Radical Intimacy: Ontroerend Goed Meets<i>The Emancipated Spectator</i>

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes Barbara Johnson, A World of Difference (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987), p. 16. The Smile off Your Face premiered in 2003, and has been touring ever since, achieving its more or less definite form after about three years. See <http://www.ontroerendgoed.be> [accessed 5 July 2011]. See, for instance, Helen Freshwater, Theatre & Audiences (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009); Modes of Spectating, ed. by Alison Oddey and Christine White (Bristol: Intellect, 2009); Dennis Kennedy, The Spectator and the Spectacle: Audiences in Modernity and Postmodernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009). Jacques Rancière, The Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2009), p. 12. See Mieke Bal, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002), pp. 286–323. Simon O'Sullivan, Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought beyond Representation (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006). Alan Read, Theatre, Intimacy and Engagement: The Last Human Venue (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008). Interview by the author, ‘Masseurs van de fantasie’, Theaterdramaturgie.Bank (2009), <http://ltd.library.uu.nl/doc/771/Interview_Ontroerend_Goed.pdf> [accessed 5 July 2011]. Thanks are due to the Utrecht School of the Arts, Lectoraat Theatrale Maakprocessen, for facilitating the research on Ontroerend Goed. Joyce McMillan, ‘The Smile off Your Face’, The Scotsman, 17 August 2008 www.ontroerendgoed.be [accessed 8 July 2012]. See Paul Patton, Deleuze: A Critical Reader, ed. by Paul Patton (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1996), p. 9. Jeroen Versteele, ‘Intiem theater?’, Etcetera, 94 (2004), 30–31. Karen J. Prager, The Psychology of Intimacy (New York: The Guilford Press, 1995), pp. 21–44. Ibid., p. 22. Joeri de Smet, ‘Tussen afgewerkte act en geïmproviseerd gesprek’, Etcetera, 94 (2004), 32–34. Pieter T'Jonck, ‘Intimiteit, intimidatie’, Etcetera, 98 (2005), 51–59. Sennett quoted in Read, Theatre, Intimacy and Engagement, p. 20. Helen Paris, ‘Too Close for Comfort: One to One Performance’, in Performance and Place, ed. by Leslie Hill and Helen Paris (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 179–91; Rachel Zerihan, ‘One to One Performance’, Live Art Development Agency (2009), <http://www.thisisliveart.co.uk> [accessed 3 July 2011]. Heiner Goebbels, ‘Was wir nicht sehen, seht uns an’, in Experten des Alltags: Das Theater von Rimini Protokoll, ed. by Miriam Dreysse and Florian Malzacher (Berlin: Alexander Verlag, 2007), p. 123. Hans-Thies Lehmann, Postdramatic Theatre, trans. by Karen Jürs-Munby (London & New York: Routledge, 2006), p. 185. Lehmann relates this response-ability to the notion of politics of perception, which will be addressed later in this essay. Rancière, The Emancipated Spectator, p. 11. Ibid., p. 15. Ibid., p. 12. Ibid., p. 17. Rancière refers to an earlier book, The Ignorant Schoolmaster. Jacques Rancière, The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). He consequently names the performer and teacher ‘he’ and the spectator and ignoramus as ‘she’, without commentary. It probably serves to underline the distribution of the sensible, and the emancipated spectator is a ‘she’ who is active; but the initial division is not entirely felicitous in my view. Baz Kershaw, The Radical in Performance: Between Brecht and Baudrillard (London: Routledge, 1999), pp. 187–216. Ibid. p. 213. Kershaw relates these connections to the ecology of performance. Maaike Bleeker, Visuality in the Theatre: The Locus of Looking (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), pp. 1–18. Rancière's argument of independent interpretation is actually reminiscent of Erika Fischer-Lichte's account of the creative spectator, in ‘The Discovery of the Spectator’, in The Show and the Gaze of Theatre (Iowa: University of Iowa Press, 1997), pp. 41–60. Bleeker, Visuality, pp. 174–77. Stephen Di Benedetto, The Provocation of the Senses in Contemporary Theatre (London and New York: Routledge, 2010), pp. 167–68. The relation between corporeal or embodied perception and attentiveness is also mentioned by Bleeker, and in Rachel Fencham, To Watch Theatre: Essays on Genre and Corporeality (Brussels: Peter Lang, 2009), p. 23. The term ‘parallax view’ is coined by Slavoj Žižek, and refers to a slight change of perspective that produces a change in the constitution of the observed object. See Read, Theatre, Intimacy and Engagement, pp. 16–17. Read, Theatre, Intimacy and Engagement, pp. 1–29. Ibid., pp. 37–43. Joaquim Negreiros, ‘Democracy and Intimacy: Contrasting Views on a Controversial Connection’, Inter-Disciplinary.Net (2010), <http://www.inter-disciplinary.net> [accessed 8 July 2011].

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.