The Archaeology of Liveness
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Archaeology of Liveness Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Dries Vandorpe, MSc Graduate Program in Theatre The Ohio State University 2015 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Stratos E. Constantinidis, Advisor Dr. Joseph E. Brandesky Dr. Ana Elena Puga Copyright by Dries Vandorpe 2015 ABSTRACT This dissertation investigates the history of semantic changes that the concept and category of “liveness” had to undergo when it was pressed into service by scholars and professionals in Theatre Studies, Broadcast Studies and Performance Studies. It queries the oppositional relationship between “live” and “recorded;” it describes how, and under what circumstances “live” (as a time-based concept) counters prevailing theories about technologically-mediated forms of performance; and it explains why “live” (as a polar opposite of “technologically-mediated” performance) in theatre needs to abandoned. ii To Melinda iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to Hilde Brutsaert, my mother, for her unremitting support and unmitigated love. In addition, I would like to express my deep gratitude to Dr. Stratos Constantinidis. His strong and conscientious weekly guidance was instrumental to the writing of every chapter of this dissertation project. I also wish to thank Dr. Joseph Brandesky for his insightful suggestions and encouraging comments, and Dr. Ana Elena Puga for her constructive criticism. Finally, I must thank Abdi Abdirahim, Jennifer Acan, Aubrey Beltran, Michael Carrozzo, Michelle Cohen, Carolyn A. Elerding, Dr. Jon Erickson, Janice Jung, Melinda McClimans, Patricia Palominos-Dunaeff, Ken Petri, Dr. Shilarna Stokes, and Blake Wilder for their inquisitive questions that helped me refine and strengthen the ideas in this dissertation. Special mentions go to Tom and Judi McClimans. iv VITA 1991........................................Humaniora St.-Barbaracollege S.J. (Belgium: Ghent) 1992 to 1998 ..........................Photography, Graphic Arts, Film, Video and Television Production (Belgium: Ghent, Genk) 1995 to 2003 .........................AV-Producer, Director, Video Editor, and Camera Operator in Corporate Movie-Production and Radio- and Television Advertising (self-employed) 2000........................................Post-Graduaat in Multimedia Technologies en Virtuele Realiteit (Groep-T, Belgium: Leuven) 2000 to 2001 .........................Editor-in-Chief and Webmaster of AV-Industrie at Making Magazines (Belgium: Ghent) 2001-2003 ..............................MA in Theatre, Film and Television Studies, University of Wales at Aberystwyth (distinction) (Wales, UK) 2004-2005 ..............................MSc in Computing, University of Teesside (England, UK: Middlesborough) 2005 to 2006 ..........................DigitalCity Fellowship, University of Teesside (England, UK: Middlesborough) 2005 to 2007 ..........................Company Owner: Software-development (England, UK: Middlesborough) 2008 to 2011 ..........................Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Theatre, The Ohio State University (Columbus: USA) Field of Study Major Field: Theatre v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iv Vita.......................................................................................................................................v List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures.................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................1 The Problem of Hybridization ......................................................................................1 Thesis Statement and Methodology............................................................................17 Chapter Division.........................................................................................................39 Chapter 2: Review and Critique of the Existing Literature ...............................................41 A. The Study of Hybridization in Broadcasting .........................................................43 B. The Study of Hybridization in Theatre and Performance ......................................56 The Ontology Theorists.....................................................................................59 The ‘Contingency Theory’ Group.....................................................................71 The ‘Intermedial Performance Analysis’ Group.............................................106 The ‘Performance-as-Cultural Memory’ Group .............................................113 The ‘Cognitive Turn’ Group ...........................................................................117 “Presence” as the Philosopher’s Stone............................................................123 Remediation Theorists ....................................................................................125 vi C. Synthesis ..............................................................................................................128 Chapter 3: The Taxonomic Principles .............................................................................132 A. Why is ‘Live Performance’ not Live? .................................................................132 The Search for the Native Meaning of the Word “Live” and Why it Matters132 Philip Auslander and the Historicity of “Live”...............................................135 A Theory of Semantic Traversal .....................................................................155 The Temporal Concept of “Live” Acquires a Spatiotemporal Meaning.........161 Concept vs. Term ............................................................................................170 B. Why is ‘Immediate Performance’ not Immediate? ..............................................180 The Sense of Immediacy.................................................................................180 The Performer and the Process of Recording .................................................185 Salva Veritate..................................................................................................189 Pro Forma........................................................................................................191 Synthesis.. .......................................................................................................193 Chapter 4: Conclusion......................................................................................................196 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................206 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Kowzan’s “Thirteen Basic Sign Systems” (1968).............................................. 31 Table 2. Steve Wurtzler classifies performance events according to the spatial and the temporal proximity of the spectators to the “event.” ..................................... 136 Table 3. Auslander’s “Historical Development of the Concept of Liveness.” ............... 169 Table 4. Ebrahimian maps the differences between theatre and film. ............................ 183 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Schechner’s performance continuum. ................................................................. 3 Figure 2. The classification model that systemizes communicatory practices. .................. 5 Figure 3. The subtle dichotomy “live/recorded” differentiates ‘technologically-mediated performance that is live’ from ‘technologically-mediated performance that is recorded.’ ........................................................................................................... 5 Figure 4. Hybrids on stage: LIVE PERFORMANCE (A) is fused with pre-recorded video (B). ............................................................................................................................ 8 Figure 5. Hybrids on television: A live transmission (A) integrates pre-written scripts (B). ............................................................................................................................ 8 Figure 6. Hybrids on stage: LIVE PERFORMANCE (A) and film projection (B). ................. 11 Figure 7. Big Art Group fuses LIVE PERFORMANCE and video which is produced live on stage.................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 8. Hotel Modern fuses LIVE PERFORMANCE and ‘video which is produced live on stage.................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 9. A lip-synch performance fuses live choreography (A) with pre-recorded sound (B). ................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 10. LIVE PERFORMANCE (A) fused with technologically-mediated sound that is not pre-recorded (i.e, amplified) (E). ..................................................................... 57 Figure 11. LIVE PERFORMANCE (A) fused with technologically-mediated video that