aEit4C n.p.G. %5 B:ie Theater2issenschaft soll ihren 8e enstand nicht in ). renE$n e enS.er anderen Medien4 eine ).2ehrhalt$n also4 definieren. @ielmehr m$Z sie Theater als ein Medi$m4 das in seiner 8r$nda$sricht$n intermedial4 das heiZt a$f )$sta$sch .edacht ist4 .e reifen.C
31
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance Bmedial specificityC F-alme 2551c4 6*5G and distin $ishes three types of intermediality! F1G transpositional intermedialit3 in 2hich a theme or te9t FcontentG is transposed from one medi$m to another. -alme criticiEes this approach for .ein a simple chan e of medi$m F Medien"echselG4 a trans3position4 and as s$ch strictly spea'in not an inter3medial interaction F-alme 2551c4 6*5( 6*1G. It sho$ld .e added that this approach implies 'no2led e of the specificity of .oth media and ass$mes a directionality of the transfer that i nores the possi.ility of omnidirectional infl$ences.%6 The second cate ory is F2G intermedialit3 as a special case of intertext alit34 2hich accordin to -alme ori inates in 1arl PrSmm,s concept of ,intermediality as the transposition of one For moreG si n systems in another,%* F-alme 2551c4 6*1G.%8 -alme 6$estions the $sef$lness of this approach since literat$re theory considers s$ch a relationship bet"een te9ts as a normal condition of any te9t prod$ction and te9t reception Fibid*G. The third approach4 2hich -alme considers to denote intermediality in a ,stricter sense,%9 Fibid*G4 is F3G Brecreati,eC intermedialit3. This type consists of the attempt to recreate the aesthetic or mode Frather than contentG of a medi$m in another Fibid*G.55 )ccordin to -alme4 this type of intermediality appeals to an e9istin ,pl$ral media competency,51 F-alme 2551c4 681G in a process that consists of indi#id$al4 distin $isha.le medial layers. Theatre there.y ser#es as the ,framin medi$m, F?ahmenmedi mG4 in 2hich another medi$m4 the ,internal medi$m, FBinnenmedi mG appeals to the aesthetic con#entions of the ,thematic medi$m, 9thematisches Medi mG Fsee -alme 2551c4 6*3G52. The interplay of these medial le#els constit$tes intermediality .eca$se it maintains the ,framin medi$m, 2hile the mode of perception ta'es place lar ely in the mode of the ,internal medi$m, Fsee -alme 2551c4 6*6G. In her ha.ilitation thesis 2remdheit applyin nd Spektakel F2553G &Mtt er is more specific in theatre on the the concept of intermediality to the realm of theatre. In approachin
f$ndamental phenomenolo ical le#el in the tradition of 1r0mer4 &Mtt er defines it in terms of its medial competencies!
%6 It there.y falls in the same cate ory as +chrMter,s transmedial intermedialit3. %* BIntermedialit0t UalsW die Transposition eines [eichensystems Foder mehrererG in ein anderesC %8 1ati &Mtt er also points to Noachim Paech,s criti6$e FBMediales :ifferenEial $nd transformati#e 1onfi $ration4C in! NMr 7el.i Fed.G4 1ntermedialit!t* -heorie nd (raxis eines interdis=iplin!ren 2orsch ngsgebiets, -erlin4 19984 23G of the intermedial disco$rse as merely form$latin the transposition of content from one container to another4 see &Mtt er 25534 1*3. %9 B:ie &ealisier$n medialer 1on#entionen eines oder mehrerer Medien in einem anderen .eEeichnet Intermedialit0t im en eren +inne.C 55 This definition is s$pported also .y Patrice Pa#is 2ho notes that intermediality BFVG does not mean the addition of different media concepts4 nor the act of placin discrete 2or's in relation to partic$lar forms of media4 .$t rather the inte ration of aesthetic concepts from different media into a ne2 conceptC FPa#is as cited in &Mtt er 25134 n.p.G. 51 BNeder TheaterE$scha$er he$te4 oder .einahe >eder4 #erfS t S.er pl$rale mediale 1ompetenEen4 so2ohl im 7in.lic' a$f die medienspeEifische 1on#entionen als a$ch im +inne des dort transportierten Wissens.C 52 -alme s$pports these cate ories .y an analysis of &o.ert ?epa e,s B+e#en +treams of the &i#er =ta.C
32

"irst4 the messa es of theatre Fas a medi$mG do not contain the traces of a specific medi$m ,theatre, .$t rather that of an interaction of m$ltiple Fand indi#id$ally e9chan ea.leG media Fs$ch as #oice4 so$nd4 mo#ement4 lan $a e4 ima e4 etc.G. +econd4 theatre is 6$ite capa.le to inte rate #ario$s technical apparat$ses creatin artificial realities Ffilm4 T@4 #ideo4 di ital media4 etc.G 2itho$t losin its stat$s as theatre. F&Mtt er 25534 1*6G53
+he com.ines this definition 2ith 1r0mer,s concept of an inherent performati#ity of media4 2hich allo2s her to define theatre as an e#ent Fsee &Mtt er 25534 185G that is constit$ted .y ,the processin and transformation of co$ntless medial distinctions and mar'ers $nder the condition of a perspecti#iEation, F&Mtt er 25534 1854 f$ll 6$ote in epi raphG. Intermediality4 in t$rn4 ta'es place ,.y means of the differentiation4 m$t$al transposition and confi $ration of media, F ibid*G4 2hich means that theatre .ecomes an intermedial e#ent 2hen it ,opens $p and performs perspecti#es on the media 2hich it sta es, Fibid*G. While these insi hts are hi hly ac$te4 the openin statement ,theatre is a medi$m, some2hat contradicts &Mtt er,s definition of theatre as a ,realm, and as an ,e#ent.,5% The e#ent character4 ho2e#er4 is #ery important as it reco niEes the interplay .et2een perception and mediation in an en#ironment 2hich is percei#ed to .e theatrical4 .$t in its mode does not mar' a difference from reality. In other 2ords4 2hile a medi$m interacts 2ith perception it does not in itself constit$te an e#ent. Theatre4 in t$rn4 contains #ario$s media Fone mi ht spea' of theatre as an inherently pl$ri3medial realmG yet is not an o.>ect4 .$t rather an e#ent that is insepara.ly connected to performance. In a more recent paper &Mtt er clarifies her definition .y referrin to theatre as an Bopen dynamic confi $rationC that is Bidentical 2ith those media in 2hich the elements characteristic of its str$ct$re are or aniEedC F&Mtt er 25134 n.p.G. In descri.in an intermediality of theatre in these terms4 &Mtt er,s approach ma'es it possi.le to .rea' o$t of the constraints imposed .y any medial specificity. )t the same time4 it is admittedly diffic$lt to e9plain a concept ,intermediality, 2itho$t also ha#in a concept of ,medi$m4, 2hich is 2here 1r0mer,s 6$asi3rec$rsi#e position of intermediality as a f$ndamental principle for the medial sphere Fsee 1r0mer 25534 854 and &Mtt er 25534 185G comes into play. The de ree to 2hich this rec$rsi#e str$ct$re is characteristic for a medial en#ironment 55 can also .e seen in Philip
53 B;rstens n0mlich .e2ahren sich an den -otschaften des Theaters Fals Medi$mG e.en nicht die +p$ren des speEifischen Medi$ms Theater4 sondern #ieler F>e2eils a$s2echsel.arerG Medien F2ie +timme4 1lan 4 -e2e $n 4 +prache4 -ild $s2.G im [$sammenspiel. [2eitens ist das Theater d$rcha$s in der ?a e4 #erschiedene technische )pparat$ren E$r 'Snstlichen WelterEe$ $n E$ inte rieren F"ilm4 "ernsehen4 @ideo4 di itale Medien $s2.G ohne seinen +tat$s als Theater E$ #erlieren.C 5% ) fe2 pa es earlier &Mtt er .e ins a preliminary #ersion of this definition 2ith the statement that4 ,Theatre as a medi$m is a realm 2hich is characteriEed...,4 BTheater als Medi$m ist ein &a$m4 der e'ennEeichnet ist...C F&Mtt er 25534 1*8G 2hich is more incl$si#e .$t still contains the notion of theatre as a medi$m. This pro.lematic can .e a#oided alto ether if one considers theatre to .e a realm constit$ted .y pl$ri3medial relationships rather than a medi$m itself. 55 +ee also the a.o#e remar's a.o$t &Mtt er,s ,ortex.
33
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance )$slander,s important distinction .et2een ,li#eness, and ,meditiEation,! any concept of ,li#eness, only ma'es sense in terms of its opposite4 i.e. a mediatiEed en#ironment Fsee )$slander 1999G. "or this #ery reason I disa ree 2ith 1atten.elt,s approach to Btheatre as the sta e of intermedialityC F1atten.elt 25564 3*G as it seems to s$ est that theatre performs intermediality. &ather4 theatre is constit$ted .y a process that can be .oth ,theatrical, and ,intermedial, For4 for that matter4 m$ltimedialG. In this sense I prefer -oenisch,s form$lation that intermediality BU...W is an effect created in the perception of o.ser#ers that is tri ered .y performance U...WC F-oenisch 2556a4 113G4 and4 as I 2o$ld add4 incl des the performance. -$t it still remains $nclear 2hat tri intermediality and 2hat sets it apart from a m$ltimediality of theatre. -oenisch attri.$tes the intermedial ,effect, to Bthe pl$ri3focal net2or's of si ns4 2orlds4 messa es4 and meanin s offered .y the performancesC F-oenisch 2556a4 115G. I propose that the 'ey to intermediality is not a ,pl$rality, of perspecti#es .$t the $ncertainty of distri.$tion of .o$ndaries and si nification4 Beffects of alienation and d3s$referential $n3realitiesC F-oenisch 2556a4 115G "ithin this perspecti#e. If 2e approach theatre as a pl$ri3medial realm rather than a medi$m4 the theatricality Fand4 in some cases4 performati#ityG at 2or' refers to a mode of appearance 2ithin an en#ironment that is characteriEed .y a conscio$s co3presence of three elements! action ( o.ser#ation ( mediality Fsee Chapter 24 section BThresholds -et2een Theatricality and Performati#ityCG.56 The dimensions of ,o.ser#ation, and ,action, enco$nter and interact 2ith the inherent mediality that conditions4 affects4 and potentially distorts the si nification. This res$lts in a ,ma ical trian le, 5* of m$t$al infl$ence4 co3conditionin 4 and co3creation. )s lon as the infl$ence of mediality remains lar ely aistheticall3 ne tral4 the si nification is conditioned primarily For4 at least4 apparentlyG .y the interplay .et2een action and o.ser#ation and prod$ces a m ltimedial4 immersi#e4 and ill$strati#e en#ironment. Instead of ,presentin , #ario$s distinct positions4 the intermedial process4 in t$rn4 deconstr$cts the apparent cohesion of h$man perception into a pl$rality of elements4 addresses Fin Mitchell,s senseG the mediality in#ol#ed4 2hose performati#ity Fin 1r0mer,s senseG t$rns into in $nsta.le thresholds of si nification that create the need to esta.lish Fcontin entG .o$ndaries4 and prod$ces ne2 si nification that is located inter3media and th$s starts the process ane2.
56 This approach is also s$pported .y &Mtt er,s o.ser#ation that4 B-eca$se theatre is reliant on .oth its prod$cti#e and recepti#e sides ( ie. on the presence of h$man .odies and their specific sensory capacities ( it is at the same time principally open to all 'inds of media Fincl$din technical mediaG. 7ence it can f$nction as an open dynamic confi $ration of medial transpositionsC F&Mtt er 2558c4 338G. In other 2ords4 mediality plays s$ch a prominent role in theatre beca se of the inherent elements of action Fi.e. prod$ctionG and o.ser#ation Fi.e. receptionG. 5* The concept$aliEation of these processes as a ,ma ical trian le, ori inates in 7elmar +chramm,s Karne,al des Denkens F19964 251G in the form of the interplay of aisthesis4 kinesis4 and semiosis, 2hich &Mtt er F25534 9%ff4 2558.G and :olenc F2511G e9tend .y incl$din mediality instead of semiosis.
ers s$ch an
3%
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance &Mtt er lin's this to theatricality 2hich4
U...W inserts a ap .et2een .eholder and .eheld that per#ades their relationship 2ith alterity4 th$s re $latin and dere $latin relations of perception! UVW UTWheatricality is al2ays f$nctional at the .orderline of the #ie2 or the perspecti#e of the .eholder to decide on tr$th or non3tr$th4 reality and non3reality4 fiction or non3fiction. F&Mtt er 25134 n.p.G
-$t in order to maintain a differentiation from other modes of medial interaction that still re ister as ,theatrical, Fe. .4 m$ltimedialityG I s$ est that s$ch aps are not primarily lin'ed to theatricality .$t to the conscio$s contin ency in si nification that .ecomes the epistemic condition of intermedialit3.58 In this sense one co$ld say that as soon as the 6$estion of mediality is pro.lematiEed in the conte9t of theatre4 theatre constit$tes an intermedial realm4 in 2hich the a2areness of the performati#ity59 of media t$rns all separations Fincl$din li#e4 corporeal4 and mediatiEedG into a threshold and there.y conditions its o2n ,conditions., =nce this process occ$rs4 theatre itself is intermedial Frather than performing intermedialityG and tri ers an acti#e process of perception4 in 2hich perception prod$ces si nification in interaction 2ith an intermedial realm F.e innin 2ith a distri.$tion of roles4 incl$din that of the percei#in h$man .ein G. 7ere I conc$r 2ith -oenisch4 2ho dia noses that in intermediality it is Bthe essentially acti#e role of the o.ser#er4 that constit$tes tr$e inter$acti,it3 and this t2o32ay process of o.ser#in U...WC F-oenisch 2556a4 159G. )nd &Mtt er spea's of an Bintermedial practice .ased on theatrePs ass$med capacity for intermedialityC F&Mtt er 2558c4 338G4 2hich ma'es it possi.le to consider a medial f$nction of theatre Fin non3intermedial sit$ationsG4 2itho$t4 ho2e#er4 limitin its f$nction to that of a medi$m. In ?$hmann,s terms one can descri.e theatre as mar'in a threshold .et2een form and medi$m4 as an intermedial realm4 2hose o2n stat$s is as contin ent as that of its constit$ents. In its most e9treme form4 intermediality $ndermines the stat$s of theatre so that it is no lon er clear 2hether theatre is theatre or somethin else4 potentially and radically ,real., This $ncertainty in stat$s and si nification has far reachin implications and constit$tes4 as I am proposin 4 a ,politicity, of intermediality. This position oes .eyond +chrMter 2ho ar $es that4
The intermedial field Fincl$din the intermedial processes on 2ritin a.o$t intermedialityG prod$ces definitions of media. The remainin tas' is therefore to start a differentiated analysis of the politics of intermediality and the politics of the correspondin notions of #ario$s media. F+chrMter 25114 6G
+chrMter,s statement is rather #a $e re ardin the meanin and mechanisms of the $nderlyin concept of politics .$t it still allo2s some inferences! ,politics, has to do 2ith a separation of the intermedial ,field, into its constit$tin media4 2hose definitions and .o$ndaries4 ho2e#er4 are
58 &Mtt er,s definition of intermedial theatre does not e9plicitly address a distinction from other modes of medial interaction. 59 I am $sin performati#ity here in 1r0mer,s sense4 2ho spea's of a ,constit$ti#e aspect, of media. +ee 1r0mer 2553.
35
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance contin ent in dependin on the field. If 2e then consider that intermediality implies an a2areness of mediality4 2e can note that $nderlyin this ,politics, is an a2areness of an aesthetic mechanism that assi ns si nification and stat$s to perception. Contrary to +chrMter4 2ho spea's of a ,politics of intermediality4, I propose that 2e ha#e arri#ed at a ne9$s of ,politics, and ,intermediality., "or the same reason I find the title -he (olitics of :esthetics4 2hich 8a.riel &oc'hill chose for his translation of &anci<re,s .oo' +e (artage d sensible: 8sth.ti# e et politi# e F2555G4 pro.lematic as it does not maintain &anci<re,s distinction .et2een BpoliticsC and Bthe police.C "ollo2in this distinction4 ,politics, strictly spea'in mar's a disa reement 2ith the distrib tion of the sensible4 2hereas aesthetics is a manifestation of the forces of the police that maintain the distrib tion of the sensible. In this sense4 ,aesthetics, mar's ,the politicalL, con#ersely one co$ld say that aesthetics contains a certain ,politicity., Th$s4 from my #anta e point4 a more appropriate title 2o$ld .e BThe (oliticit3 of )esthetics.C
Intermediality and Politics

Tho$ h o.#io$sly one 2ho sees4 an o.ser#er is more importantly one 2ho sees 2ithin a prescri.ed set of possi.ilities4 one 2ho is em.edded in a system of con#entions and limitations. Nonathan Crary4 -echni# e of the Ebser,er, 19924 6 Intermediality reconfi $res three former separated c$lt$ral domainsTesta.lished in the 19th cent$ry T of the arts4 politics and science4 especially philosophyT enhancin an e9perience of the in3.et2een and a sensi.ility for tensional differences. 7en' =osterlin 4 B+ensFaG.le Intermediality and 1nteresse4C 25534 35
My reflections on the disco$rses on ,media, and ,intermediality, ha#e come f$ll circle! on the .asis of 1r0mer,s phenomenolo ical reflections I first s$ ested that media co nition re6$ires intermediality. )nd 2hen loo'in at intermediality I arri#ed at the proposal that at its core is an aesthetic mechanism that assi ns stat$s and si nification to perception and prod$ces definitions of media4 2hich4 in t$rn4 can f$rther affect si nification and there.y the media in#ol#ed. Instead of indicatin a fallacy in my ar $ment4 this rec$rsi#e str$ct$re re#eals a contin ency that .ecomes apparent 2hen approachin intermediality from a phenomenolo ical perspecti#e. This contin ency4 in t$rn4 lin's intermediality to the concept of ,politics, 2hich from its .e innin s in Classical 8reece has had an intricate connection to perception. I am .asin my approach to2ards ,politics, on a philosophy that =li#er Marchart has called ,post3fo$ndational, Fsee Marchart 255*G and that4 2ithin the ran e of its indi#id$al approaches4 reco niEes a contin ency at the core or fo$ndation of
36
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance politics. "ollo2in Marchart4 2hat characteriEes these approaches as ,post3fo$ndational, is the
reco nition that all social h$man interaction needs a fo$ndation4 e#en tho$ h this fo$ndation or ro$nd 2ill al2ays .e contin ent Fi.e. contain a fla2 or miscalc$lationG and as s$ch can ne#er .e ,final.,65 =f partic$lar importance for me are 7annah )rendt and Nac6$es &anci<re 61 altho$ h their approaches initially seem to contradict each other! 2hat )rendt descri.es as ,politics4, namely a ne otiation of iss$es and perceptions 2ithin an e9istin order F polisG and amon e6$als4 constit$tes the opposite of ,politics, for &anci<re4 2ho descri.es as ,politics, the moment of disa reement 2ith and deconstr$ction of an e9istin ,distrib tion of the sensible, Fsee also Chapter 14 section BIndi#id$al Corporeality and the Politics of )estheticsCG. The foc$s of )rendt and &anci<re differs and4 as I 2ill sho24 to a certain de ree complement rather than contradict each other. While )rendt,s approach considers the political implications of forms of h$man interaction4 &anci<re foc$ses on the aesthetic principles re $latin this interaction. -$t if one ta'es a closer loo' at the $nderlyin mechanisms and raison d0Ftre of politics4 2hich4 follo2in Marchart4 lie in an inherent contin ency of any political order4 the t2o approaches .ecome compara.le. I com.ine my o2n reflections on mediality and intermediality 2ith these approaches4 each of 2hich implies .$t does not e9plicitly consider medial relations.62 I am there.y e9pandin the post3fo$ndational approach .y lin'in the contin ency at the core of .oth approaches to mechanisms of intermediality. ,Politics, is a concept that applies only to h$man Finter3Grelations63L its application to a sin le h$man .ein ma'es no sense4 >$st as its application to conte9ts 2itho$t any h$man presence or in#ol#ement is f$tile. )rendt e9plains this .y notin that the core of politics is the ,pl$rality, of h$man .ein s Fsee )rendt 25534 9G! h$man .ein s share certain 6$alities .$t are also $ni6$e. )s a
65 BUPost3fo$ndationalismW ass$mes UVW the a.sence of an $ltimate ro$nd4 since it is only on the .asis of s$ch a.sence that ro$nds4 in the pl$ral4 are possi.le. UV IWt does not t$rn into anti3fo$ndationalist nihilism4 e9istentialism or pl$ralism4 all of 2hich 2o$ld ass$me the a.sence of any ro$nd and 2o$ld res$lt in complete meanin lessness4 a.sol$te freedom or total a$tonomy. _or does it t$rn into a sort of postmodern pl$ralism for 2hich all meta3narrati#es ha#e e6$ally melted into air4 for 2hat is still accepted .y post3fo$ndationalism is the necessity for some ro$ndsC FMarchart 255*4 1%G. 61 I am also referrin to the 2or's of other theorists4 incl$din )lain -adio$4 ;rnesto ?acla$4 +la#o> 'i(e'4 Martin 7eide er4 and Chantal Mo$ffe4 .$t 2ill do so lar ely in the conte9t of the approaches of )rendt and &anci<re. 62 While &anci<re spea's of media4 for instance in 2 t re of the 1mage F255*G4 the concept of media he applies is relati#ely con#entional 2ith a stron material dimension. &anci<re reco niEes the in#ol#ement of perception in mediality4 2hich in the conte9t of his research interest4 ho2e#er4 appears lar ely 2ith a #is$al emphasis Fsee for instance &anci<re 255*4 *1(*2G and reco niEes f$rther elements .$t does not incl$de any anthropomorphic 6$alities! B) medi$m is not a ,proper, means or material. It is a s$rface of con#ersion! a s$rface of e6$i#alence .et2een the different arts, 2ays of ma'in L a concept$al space of artic$lation .et2een these 2ays of ma'in and forms of #isi.ility and intelli i.ility determinin the 2ay in 2hich they can .e #ie2ed and concei#edC F&anci<re 255*4 *5(*6G. 63 )ltho$ h the relationship .et2een a h$man .ein and an o.>ect can also mar' a certain ,politicity4, this is only the case insofar as this relationship also affects the interrelationship 2ith other h$man .ein s.
3*
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance conse6$ence4 2here#er they enco$nter each other they interact as separate and distinct entities and there.y form relations. ,Politics4, in t$rn4 concerns the interaction and relations amon this pl$rality4 or4 as )rendt p$ts it4 ,deals 2ith the B.ein 3to etherC and B.ein 3amon 3each3otherC of the distinct,6% F)rendt 25534 9(15G. This interaction constit$tes a ,realm4, a h$man 2orld or ,reality,65 that $nites and sim$ltaneo$sly separates the h$man pl$rality. While ,reality, is commonly associated 2ith sta.ility4 )rendt stresses that this realm chan es o#er time66 Fsee )rendt 25534 25G and analyEes transformations of this realm in terms of #ario$s aspects of h$man life and e9periences Fincl$din transformations of the social34 la.or3 H 2or'34 and technolo ical en#ironment4 see )rendt 1998G. )ll of these e9periences4 ho2e#er4 depend on perception 2hich ta'es place in this realm .$t also conditions it. In this sense4 h$man pl$rality does not interact in a space4 .$t their interaction creates and conditions the realm4 2hich4 in t$rn4 str$ct$res and conditions its elements Fincl$din perceptionG. This is the first indication of f$ndamental medial relations $nderlyin pl$rality4 2hich emanates from and incl$des each $ni6$e h$man .ein . This mediality is also implicit in )rendt,s concept of a common inter3est F?atin! .ein in .et2eenG that holds to ether this comm$nity of e6$al3yet3distinct indi#id$als Fsee )rendt 19984 182G. The comm$nal inter$est is more than an assem.la e of indi#id$al interests .$t in constit$tin h$man interrelations connects and sim$ltaneo$sly separates the distinct into the same.6* This also means that )rendt,s concept of politics sho$ld not .e $nderstood in p$rely spatial terms4 e#en
6% BPoliti' .er$ht a$f der Tatsache der Pl$ralit0t der Menschen. U...W Politi' handelt #on dem [$sammen3 $nd Miteinander3+ein der @erschiedenen.C 65 The concept of ,real, and ,reality, is a #ery comple9 disco$rse in itself F)rendt e#en distin $ishes .et2een ,act$ality, or 'irklichkeit4 and ,reality, or ?ealit!tG and 2o$ld re6$ire a st$dy in and of itself. I 2ill limit myself to a #ery pro#isional definition of ,reality, as the opposite of ,theatricality4, that is4 a realm of h$man perception and interaction that is not mar'ed .y a conscio$s percept$al element of performati#ity and mediality4 and in 2hich all actions and re3actions ha#e ,real4, non3semiotic or ima inary4 conse6$ences. This realm centers on h$man life4 2hich is also at sta'e as its essential and $ltimate conse6$ence! tho$ h a n$m.er of h$man .ein s may a ree on certain traits of ,a reality4, h$man $ni6$eness lin's the concept of ,reality, to indi#id$al perception so that 2ith the end of a $ni6$e life F2hich is a conse6$ence of the linearity of h$man life4 see )rendt 19984 1*ffG the $ni6$e reality associated 2ith that life comes to an end. My $nderstandin of reality there.y incl$des notions of the ,p$.lic, Fsee also )rendt 25524 62f4 113G and the 8erman concept of ffentlichkeit Fsee also -alme 2515G* Con#ersely4 in resol#in the separation of ,reality, and ,theatricality, into a threshold4 intermediality4 follo2in my hypothesis4 is inherently ,political., 66 ,Where#er h$man .ein s assem.leHenco$nterHmeet a realm UVW emer es4 that .oth assem.les and separates them from one another. ;ach of these realms has its o2n str$ct$re that chan es o#er time UVW, ( BUVW UYW.erall 2o Menschen E$sammen'ommen U... entstehtW ein &a$m U...W4 der sie in sich #ersammelt $nd E$ leich #oneinander trennt. Neder dieser &0$me hat seine ei ene +tr$'t$riertheit4 die sich im Wandel der [eit 2andelt UVWC F)rendt 25534 25G. 6* This aspect is also implicit in &Mtt er,s disc$ssion of Ma$rice Merlea$3Ponty4 in 2hich she notes that ,In this sense4 the =ther and the +elf are no radical difference4 2hat is more essential is the 6$estion of the shared affiliation of the I and the =ther 2ith the 2orld. Merlea$3Ponty calls this 2orld4 "hich is common to both4 ,shared 2orld, UG"ischen"eltW4, B:as )ndere $nd das +el.st sind so esehen nicht als radi'ale :ifferenE edacht4 #iel entscheidender ist hier die "ra e nach der emeinsamen [$ ehMri 'eit #on Ich $nd )nderem E$r Welt. :iese Welt4 die beiden gemeinsam ist4 nennt Merlea$3Ponty die ,[2ischen2elt.,C F&Mtt er 25534 19%G.
the h$man
38
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance tho$ h the 8ree' model of the polis seems to s$ est so.68 If one accepts that space Fthe same also
applies to timeG is not an a.sol$te .$t an a.straction deri#ed from the frame2or' of perception4 the ine#ita.le connection of media and perception 1r0mer posits means that the same contin ency that applies to perception also applies to its frame2or'4 i.e. incl$des the notion of space. When Nonathan Crary Fsee epi raphG stresses the m$t$al infl$ence .y etymolo ically lin'in the notion of an o.ser#er to the r$les of an aesthetic system re $latin and conditionin perception4 2e arri#e at a system that re#er.erates remar'a.ly 2ith the reflections on intermediality I ha#e de#eloped a.o#e. In this sense it seems more correct to spea' of a realm of h$man inter3relation4 2hich .ecomes intermedial as a conse6$ence of the inherent medial dimension of h$man interaction. 7en' =osterlin confirms this connection from the opposite direction 2hen descri.in the B$nsta.le and non3disc$rsi#e 6$ality of the .ein F esseG of this in3.et2een FinterG as inter3esseC 2hich characteriEes intermediality for him Fsee =osterlin 25534 31G. Mediality plays a role in terms of the mode of politics. )rendt posits that the political realm Brises directly o$t of actin to ether4 the ,sharin of 2ords and deeds,C F)rendt 19984 198G. While )rendt4 follo2in the 8ree' tradition4 ass$mes a direct4 immediate comm$nication4 from a medial perspecti#e it .ecomes clear that only the capacity to act and spea' allo2s a h$man .ein to manifest his or her $ni6$eness4 2hich means that a medial f$nction is the precondition of politics. With that in mind4 perception is part of the political mode! 2itho$t it the ,sharin , 2o$ld .e impossi.leL perception is intrinsically associated 2ith h$man $ni6$eness. )rendt all$des to this 2hen descri.in ho2 perception can create freedom of mo#ement on a metaphorical le#el!
,;ssential is UVW that one attained the capa.ility to tr$ly percei#e o.>ects from #ario$s sides4 2hich means in political terms that one co$ld ass$me the many UVW points of #ie2 from 2hich the same thin can .e seen4 and 2hence it re#eals different aspects that are independent from its essence UBSelbigkeitCW. UVW This is si nificantly more than .ypassin one,s personal interest UVW4 .$t prod$ces a tr$e freedom of mo#ement on an intellect$al le#el that parallels that of a physical le#el.,69 F)rendt 25534 96(9*G
This statement contains se#eral 'ey elements of )rendt,s concept of politics! it indicates the pl$rality of perspecti#es as constit$tin the realm4 the difference that separates an indi#id$al interest from the inter$esse Fnamely the reco nition that there is a potential s$rpl$s of perceptionG4 as 2ell as 2hat Marchart calls the comm$nitarian fo$ndation of )rendt,s concept of politics. "or
68 This .ecomes clear 2hen considerin )rendt,s statement BUTheW tr$e space Uof the polisW lies .et2een people li#in to ether for this p$rpose4 no matter 2here they happen to .eC F)rendt 19984 198G. 69 B;ntscheidend ist U...W4 daZ man die "0hi 'eit e2ann die +achen 2ir'lich #on #erschiedenen +eiten E$ sehen4 $nd das heiZt politisch4 daZ man sich dara$f #erstand4 die #ielen mM lichen4 in der 2ir'lichen Welt #or e e.enen +tandorte einE$nehmen4 #on denen a$s die leiche +ache .etrachtet 2erden 'ann $nd in der sie4 ihrer +el.i 'eit $n eachtet4 die #erschiedensten )spe'te Eei t. UVW :ieses ist erhe.lich mehr als die )$sschalt$n des ei enen Interesses U...W4 UmanW erEielt so eine 2ahre -e2e $n sfreiheit in der Welt des 8eisti en4 die der -e2e $n sfreiheit im Physischen ena$ parallel l0$ft.C
39
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance )rendt4 politics .e ins 2ith the fo$ndation of a polisHI as a realm of e6$ality*1 and is characteriEed .y comm$nication 2hich see's to incl$de as m$ch of the $ni6$e differences as possi.le Fand th$s resem.les the attempt to deri#e definitions of media from an intermedial epistemolo yG. This e6$ality4 ho2e#er4 comes at the cost of e9cl$din elements that are considered to .e non3e6$al Fin a Classical 8ree' conte9t this meant any non3citiEens4 incl$din 2omen4 children4 and sla#esG. While for )rendt this e9cl$sion*2 indicates the non3political4 it is at the core of &anci<re,s concept of ,politics4, 2here it is also intrinsically connected 2ith perception. ,Politics, in &anci<re,s sense4 constit$tes not the acti#ity 2ithin a ,realm, F2hat he calls distrib tion of the sensibleG .$t an appearance 2hich is impossi.le accordin to the realm,s r$les of the appearance. This impossi.le appearance deconstr$cts this ,realm, .y re#ealin a fallacy in its fo$ndation4 e9poses the $nderlyin contin ency of the separation4 t$rns it into a threshold4 and there.y necessitates a rene otiation of the fo$ndin principles. The appearance posits radical e6$ality 2ith4 rather than difference from4 the realm,s lo ic of appearance.*3 In li ht of the mediality of the h$man .ody4 one co$ld say the appearance creates an inc$rsion of si nification 2hich dissol#es medial separation and distri.$tion and there.y creates an intermedial realm. This intermedial realm deconstr$cts medial specificity4 that is4 it dissol#es the distri.$tion of media and their separation into a threshold 2hich creates a radical e6$ality. )s this e6$ality needs to .e percei#a.le and reco niEa.le4 the appearance stresses perception as .ein located in .et2een a pl$rality of independent3yet3connected orders. This appeals to a conscio$s perception 2hich addresses its o2n conditions4 in m$ch the same 2ay as 1r0mer,s concept of intermedialit3 is the epistemic condition of medialit3. The political ,acti#ity, in#ol#ed is not comm$nitarian in the sense of maintainin a comm$nity .$t anta onistic in deconstr$ctin a ,realm, .y re#ealin the contin ency and mediality of its $nderlyin str$ct$ral principles that condition stat$s and the si nification of its elements Fincl$din perceptionG.
*5 )s Marchart notes4 BUIWn the )rendtian tra>ectory4 Cla$de ?efort UVW 2ill call the political the moment .y 2hich the sym.olic form of society is instit$ted4 2hile for ;rnesto ?acla$ UVW4 to some e9tent from 2ithin the +chmittian tra>ectory4 the political is .oth the disr$pti#e moment of the dislocation of the +ocial and the fo$ndin moment of the +ocial,s instit$tion ,is$J$,is a radical o$tsideC FMarchart 255*4 %8G. -y Bthe +chmittian tra>ectoryC Marchart refers to the political tho$ ht of Carl +chmitt4 2ho 2as the first to introd$ce the distinction .et2een ,politics, and ,the political, in the 8erman disco$rse Fsee Marchart 255*4 %G4 and 2hose reflections are important also for 8ior io ) am.en,s concept of .iopolitics Fsee ) am.en 1998G. *1 I 2o$ld li'e to stress that this e6$ality does not concern s$perficial differences s$ch as profession4 loo'4 lan $a e4 etc.4 .$t f$ndamental 6$alities of .ein a $ni6$e percei#in 4 spea'in 4 and actin h$man .ein . It concerns the 6$estion of 2hat ma'es each h$man .ein $ni6$e at that le#el4 2hich implies that there needs to .e some characteristic that sets him or her apart. *2 -oth )rendt and &anci<re emphasiEe the 8ree' concept of the logos as the core of the distinction in the )ristotelean tradition Fsee for instance )rendt 19984 25ff4 &anci<re 25524 1%4 354 3%4 3*G. *3 BPolitics is first of all the confi $ration of a space as political4 the framin of a specific sphere of e9perience4 the settin of o.>ects posed as ,common, and of s$.>ects to 2hom the capacity is reco niEed to desi nate these o.>ects and disc$ss a.o$t them. Politics first is the conflict a.o$t the #ery e9istence of that sphere of e9perience4 the reality of those common o.>ects and the capacity of those s$.>ectsC F&anci<re 255%.4 n.p.G.
%5
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance In other 2ords4 the political is a realm in 2hich an assem.lin 4 $nitin process meets a dissem.lin 4 separatin process. This is another 'ey feat$re of the post3fo$ndational approach to politics 2hich distin $ishes 2hat Marchart refers to as the ,ontic element, of ,politics, and the ,ontolo ical element, of ,the political, 2hich e#ol#es on a sym.olic le#el at the core of the fo$ndin moment of society Fsee Marchart 255*4 *(8G.*% I s$ est that .eca$se of the h$man in#ol#ement this sym.olic le#el needs to .e concei#ed of in terms of an inherent performati#ity4 .oth in the sense of esta.lishin an order and assi nin si nification #ia performance Fa performati#e actG4 and also as actin in accordance 2ith an order 2hich conditions the si nification of the performati#e acts. ;#ery fo$ndation needs a certain de ree of sta.ility4 a $nitin str$ct$rin principle or order 2hich not only creates .$t also maintains some homo eneity in the assem.la e of elements that are hetero eneo$s F,$ni6$e,G in character. This f$lfills essentially a mana ement f$nction 2hich f$nctions as For replacesG a sens s comm nis or inter$esse4 a shared ,sensi.ility, or lo ic.*5 &anci<re descri.es this inte rati#e mechanism at the core of ,the political,*6 in ne$tral terms Fsee &anci<re 19994 294 31G as Bthe policeC 2hich maintains a distrib tion of the sensible .y assi nin each element its place and stat$s. This element is a necessary part of ,the political, .eca$se of its contin ency 2hich4 follo2in &anci<re4 implies a f$ndamental 2ron FblaberonG4 an inherent lo ical fla2 2hich 2ill disr$pt the order if it .ecomes apparent F&anci<re 19994 13G. In this sense4 the f$nction of the police4 as 8a.riel &oc'hill p$ts it4 is to esta.lish Bthe .orders .et2een the #isi.le and the in#isi.le4 the a$di.le and the ina$di.le4 the saya.le and the $nsaya.leC Fsee &anci<re 255%a4 89G. Phenomenolo ically spea'in the police is essentially an aesthetic mechanism4 and &anci<re distin $ishes se#eral historic ,aesthetic re imes,** as specific distrib tions of the sensible. ;#en tho$ h he does not esta.lish a medial perspecti#e4 the in#ol#ement of aesthetics and its 6$alitati#e norms implies a mediality that re $lates the 2ay somethin is percei#ed as somethin . In this sense4 the a2'2ard $se of the term Bsensi.leC F2hich seems to .e the prod$ct of &anci<re,s o2n
*% +ome theorists $se the terms in re#erse meanin or in different interrelationships. Chantal Mo$ffe4 for instance4 defines politics as Bthe practices and instit$tions thro$ h 2hich a certain order is or aniEedC FMarchart 255*4 %3G4 2hich &anci<re 2o$ld refer to as the police. :espite the indi#id$al differences4 ho2e#er4 all theorists that Marchart calls post3fo$ndational maintain a distinction .et2een ,politics, and ,the political, Fsee also Marchart 255*4 1%%G. *5 Marchart notes that this consists Bmainly of instit$tionaliEed social mana ement and of 2hat "o$ca$lt 2o$ld call o#ernmental technolo ies or police. It appertains to the realm of calc$lation4 2here all arisin pro.lems and diffic$lties are to .e ,resol#ed, .y administrati#e means4 2hile e#erythin 6$estiona.le in the radical sense4 that is 6$estiona.ility as s$ch4 disappearsC FMarchart 255*4 68G. *6 8a.riel &oc'hill o.ser#es that &anci<re does not maintain a strict terminolo ical distinction .et2een politics and the political4 .$t that the political is Bthe meetin ro$nd .et2een politics and the police4C i.e. the realm of enco$nter Fsee B8lossary of Technical TermsC in &anci<re 255%a4 89G. This sho$ld not .e conf$sed 2ith the distrib tion of the sensible F2hich is part of the policeG .$t rather as a realm that ma'es the enco$nter possi.le. ** The ,ethical re ime of ima es4, the ,representati#e re ime of )rt,4 and the ,aesthetic re ime of )rt, Fsee &anci<re 255%aG.
%1
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance translation of the "rench term partage d sensible4 in 2hich sensible si nifies the percei#a.leG sho$ld .e $nderstood as incl$din the connotation in ;n lish of an element of reason that the process of ne otiatin an aesthetic order conditionin an interplay .et2een mediality and si nification into a political system implies.*8 This perspecti#e is important not only in the conte9t of a ne9$s of politics and intermediality4 .$t also in an en#ironment that is mar'ed .y an increasin a2areness of an omnipresence of media4*9 .y Bmicro and eopolitical aspects of intermedial interactions and transactions 2ithin a lo.aliEed4 media dominated information societyC F=osterlin 25534 35(31G. It also indicates 2hy a p$rely administrati#e acti#ity4 epitomiEed in the 2or' of today,s professional politicians4 does not constit$te ,politics., We ha#e arri#ed a ain at an essentially intermedial sit$ation! the mediality at the core of politics resem.les stri'in ly the theoretical implications of a concept of intermedialityL and4 #ice #ersa4 the reflections on intermediality point to a political dimension. In other 2ords4 the #ery concept of intermediality is ,political, or contains a certain ,politicity, in the sense that4 altho$ h it does not itself present a distrib tion of the sensible4 it mar's a realm that s$spends the police0s mechanisms of distri.$tion and allo2s for a rene otiation of a distrib tion of the sensible. 7ints of this can .e fo$nd in +chrMter,s notion of a ,politics of intermediality4, and =osterlin e9plicitly ar $es for s$ch a connection .y pointin to a political dimension of the ,inter, as Ban inte ratin force 2or'in in media technolo y4 implicitly imposin politics on collecti#e conscio$sness4C 2hich concerns Bthe $nsta.le and non3disc$rsi#e 6$ality of the .ein FesseG of this in3.et2een FinterG as inter3esseC F=osterlin 25534 31G. -oth the comm$nitarian and anta onist approaches locate politics in a threshold .et2een sameness and differenceL the approaches differ in the direction each ta'es in re ard to this threshold and ho2 it dra2s the lines of distinction. My concept of the mediaclash85 descri.es the $ncertainty re ardin the interaction 2ith media in an intermedial realm4 partic$larly in terms of the implications re ardin one,s o2n role and stat$s in interactin 2ith these media. The mediaclash s$spends all prior mechanisms of si nification4 points to the $nderlyin contin ency and dissol#es all .o$ndaries 2ithin the intermedial realm into a threshold. This esta.lishes the political dimension4 the deconstr$ction of medial and si nificational specificity in a self3reflecti#e s$rpl$s of meanin . What -eltin notes for the specific case of ima es # a media also applies to intermediality in eneral!
*8 +ee also Chapter 14 section BIndi#id$al Corporeality and the Politics of )esthetics.C *9 )ltho$ h this a2areness enerally refers to di ital media4 my analyses demonstrate that it applies also to medial relations in eneral. 85 +ee :app 2556.
%2

The politics of ima es relies on their mediality4 as mediality $s$ally is controlled .y instit$tions and ser#es the interests of political po2er Fe#en 2hen it4 as 2e e9perience it today4 hides .ehind a seemin ly anonymo$s transmissionG. The politics of ima es needs a medi$m to t$rn an ima e into a pict$re. F-eltin 25554 355G
My reflections s$
est that 2hat -eltin descri.es as ,ima es, applies to phenomena in eneralL
,pict$re, there.y descri.es the interaction .et2een phenomenon and transportin medi$mL -eltin ,s ,politics, strictly spea'in refers to the politicity of si nification4 2hich4 once the inherent mediality .ecomes percei#a.le can prod$ce an intermedial threshold 2hich has the potential to disr$pt the distrib tion of the sensible. The same intermedial interplay can also .e demonstrated from the opposite4 political direction4 for e9ample4 in ;rnesto ?acla$,s concept of ,sedimented social practices,!
UWWe li#e in a 2orld of sedimented social practices. The moment of reacti#ation consists not in oin to an ori inal fo$ndin moment4 as in 7$sserl4 .$t to an ori inal contin ent decision thro$ h 2hich the social 2as instit$ted. This moment of the instit$tion of the social thro$ h contin ent decisions is 2hat I call ,the political,. F?acla$ as cited in Marchart 255*4 138G
In li ht of )rendt,s notion of h$man ,pl$rality4, 2hat lies at the core of the ,social practices, is the threshold of a distri.$tion of distinct3yet3e6$als4 of indi#id$al interest 2ithin the social inter$esse4 and of a contin ent alterity. The inc$rsion of the contin ency 2hich emer es from the appearance of the other not only 6$estions the social inter$esse .$t also e9tends to each indi#id$al interest 2hose stat$s it calls into 6$estion. If 2e then ret$rn to the initial 6$estion re ardin the concepts of ,intermediality, and ,politics, in the conte9t of theatre and performance4 the medial f$nction of performati#ity Fsee Chapter 24 section BThresholds -et2een Theatricality and Performati#ityCG pro.lematiEes the inherent contin ency on yet another le#el! the #ery ass$mption of the stat$s as ,)rt, posits a difference from all other modes of h$man interaction # a performati#ity. =ne co$ld say that in performin sameness theatre Fand4 e#en more radically4 performanceG claims difference4 or rather4 it claims difference .eca$se of performing sameness. In this sense it is not the specific content of a theatre performance that ma'es it ,political, .$t the distance it ass$mes 2ith respect to other ,realms., )s &anci<re p$ts it4
)rt is not political o2in to the messa es and feelin s that it con#eys on the state of social and political iss$es. _or is it political o2in to the 2ay it represents social str$ct$res4 conflicts or identities. It is political .y #irt$e of the #ery distance that it ta'es 2ith respect to those f$nctions. It is political insofar as it frames U...W a specific space3time sensori$m UV 2hichW defines 2ays of .ein to ether or .ein apart4 of .ein inside or o$tside4 in front of or in the middle of4 etc. It is political as its o2n practices shape forms of #isi.ility that reframe the 2ay in 2hich practices4 manners of .ein and modes of feelin and sayin are inter2o#en in a commonsense4 2hich means a Bsense of the commonC em.odied in a common sensori$m. F&anci<re 255%.4 n.p.G
%3
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance &anci<re .ases this approach on his historical analysis of #ario$s aesthetic re imes or distrib tions of the sensible Fsee &anci<re 19994 255%a4 255%.G4 2hich reflect attempts at re $latin and e#al$atin Fand th$s controllin G the difference in stat$s that ,)rt, claims4 and 2hich is as old as the concept of politics. It is important to 'eep in mind that 2hen &anci<re notes s$ch a politicity for ,)rt, he thin's primarily alon the lines of #is$al arts and paintin . If 2e apply &anci<re,s reflection to the realm of theatre4 its inherent corporeality and theatricality pro#ides theatre 2ith an e#en more hei htened politicity as its ,practices4 manners of .ein and modes of feelin and sayin , are e#en nearer to the ,social str$ct$res4 conflicts4 or identities, of a distrib tion of the sensible from 2hich it post$lates its distance. In this sense I 2ill contin$e to $se &anci<re,s term ,)rt, also in a theatrical conte9t to indicate its .road applica.ility4 .$t $r e the reader to 'eep in mind the special mode4 conditions and capa.ility of theatre. )t the same time4 most people 2ill a ree that not all )rt is ,political,L )rt4 in fact4 can .e p$rely entertainin beca se of its distance from the other realms. I propose that the ans2er to the 6$estion of 2hat ma'es )rt ,political, lies in its inherent mediality. More precisely4 )rt .ecomes ,political, 2hen intermediality .ecomes an epistemic condition to percei#in the interplay .et2een mediality and performati#ity. It .ecomes political 2ith respect to its o2n sameness4 as the lo ic of the police cannot a.sor. this parado9ical sameness3of3the3distinct. )s soon as the e#ent of politics has ta'en place4 its occ$rrence tri ers a rene otiation of the distrib tion of the sensible4 2hich incl$des the ne2 order .$t is no less contin ent4 >$st differentl3 so. In this sense it is the $ncertainty4 the stance of literal ,in3difference, and indifference that ma'es intermedial )rt ,political., )ny e9plicit claim to politics4 for instance .y addressin social iss$es4 essentially remains 2ithin the lo ic of a distrib tion of the sensible and can .e la.eled4 cate oriEed4 and controlled4 and th$s is >$st another manifestation of the police. Intermedial art is ,political, in the sense that it ma'es possi.le or e#en enco$ra es .$t also needs to a#oid ,politics, in order to attain politicity .$t also remain ,)rt., My definition of intermediality e9pands &anci<re,s concept of aesthetics to acco$nt for the intermedial relationship $nderlyin the interplay of aisthesis4 media4 and si nification. =ther forms of mediality4 s$ch as m$ltimediality or transmediality can .e said to maintain a set of predefined medial relationships 2hich can a.sor. any in'lin of a conscio$s mediality into ,r$les of aisthesis, that maintain a distrib tion of the sensible. This definition implies a politicity that is independent from any political ,ideolo y, and e#en departs from any clear ,meanin ., It also means that any notion of an appeal to a specific political action .ecomes impossi.le. The res$ltin am.i $ity can .e 6$ite fr$stratin for an a$dience Fsee for instance Chapter 2GL the fr$stration4 ho2e#er4 is an
%%
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance indicator of an acti#e en a ement .y spectators 2ho reco niEe the presence of meanin .$t are $ncertain a.o$t its stat$s.81 =ne co$ld say it enco$ra es a Fre3Gne otiation of the distrib tion of the sensible yet lea#es it open as to ho2 this ne otiation sho$ld ta'e place4 or 2hat its o$tcome sho$ld .e. The detailed analysis of fi#e performances 2hich follo2s has reatly contri.$ted to the theoretical reflections o$tlined a.o#e4 yet is also inconcei#a.le 2itho$t them. These chapters set o$t to e9plore the 2ay in 2hich these concepts can contri.$te to the si nification of these performances4 and4 con#ersely4 ho2 the performances can contri.$te to the concepts of intermediality and politics. _one of these performances claim to .e intermedial4 nor yet to .e ,political theatre,L in fact4 some of their creators mi ht 6$estion or e#en re>ect s$ch la.els alto ether. ;ach performance creates a $ni6$e medial realm 2ith a 2ide ran e of medial f$nctions4 and a partic$lar f$nction and place for the indi#id$al spectator4 a circ$mstance 2hich at the same time calls into 6$estion the distri.$tion of roles4 media4 and si nification. ;ach $ni6$e intermedial realm 2hich emer es 2ithin these performances also differs in politicity and comprises $ni6$e ratios .et2een the t2o opposite ,political, forces of inte ration and disr$ption4 of comm$nitarian and anta onist approaches as posited .y post3fo$ndationalism. "$rthermore4 all of them address the medial ,realm, as a lo.aliEed phenomenon4 as an e9perience transcendin national .o$ndaries and interF3Gests. ;ach performance there.y creates its o2n threshold .et2een performance and reality 2ith the potential to re3acti#ate the contin ency of ,sedimented social practices, and ma'e ne otia.le concepts 2hich seemed to possess a relati#e sta.ility. )t the same time4 they constit$te a ,precario$s )rt4, as it 2ere4 insofar as their $ni6$e politicity is al2ays in dan er of .ein s$.s$med .y the aesthetic r$les of the police4 2hich 2o$ld red$ce them to mere meta3politics. I ha#e or aniEed my analysis .y theatre companies as a .road indicator of a shared ,sense ratio, inherent in their methodolo y. ;9cept for the second chapter4 my analyses are .ased on my e9perience of the li#e performances a$ mented .y #ideo material o.tained from the companies themsel#es.82 While this transforms the o#erall si nification at least sli htly .y allo2in intermedial point of #ie2 alle#iates this pro.lem .y foc$sin on the enco$nter 2ith media4 ma'in
81 It sho$ld .e noted that this sit$ation does not e6$al chaos 2hich a.olishes all si nification. )nalo o$sly to the distinction .et2een post3fo$ndationalism and anti3fo$ndationalism Fsee Marchart 255*4 1%G4 there needs to .e some meanin 4 e#en tho$ h this meanin has to accept its o2n contin ency. Intermedial performances maintain cohesion4 2hich4 ho2e#er4 consists of constant attempts of independent4 hetero eneo$s elements to .rea' o$t of the homo eneo$s 2hole. 82 The second chapter is an e9ception insofar as it is .ased on Pa$l Poet,s doc$mentary : sl!nder ?a s 7 Bitte liebt sterreich and other secondary so$rces4 in line 2ith my ar $ment that the performance too' place in a lar er medial realm .eyond the immediate4 corporeal e#ent Fsee Chapter 2G.
comparison and le#el of analysis .eyond the e9act e9perience of an a$dience mem.er4 an
%5
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance it possi.le to incl$de this difference as an analytical tool. )fter all4 the point is not to recreate a performance4 nor its e9perience4 .$t to reflect on the implications of this e9perience for my theory. The 6$estion directed to2ards the prod$ctions does not address any concrete political messa e or ,political actions, they mi ht call for. &ather4 it loo's at the intermedial ,realm, they create4 2hat this ,realm4, its distri.$tions4 and si nification process means4 and 2hat its implications are4 for the intermedial ,realm, that constit$tes ,reality.,
Writing on Intermediality and Politics: Findings of the Individual Chapters

The intermedial field Fincl$din the intermedial processes on 2ritin a.o$t intermedialityG prod$ces definitions of media. Nens +chrMter4 B:isco$rses and Models of Intermediality4C 25114 6
In 2ritin my analyses I fo$nd that the distinct intermedial ,realm, of each performance e9tended into the process of 2ritin . =ne can s$mmariEe this .y paraphrasin +chrMter statement4 ,the intermedial field incl des the intermedial process on 2ritin a.o$t intermediality., I tried to en a e 2ith the performances on a le#el of e6$als4 of not imposin somethin onto them .$t of de#elopin somethin in interaction 2ith each performance. This has res$lted in the follo2in three chapters4 differin si nificantly in tone and content4 each introd$cin its o2n insi hts4 elements4 and style. )nd yet4 they form part of an or anic 2hole4 an intermedial ar $ment a.o$t intermediality4 as it 2ere4 2hich ro2s and e#ol#es thro$ h these chapters. )t the same time4 >$st as it is possi.le to consider &anci<re,s philosophy independently from )rendt,s4 the $ni6$e approach of each company ma'es it possi.le to read each chapter independently. "or this reason I ha#e incl$ded a section on a eneral methodolo y of the directors H prod$ction company in#ol#edL I ha#e omitted this section in the third chapter as the pro>ect 2as the res$lt of an international co3operation83 and th$s not necessarily representati#e of other 2or's .y the company. I 2o$ld li'e to ad#ise the reader not to read the chapters as st$dies of ,political theatre4, .$t rather as an e9ploration of the politicity of #ario$s forms of intermediality. This is e#ident in the 2ide ran e of medial f$nctions appearin in the performances4 and the analytical implications res$ltin from them. Theatre no more than prepares ro$nd for intermediality4 >$st as social H political ro$nd 2ill al2ays .e contin ent. There is no $ltimate ro$nd4 >$st as there it no $ltimate
83 I neo$s .e an as an artistic colla.oration in 1993 and 2as formally esta.lished in 199* 2ith a mandate to create Bm$ltimedia dance3.ased performances for the sta e4 installation performances in alternati#e spaces4 mo#ement3 .ased #ideos4 and cond$ct for$ms4 2or'shops and masterclassesC Fsee http!HH222.i neo$s.or .a$H thanatona$ts.htmlG. li# id skin is $ni6$e 2ithin this str$ct$re as the prod$ct of a cooperation 2ith the 2555 -heater der 'elt "esti#al4 -o.#an F-el i$mG and "ran's +oehnle F8ermanyG. It also to$red to se#eral co$ntries in a re#ised #ersion 2ith p$ppeteer -r$ce ;llison F]+)H-el i$mG.
%6
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance ,political theatre, that resol#es the contin ency once and for all. Chapter 1: Rimini Protokoll A Communitarian Approach to the Politics of Intermediality The performances .y &imini Proto'oll ha#e .een descri.ed as ,doc$mentary theatre4, insofar as they com.ine .io raphical elements of their performers and e9plicit references to iss$es that are commonly associated 2ith ,politics., The performers are almost e9cl$si#ely non3actors 2ho appear as themsel#es and tell their o2n stories as ,e9perts, of their o2n life. When approached from this point of #ie24 the performances appear to follo2 a tradition of ,political theatre, that incl$des aspects of collecti#e creation H cr.ation collecti,e Fe. .4 )riane Mno$ch'ineG4 8erman doc$mentary theatre of the 1965s4 and -recht,s epic theatre. )t the same time4 the performances do not esta.lish a ,dramatic, narrati#e4 especially not in the sense of a str$ct$re of e9position4 clima94 and concl$sion. They comprise an assem.la e of indi#id$al perspecti#es that co$ld .e called ,postdramatic, and ma'e the a$dience an acti#e co3creator of the performance .y sta in their dramat$r ical f$nction # a a$dience. -$t the performances do not simply .rea' the "o$rth Wall and call for a$dience participation on sta e in the form of playin a small role. Instead4 they appeal to and en a e the indi#id$al spectator,s $ni6$e perspecti#e to prod$ce si nification in interaction 2ith the mediality $nderlyin the theatrical performance. If one approaches the performances in this li ht4 as an intermedial ,realm4, principles of separation emer e that str$ct$rally per#ade the prod$ction on #ario$s le#els4 separatin performers4 a$dience4 and media. These separations interact 2ith the intermedial process and prod$ce thresholds of si nification that .ecome the loc$s and ori in of a politicity of the performances. These thresholds are $ni6$e to each performance4 2hich is 2hy the chapter is str$ct$red in three lar e sections4 each of 2hich foc$ses on one performance. Karl Marx: Das Kapital, Band 1 is an $n$s$al prod$ction for &imini Proto'oll insofar as it has a specific person and o.>ect as its theme. 8i#en the infl$ence of Das Kapital on the e#ents of the nineteenth and t2entieth cent$ries4 one mi ht e9pect the performance to follo2 the tradition of doc$mentary ,political theatre, partic$larly as its mise$en$sc%ne is 6$ite ,con#entionally, theatrical. Xet approachin the performance from an intermedial point of #ie2 ma'es it clear that Mar9,s hypotheses play only a s$.ordinate roleL the dramat$r ical core of the performance is the mediality of the .oo' # a .oo' 2hich starts to interact 2ith and re#eal other medial elements of the performance realm. Within its episodic str$ct$re4 the performance e#al$ates the $nderlyin mediality of Mar9,s hypotheses in terms of their infl$ence on indi#id$als Fincl$din the ,e9perts, and4 a fortiori4 each indi#id$al a$dience mem.erG in the t2enty3first cent$ry. %*
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance ]nderlyin Mar9,s concept of #al$e4 for instance4 emer es a medial f$nction that is
independent of any concrete meanin ! #al$e appears first and foremost as a tool for meas$rement4 a medial f$nction of ,translation, that ma'es phenomena compara.le. This realiEation calls attention to #ario$s forms of meas$rements in the conte9t of the performance that condition the si nification of perception. This shifts the foc$s from specific content to an inter3medial process affectin si nification in interaction 2ith a dynamic process of perception. In this sense4 &imini Proto'oll creates the performance ,realm, as a comm$nity of performers4 media4 and spectators4 2hile deconstr$ctin it .y emphasiEin mediality and the indi#id$al perspecti#e of each a$dience mem.er. This res$lts in a hetero eneity and s$rpl$s of si nification 2hich sets each indi#id$al h$man .ein apart4 and sta es a pl$rality of $ni6$e perspecti#es 2hich .rea' o$t of this $nity and enco$ra e the spectators to transpose their perception onto a .roader Fe9tra3theatricalG conte9t. This indi#id$aliEation and 6$asi3e6$ality of performers4 media4 and percei#ers4 in t$rn4 .ecomes the .asis for a ne2 inter$esse4 a comm$nity that is $nited not .y ,facts, .$t .y insi hts triggered .y the performance. &ather than any specific action4 iss$e4 or 6$ality4 ,politics, emer es as an acti,it3 that4 li'e intermedial si nification4 is literally in bet"een. )ltho$ h Mnemopark is similar in terms of eneral methodolo y4 it differs si nificantly in tone4 s$.>ect4 and mise$en$sc%ne. The performance comprises m$ltiple narrati#e le#els that re#ol#e aro$nd a model train landscape replicatin areas in +2itEerland .$t ser#in also as a sta e for a ,s$.3plot, 2hich mer es facts a.o$t a lo.aliEed en#ironment 2ith the #irt$al ,realm, created in and .y -olly2ood mo#ies. While these facts seem o#ertly ,political4, approachin the technico3medial set$p from an intermedial perspecti#e re#eals another dimension! the reen3screen4 cameras4 so$nd effects4 and pro>ection screen prod$ce a life3siEe threshold .et2een a model4 #irt$al3fictional ,realm4, and the corporeal performance ,reality., The model landscape .ecomes an intermedial sim lacr m 2hich is .oth e6$al and different4 that is4 it attains a medial am.i $ity 2hich affects perception. The intermedial realm of Mnemopark creates a threshold .et2een model scale and ,realityL, li#e4 corporeal and mediatiEedL past Fmemory4 e9perience of ,flash3.ac'3moments,G4 present FperformanceG4 and f$t$re Fcollapse of ,flash3.ac's,G. This threshold ind$ces .rea's in perception that re#eal the contin ency of spatio3temporal perception in an intermedial en#ironmentL the #ery ass$mption of a ,self3e#idence, of ,facts, re#eals their contin ency and e9poses the distrib tion of the sensible. The spectator finds him3 or herself in the pec$liar position of ha#in to find a 2ay thro$ h the episodic str$ct$re4 of .ein forced to ta'e a stance 2hen .ein directly referred to4 yet
%8
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance sim$ltaneo$sly .ein immo.iliEed in the role of an a$dience. The spectator is e9posed to a ,narcotic, Fsee Mc?$han 25514 %5G medial en#ironment that a.sor.s the h$man .ein in its medial f$nction. This medial force c$lminates in a scene in 2hich one of the e9perts is trapped in a .lea' and empty f$t$re4 in 2hich the model landscape is no lon er a model of .$t a model for ,reality4, a -a$drillardian sim lation Fsee -a$drillard 19*8G. The fictional3#irt$al ,s$.3plot, affirms the reach of lo.al media in per#asi#ely conditionin perception on a lo.al scale. )nd yet4 it also .ecomes clear that they can create a s$rpl$s of si nification that is more than the s$m of its constit$tin elements and reflects its o2n stat$s4 condition4 and contin ency in li ht of the lar er medial ,o$tside., This res$lts in an intermedial process of spatial and temporal relationships that points to a transformation of ,reality, into an ,en#ironment, conditioned .y media. ) :ele$Eean fold Fsee :ele$Ee 25554 125G emer es4 an o$tside that is located at the inside and introd$ces a critical perspecti#e that offers a chance for politiciEation .y re3acti#atin BossifiedC FMarchart 255*4 139G conditions and con#entions. The performance assem.les ,e9perts4, media4 and ,spectators4, in an intermedial en#ironment 2hich dissol#es this $nity into thresholds of its constit$ents4 and attains a politicity that concerns the challen es an inter homines esse faces in a time of lo.ally operatin media. Cargo Sofia oes e#en f$rther in intermedially dissol#in theatrical spaces and si nification into thresholds 2hen it in#ites the a$dience to >oin the dri#ers on a road trip from +ofia to the act$al location of the performance. The performance cle#erly $ses mediality to ,pro>ect, another si nification on real landmar's and th$s creates a realm that is sit$ated .et2een fiction and reality. )ltho$ h the performance physically separates a$dience and performers4 this separation f$nctions as a parado9ical threshold .et2een the t2o realms. -y t$rnin the a$dience into car o4 the performance ind$ces .rea's in perception that .ypass medial constraints and open $p for disc$ssion f$ndamental concepts and tenets of o$r contemporary cons$mer societies. The intermedial realm e9poses mediality as .oth separatin and connectin #ario$s spheres of perception4 t$rnin lo.al and local into a threshold. It also ne2 ,political, demarcations and the distinction .et2een
hi hli hts an anthropomorphic dimension of media affect o$r ,2ay of life, .y creatin possi.ilities on a technical le#el Fe. .4 openin ne2 spaces4 a.ilities4 e9pandin senses4 etc.G.
While Mar9 .elie#ed that technolo y 2o$ld free man from la.or Fsee )rendt 19984 %3ff4 15%G4 Cargo Sofia indicates that e#ery ,ne2 freedom, comes at a cost! the 8P+ ill$strates a rad$al and #ol$ntarily s$rrenderin of pri#acy to an increasin need3to3'no2 of a political system4 alon 2ith the contin ency in the interplay and interdependence .et2een freedom4 e6$ality4 and
%9
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance separation. It .ecomes clear that political str$ct$res are neither the so$rce of freedom nor the so$rce of chan e4 .$t rather the effect of .oth. )t the same time4 freedom and politics do not simply #anish 2ith a re ime chan e4 .$t form a dynamic and interdependent relationship4 2hose contin ent delimitation shifts 2ith any rene otiation and forms ne2 separations. In this li ht Cargo Sofia sta es ho2 lo.ally operatin media s$.>ect the indi#id$al to an e6$ality that can .e as li.eratin as it can .e s$ppressi#e4 and there.y em.odies and performs the contin ency at the core of ,the political., Con#ersely4 the f$ndamental sameness can also .ecome a means to empo2er the indi#id$al to disr$pt the comple9 medial machinery .y positin alterity. Theatre t$rns into a comm$nitarian intermedial ,realm, that is located at a threshold .et2een ,reality, and ,theatricality, and has the a.ility to ind$ce mediaclashes 2hich re#eal and rene otiate separations and si nification. Chapter : Christoph Schlingensief!s !"itte lie#t $sterreich erste europ%ische &oalitions'oche! ( Antagonism) Provocation) and the Contingency of an Intermedial Performance +chlin ensief,s ,)'tion, ta'es the reflections to a more eneral le#el of performati#ity. It 2as a $ni6$e e#ent 2hose str$ct$re ma'es it #ery clear that any repetition 2o$ld ha#e >eopardiEed its inte rity. It also differs in terms of its o#erall reception4 as a politicity 2hich concerned a reflection on the ,c$rrent state of the 2orld, 2as 6$ite apparent to most spectators. In fact4 the ,)'tion, so effecti#ely 6$estioned the .o$ndaries of a$tonomo$s ,)rt, that it .ecame an insepara.le part of the realm constit$tin the e#ents it addressed. The medial mechanisms 2ere there.y 6$ite ,con#entional4, .$t interacted 2ith the mediality of theatricality8% and formed an intermedial realm that deconstr$cted the si nification process so effecti#ely that all con#entional forms of interactin 2ith media failed. In this sense4 its intermediality is both apparent and opa6$e4 do$.lin the mise$ en$sc%ne 2hich consists of a Big Brother scenario aro$nd an o.tr$si#ely ,isible deportation camp for e6$ally o.tr$si#ely in,isible asyl$m see'ers. The performance realm deconstr$cts the theatrical aEe and creates an am.i $ity concernin the distri.$tion of roles4 pointin to an inherent mediality 2hich operates at the core of the si nification process and ma'es intermedial relations possi.le. This res$lts in 2hat +chlin ensief compares to a mirror for ,self3pro#ocation4, a f$nction 2hich $ndermines the mechanism of performati#ity that 2o$ld allo2 control o#er si nification. ;#ery.ody that comes in contact 2ith the e#ent4 e#en in a form of mediation4 .ecomes a participant
8% In fact4 +chlin ensief created a threshold .et2een theatricality and performati#ity as the ,a$dience, Fincl$din forei n diplomatsG 2as $ncertain a.o$t the stat$s of the e#ents4 2hich res$lted in attempts to e9ternally ,clarify, the stat$s4 as 2ell as in act$al4 ,real, e#ents4 incl$din attac's on the performers and the performance.
55
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance 2ho faces a mirrorin s$rface 2hich constantly confronts oneself 2ith the ima e of seein others percei#e oneself. )ny attempt of a .eholder to ta'e a stance in order to separate him3 or herself from the performance .ac'fires and res$lts in an e#en more intricate in#ol#ement. )s a conse6$ence4 the storyline depends entirely on the a$dience3as3participant. While this str$ct$re has .een associated 2ith postdramatic performance Fsee -alme 2515G4 the chapter sho2s that on its o2n this concept is ins$fficient to capt$re the intricacies emer in from intermediality. In en a in and internaliEin ,e9ternal, media Fe. .4 ne2spapersG4 the intermedial realm e9tends .eyond the ,immediate, conte9t and $ndermines any distinction .et2een inside and o$tside Fe. .4 in endo2in ,real, acts 2ith theatricality4 2hile ,fictional, elements attain a certain ,reality,G. The dramat$r y of the ,)'tion, there.y creates a sit$ation that resem.les 2hat :ele$Ee calls a fold4 2hich differs from the folds of &imini Proto'oll insofar as the stat$s of the ,)'tion, as )rt .ecomes e9tremely contentio$s. It .ecomes a ,space of e9ception, that sta es the social system as a .iopolitical panopticon4 and 2hose #ery e9istence transcends metapolitics .y callin attention to the fact that there is $ltimately nothin apart from con#ention that distin $ishes the modes of one sphere from the other. This deconstr$cted not only the si nification process .$t also the protecti#e f$nction of ,)rt, and e9posed the ,)'tion, to the radical force of reality 2hich manifested itself in the form of physical attac's Fincl$din arson and acid attac'sG4 attempts to free the inmates4 and attempts to control the ,)'tion, on a ,political, le#el. The chapter e#al$ates the notion of ,political theatre, 2ithin the conte9t of the performance4 as +chlin ensief completely .rea's do2n the si nifyin system and e9plicitly re>ects any therape$tic aspect to the performance. +chlin ensief does not .elie#e in any ,political chan e, as a direct res$lt of ,)rt, and acti#ely resists attempts to inte rate its si nification 2ithin the lo ic of the pre3e9istin social ro$nd. The simple declaration that 2hat is happenin ro$ndin is ,)rt, sta es the H re3 ro$ndin a enco$nter .et2een anta onist and comm$nitarian mechanisms in la.elin
contin ency at the heart of the +ocial and raises the 6$estion of 2ho determines s$ch a stat$s4 2hile any attempt to control this stat$s as an e9ample of censorship. This res$lts in the impossi.ility of ta'in any definite stance in an en#ironment in 2hich all relations are constantly shiftin L it also indicates that political ,er$ptions, are e9tremely limited in their temporality. ,Politics, .ecomes an e#ent that clashes its o2n contin ency 2ith the ro$ndlessness of the +ocial and interr$pts the contin$ity of ,the political, .y co$nterposin another ro$nd. This means that ,politics, cannot .e repeated4 and its occ$rrence and o$tcome is $npredicta.le. While many participants e9pressed a desire to repeat the ,)'tion, in other places and conte9ts4 the #ery repeata.ility 2o$ld
51
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance retroacti#ely affirm its stat$s as ,)rt4, and there.y $ndermine its politicity. Chapter *: liquid skin Intermedial Thresholds of the ,uman "eing) Technology) and -edia li# id skin consists of a 2onderf$lly lyrical4 m$lti3str$ct$ral process of a.stract4 intermedial si nification 2hich com.ines dance4 p$ppets4 #ideo pro>ections4 and an ela.orate so$ndscape. The #is$al le#el of si nification there.y en a es 2ith the comple9 spatio3temporal so$ndscape4 rene otiatin ima es and actions on sta e and transformin their meanin . ;ach element affirms its independent medial contri.$tion and .rin s to attention ,discontin$ities, 2ithin a non3hierarchical4 non3a.sol$te4 synaesthetic4 $npredicta.le4 and indi#id$al intermedial perception. =f partic$lar importance to this process is dancer Names C$mmin ham,s paralyEed left arm 2hich enhances this process .y introd$cin an element of alterity. This res$lts in a pl$rality of possi.le str$ct$ral principles 2hich occ$r sim$ltaneo$sly4 and each of 2hich contri.$tes si nification to the performance 2hile maintainin a de ree of independence. +e#eral moments that resem.le ,recapit$lations, in#ol#e each indi#id$al spectator as an acti#e co3creator of the performance in making sense4 and i#e this process an essentially spiral str$ct$re. In li ht of the conspic$o$s a.sence of lan $a e4 one can say that the performance 6$estions the medial stat$s of lan $a e as somethin lyrical4 partic$larly in its relationship 2ith other4 e6$ally lyrical media that are distin $isha.le e#en tho$ h their .o$ndaries ,li6$ify, into an intermedial 2hole. The intermedial realm of dissol#in .o$ndaries also e9tends to the h$man .ein 4 2hose s'in4 as the title s$ ests4 li6$ifies and prod$ces a threshold .et2een h$man .ein 4 mediality4 and .$t a technolo y. This threshold points to an ethico3political dimension! is identity nothin
threshold4 an am.i $ityA It is symptomatic of this intermedial realm that there is no lon er a difference contained .y e6$ality4 .$t rather an am.i $ity pertainin to identity 2hich creates an $nresol#a.le tension and t$rns identity into a political condition. ) medial .iopolitics emer es that attempts to normaliEe the h$man .ody in its medial f$nction and create a ne2 type of f$nctional e6$ality that a.olishes h$man indi#id$ality. The initial c$riosity of the dancer faces an increasin a ression from the p$ppets and t$rns into a .attle .et2een forces of inte ration and forces of resistance. The medial en#ironment .ecomes associated 2ith a manip$lati#e po2er Fe. .4 6$ite literally manip$latin the paralyEed armG that assem.les a pl$rality of normali=ed h$man .ein s as its distrib tion of the sensible4 and 2hose indi#id$ality it reco niEes only medially. Politics no lon er concerns primarily h$man interaction .$t the self3affirmation of the indi#id$al in the face of an e#er3encroachin medial en#ironment. In other 2ords4 the contin ency at the core of this politics is not a #ariation of an inter$homines$esse .$t the .o$ndaries of identity4 2hich determines 2hether 52
Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance any notion of an ,inter, can e#en .e maintained. Thresholds .et2een h$man .ein and media 6$estion the mode and location of their separation in the post3fo$ndational tradition. ;ach a$dience mem.er f$lfills a d$al role as indi#id$al and representati#e of an oppressi#e medial en#ironment that threatens to replace the +ocial and a.olish indi#id$ality. The confrontation 2ith this d$ality hei htens the tension .et2een the +elf and its medial en#ironment and introd$ces self3refle9i#ity4 2hich has si nificant effects on the theatrical en#ironment. li# id skin str$ct$rally do$.les the enco$nter .et2een t2o contradictory dynamicsL on the one hand it maintains the aesthetic stat$s of theatre4 2hile4 on the other hand4 the mediality on 2hich this stat$s is fo$nded t$rns the #ery distinction into a threshold. The .ody no lon er ,em.odies, a character .$t prod$ces a stream of ima es 2hose si nification it refers to the medial and percepti#e process. These ima es .lend into each other in a constant transformation of appearance and si nification4 2hich pro#ides them 2ith a fl$idity that almost ma'e them seem ali#e. Theatrical space dissol#es into a hetero eneity4 into a threshold .et2een li#e and mediatiEed4 corporeality and mediality4 space as a ,container, and as FaestheticG separation. The performance 2ith its open3ended str$ct$re and the stri'in reappearance of the corporeal h$man .ody at the end of the performance4 ma'es concei#a.le that the $ltimate conse6$ence of this intermedial .iopolitics is a separation of h$man mediality from the .ody4 an e9istence that is no lon er limited .y physical constraints. In my analysis I compare this state to an ,intermedial promise of immortality, in 2hich the medial en#ironment entirely replaces the .ody and pro#ides identity 2ith a ,medial life., )t the same time4 the rec$rrin inc$rsions of corporeality in li# id skin and the alterity introd$ced .y the dancer,s disa.ility enco$ra e a critical stance to2ards a p$rely ne ati#e o$tloo' re ardin the effects of media. In this li ht the disa.ility ta'es on a representati#e f$nction of h$man $ni6$eness4 a manifestation of the possi.ility of .rea'in thro$ h the oppressi#e norm4 a ,disHa.ility, 2hich s$ddenly .ecomes an ,a.ility, to affirm $ni6$eness. If 2e apply this to the post3fo$ndational ,models, of politics4 a ratio of comm$nitarian and anta onist elements emer es 2hich differs from the other performances! the efforts of .rea'in o$t of an e9istin order to a#oid the normati#e aesthetic mechanisms FpoliceG of a medial en#ironment are rooted in a &anci<rean anta onism4 .$t also re3introd$ce an element of the )rendtian comm$nitarian political process of indi#id$ality and de.ate. 8i#en the a.stract mode of comm$nication4 ho2e#er4 the $ltimate ,empo2erment, of indi#id$ality is that any concl$sion remains to .e made .y each indi#id$al spectator.
53

Intermediality and Politics Theatre and Performance

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Intermediality and Politics Theatre and Performance

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Downloaded from UvA-DARE, the institutional repository of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) http://dare.uva.

503072 Introduction: Intermediality and politics in theatre and performance

FULL BIBLIOGRAPHIC DETAILS: http://dare.uva.nl/record/459124

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)

Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance

Introdu)tion* Intermediality and Politi)s in T(eatre and Performan)e

terms of the political si nification of a performance from a post3fo$ndational perspecti#e.

Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance

The Concept of Media

Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance

Intermediality and Theatre31

Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance

Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance

Intermediality and Politics

Introd$ction! Intermediality and Politics in Theatre and Performance

Writing on Intermediality and Politics: Findings of the Individual Chapters

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen