Primus Theatre: Establishing an Alternative Model

PRIMUS THEATRE: ESTABLISHING AN ALTERNATIVE MODEL FOR CREATING THEATRE IN ENGLISH CANADA by Claire Borody A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Centre for Study of Drama University of Toronto Copyright © by Claire Borody 2009 Abstract Primus Theatre: Establishing an Alternative Model for Creating Theatre in English Canada Claire Borody Doctor of Philosophy 2009 Graduate Centre for Study of Drama University of Toronto This study of Primus Theatre is evidence of many things. First and foremost it is a long overdue print recognition of Primus Theatre’s substantial artistic accomplishments and its important contribution to the development of theatre-making in English-speaking Canada. In examining the various factors contributing to the founding of the theatre and the extremely challenging conditions in which company members functioned over the years, it remains truly remarkable that Primus Theatre existed at all. Three central determinations emerge from the examination of Primus Theatre’s practice. The theatre truly was a pioneering venture in English Canada. Company members established an “as-if-permanent” ensemble that engaged in the creation of original performance work drawn from research that emerged from their regular training practice. The company adopted a theatre-making practice generated by the Odin Theatre in Denmark and then adapted it to vastly different cultural and fiscal contexts. It can also be determined that the origins of the company are inextricably bound to Richard Fowler’s personal artistic journey. His strong sense of the creative and communal potential for theatre not only fuelled his own creative journey but also inspired National Theatre School students to launch their own acts of courage. ii The third determination arising from this study is that, while all aspects of Primus Theatre’s creative practice can be linked to that of the Odin Theatre, this relationship can most accurately be described as an imprinting, rather than an extension, of Odin Theatre practices. The conscious and unconscious permutations and advancement of the practice, driven by the technical and creative needs and interests of the young Canadian company and deeply affected by substantial financial hardships and creative setbacks, forced Primus to emerge as a unique theatre entity developing from a particular and identifiable genealogy. This study of the establishment of Primus Theatre also provides evidence that the substantial hardships faced by company members did not dissuade them from advancing their practice of continued exploration of form and expression. The study provides evidence not only of Primus Theatre’s substantial body of creative work but also of its substantial pedagogical efforts. Subsequently, a new generation of theatre artists has been inspired and trained in this alternative theatre-making model, and they are making their own contributions to the continued redefinition of theatre in English Canada. iii Thanks and Acknowledgements The journey to this end has been a long and difficult one and would not have been possible without the support of a number of people that I have had the great fortune to know. I would like to thank my colleague and friend Per Brask for his clear-sighted view of the project and his unwavering support. Without this, the thesis may not have been finished. Thank-you to Pia Kleber for the support and encouragement in the early stages of the project. Thank-you to former Primus Theatre members, Richard Clarkin, Sean Dixon, Donald Kitt, Tannis Kowalchuk, Stephen Lawson, Karin Randoja, Ker Wells and Artistic Director Richard Fowler for their generosity with their time and personal documentation of the Primus experience. In particular, to Sean for incredible note-keeping and Tannis and Ker for answering endless questions. I would also like to thank those whose work has been inspired by Primus for taking time to answer questions and queries. In particular Maiko Bae Yamamoto and James Long from Theatre Replacement. I thank my colleagues at the University of Winnipeg and my family and friends for being supportive and understanding when the going got rough. Finally, I would like to dedicate this thesis to my parents Audrey and Mel Borody without whom the drive to seek knowledge may never have been ignited and the tenacity to accomplish this project would never have been nurtured. iv Table of Contents Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 Chapter One: Primus Theatre in Context.........................................................................14 Chapter Two: Richard Fowler’s Artistic Journey and the Odin Theatre ........................48 Chapter Three: Training and Dramaturgical Practices..................................................123 Chapter Four: Alkoremmi..............................................................................................181 Chapter Five: Performance Creation and Pedagogy......................................................262 Chapter Six: Primus Theatre and the Ripple Effect.......................................................325 Works Cited .....................................................................................................................378 v Introduction In July 1989 Primus Theatre—five graduates of the National Theatre School under the direction of Richard Fowler, an actor with the Odin Theatre in Denmark—premiered Dog Day at the Winnipeg Fringe Festival. The young company stunned audience members and critics alike with what CBC critic Robert Enright described as an “incredibly intense and incredibly well disciplined” performance and “one of the most radical pieces [. .] at the Fringe Festival” (24 Hours, 19 July 1989). Jacqui Good of CBC Radio claimed that it was a performance to be understood emotionally, rather than intellectually, and one that continued to resonate long after it had ended (CBC Information Radio, 19 July 1989). Karen Crossley of the Winnipeg Sun described the performance as a “fascinating, beautifully acted piece to be felt rather than understood” (Winnipeg Sun, 20 July 1989). She also suggested that spectators would feel the full impact of the performance after they left the theatre. Subsequent performances of the piece garnered similar responses in centres across the country. Kate Zimmerman claimed that Dog Day possessed “an alluring hallucinogenic quality” (Calgary Herald, 5 Aug. 1989). Randal McIlroy viewed the non-linear structure of the piece as “at once unabashedly intellectual and vehemently physical” (Winnipeg Free Press, 11 Aug. 1989). Even those who clearly disliked the performance aesthetic appeared to be engaged by it. Irene D’Souza described it as an “often violent, grotesque and outrageous” combination of “rituals, sounds, gestures, and stylized actions” catering to “a very select audience, those who prefer their senses and sensibilities to be assaulted rather than assuaged” (Circuit, 31 Aug. 1989). This selected critical response indicates several things about Primus Theatre’s first 1 2 performance work. On a fundamental level it appears that the world created by Dog Day provided the spectator with an experience located “beyond the normal equations necessary for identification, [in which] the story is merely the instrument which keeps us in the flow of time” (“Dilating the Body” 209).1 As a result critics and reviewers were left to struggle with descriptions of their reactions to the performance. Responses to the work were often registered as visceral reactions to an incident or experience, rather than as intellectual or empathetic reactions to a play. According to Bruce Wilshire, theatre is a mode of discovery that explores the threads of what is implicit and buried in this world, and pulls them into a compressed and acknowledgeable pattern before us in its “world”. Theatre discovers meaning, and its peculiar detachment reveals our involvement. (Role Playing and Identity xiv) The selected commentary suggests that Dog Day did not simply present discovered or recovered truths but addressed the act of uncovering or recovering new or misplaced meaning and enabled the audience to share in that experience. The commentary indicates a disturbance and exposure of that which lies below the surface, a glimpse of something dark and mysterious, which for some was engaging and for others disturbing. The critical response also illustrates that the performance text2 was structured in an “open” manner, which allowed for a wide range in the reading of arranged images and text and in the interpretation of these visual and aural patterns. The commonality that can be drawn from these variations in critical response is that Dog Day rattled spectators out of complacency wherever it was performed. Primus Theatre was originally organized as a temporary arrangement directed at the completion of a work-in-progress begun at the National Theatre School. During this 1 Per Brask’s description is directed at Primus Theatre’s second performance piece, Alkoremmi, but is equally true of Dog Day and other performance works created by the company. 2 The use of the term “performance text” for purposes of this study is based on Kier Elam’s description of the performance text as “the resulting structure [of theatrical discourse] articulated in space and time (44). The implication is that all ingredients used in the construction of a mise en scene contribute equally to

Load more