7RXFKLQJ)OLUWLQJ:KLVSHULQJ3HUIRUPLQJ,QWLPDF\

)LQWDQ:DOVKLQ3XEOLF

TDR: The Drama Review, Volume 58, Number 4, Winter 2014 (T224), pp. 56-67 (Article)

3XEOLVKHGE\7KH0,73UHVV

For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/tdr/summary/v058/58.4.walsh.html

Access provided by Birkbeck College-University of London (17 Dec 2014 04:57 GMT) Touching, , Whispering Performing Intimacy in Public Fintan Walsh

We want performance to seduce us, and in its own way, performance wants to seduce us. But what forms of intimacy do these circuits of desire model or deliver, and what might they reveal about intimacy on a wider level? I address these questions by considering three performances that pivot on relationships of touch, flirtation, and whispering — forms of intimate contact that slip into, and back on, one another: Scottish performer Adrian Howells’s Foot Washing for the Sole (2008); Belgian theatre company Ontroerend Goed’s Internal (2007); and German-British artist Tino Sehgal’s These Associations (2012). Participating in these structured encounters reveals

Figure 1. Adrian Howells, Foot Washing for the Sole. Tokyo Performing Arts Market, 2013. (Screenshot by TDR from http://vimeo.com/18162606; © TPAM)

Fintan Walsh is Senior Lecturer in Theatre and Performance Studies at Birkbeck, University of London, UK. He is the author of Theatre & Therapy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013) and Male Trouble: Masculinity and the Performance of Crisis (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). He is an editor of a number of anthologies including “That Was Us”: Contemporary Irish Theatre and Performance (Oberon Books, 2013); Queer Notions: New Plays and Performances from Ireland (Cork University Press, 2010); Performance, Identity, and the Neo-Political Subject (Routledge, 2013, with Matthew Causey); and Crossroads: Performance Studies and Irish Culture (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, with Sara Brady). He coedited an issue of Performance Research, “On Affirmation” (2014, with Catherine Silverstone). [email protected]

TDR: The Drama Review 58:4 (T224) Winter 2014. ©2014 56 New York University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Performing Intimacy 57 - can can — private Despite 1 Brecht’s theatre is exemplaryis theatre Brecht’s — While intimacy has long been an implicit dramaturgical concern 2 But what kind of intimacy might something as promiscuous as performance have to offer? But what kind of intimacy might something Maria Chatzichristodoulou and Rachel Zerihan associate the recent focus on intimacy in theatre and performanceand theatre in intimacy on focus recent the associate Zerihan Rachel and Chatzichristodoulou Maria newthe of turn the to and trace social, they symbolic, connection the and for millennium, desire a with the course of persuasive, ways many in is periodization this While (2012:2). heralded it technological troubled that alienation social over concern the example, For new. that all not is public in intimacy of pursuit artistsand philosophers century20th mid and early the in Western many be seen as the direct precursor to the contemporary fascination with intimacy, insofar as one presumes the other. the presumes one as insofar contemporarythe to precursor intimacy, fascination with direct the as seen be Intimacy of “Cultures Budgeon’s Shelley and Roseneil Sasha see debates these overviewof good some a of For (2004). Century” 21st Early the in Change Social and Life Personal Family’: ‘the beyond Care and Promiscuous might be one way to describe these works, given that they draw freely on a given one way to describe these works, Promiscuous might be 1. 2. such numerous possibilities for categorization, the examples I’m particularly interested in here the examples I’m particularly interested such numerous possibilities for categorization, and affective emotional, about the physical, are distinct in that they raise questions specifically for how in ways that have implications and spaces, participants, boundaries between performers, politics of proximity on a wider level. and pleasures, we think about the pains, the exclusive encounter we intimacy is often thought of as ’s nobler relative, Indeed, meaning “within,” Derived from the Latin intimus, really seek among promiscuity’s many beds. by connect- achieved relationships of closeness, intimacy refers to both spatial and experiential animals or things, even between people or places, and affective borders emotional, ing physical, to be the estranging effect of distance and drawing them into contact from what is presumed and especially to be the preserve of individuals, While intimacy was once considered distinction. years it has become more of a public concern. in recent often in domestic spheres, couples, from the reconfiguration of the heteronorma- Social and political theorists point to everything and digital technology globalization, of urbanization, tive family unit to the disaffecting effects intimate connection outside of obviously personal, in an attempt to account for our search for or domestic arenas. private, for performance (from Aristotelian catharsis to Brechtian estrangement, for example), it has for example), Aristotelian catharsis to Brechtian estrangement, for performance (from both a symp- a shift that can be understood as increasingly become the core subject of inquiry, tom and a response to some of these broader cultural dynamics.

divides more generally. Are these, and similar works, important interventions into how people important and similar works, Are these, divides more generally. are they circumspectly still, and political alienation; or perhaps more today experience social as it becomes and private, displacement of intimate desire as personal representative of the public sphere? and commodified in the neoliberal increasingly choreographed and experimental theatre, art, including performance as I do myself, range of artistic traditions, exer their seductive tendencies, But we might also be struck by interactive gallery installations. as well as during the live events reputations that often precede them, cised in the provocative to come closer and join in. are bent on tempting would-be participants which themselves, cat- they fall into the broad-brush interaction, Insofar as the performances I focus on centralize So too or participatory. immersive, socially engaged, egories variously described as relational, a 72), 2013:6, (Walsh “neo-Aristotelian catharsis” of might they be situated within a tradition a swathe of contemporary work that centralizes con- term I have used elsewhere to account for and rich affectivity within its structures. physical and , fession, how the provision and pursuit of intimacy in public amounts to no simple pleasurable reward, pleasurable reward, amounts to no simple of intimacy in public and pursuit how the provision and labor pains. of performance anxieties of a complex set demands the navigation but rather with and to create intimate relationships works conspire I examine how these Accordingly, and ethical sociopolitical, experiential, heed to their potential paying publics, among their feel pressures to performed under substantial is sometimes also consider how intimacy I virtues. and to pay money are faced with obligations when participants especially to fake it, or at least interested in curating intimacy makers seem to have become more As performance attention. and public/­ intimacies, what this might reveal about more private I wonder in public, 58 Fintan Walsh © TPAM)http://vimeo.com/18162606; Washing for the Sole. Performing Arts Market, 2013. (Screenshot by Figure 2. Intimacy is experienced in byAdrian both Howellsparties Howells talkedwithmembersofthepublicinafunctioningsalon, whilewashingtheirhairand For example, inSalonAdrienne(2005), performingashiscrossed-dressedalter-ego Adrienne, self andparticipants, typicallyworkingwithsmallgroupsorindividualsinnon-theatrespaces. Adrian Howells’spracticeisprimarilyconcernedwithminingboundariesbetweenhim- Adrian Howells’s Foot Washing fortheSole Touching cially inartisticorculturalcontexts, andhavethembathed, massaged, andthen kissed. Howells pants areinvitedtoexposeapart oftheirbodiesnotnormallygivenattentioninpublic, espe- of amixturecuriosityandduty. ished bathingmyfeetandanointing themwithoil, heaskedifcouldkissthem. Iagreed, out glad tohavethem,” Isaid, “although Ihaven’treallygiventhemmuchthought.” When hefin- emphasized, wasnotthesameasservility. Howells askedmehowIfeltaboutmyownfeet. “I’m of footwashing, whichispredicatedonarelationshipof careandservice. This dynamic, he the violencehediscoveredwasinstarkoppositiontohistorical Judeo-Christianpractice moved himtowardscreatingthepiece. Heclaimedto have beenstruckbytherealizationthat involved visitingtheMiddleEastwherehelearnedabout Israel/Palestineconflict, which my feet. me inacalmingslowbreathingexercise:in, out, in, out, inout. Howellsthenbegantobathe was goingtododuringourtimetogether, whichwouldbejustunderhalfanhour. Then heled asked metoremovemyshoesbythedoor, andguidedmetositdown. Hetoldmewhathe greeted byanaffable, softlyspokenHowells, dressedinwhite. Itwasjustthetwoofus. Howells led mefromthewaitingareaongroundfloortoaspacious, well-litroomupstairs. Iwas service, cleansing, andabsolution. are amongthekeyfeaturesofFoot Washing forthe Sole, whichdrawsonJudeo-Christianideasof tic dramaturgy, inwhichheusesformsofphysicaltouchtocarefullyengageparticipants. These ular format. Additionally, attheheartofHowells’spracticeiswhatcanbedescribedasahap- and theplacationofspectators. This performanceworkbothplaysintoandagainstthispop- able fromtheexploitativespectacularizationofsuffering, theproductionof(minor)celebrity, What isintimateaboutthisperformance mightseemobviousenough:individualpartici- As hedidso, Howellstoldmeabouttheresearchprocess thatinformedthepractice. This At the2010performanceinarestored16th-centurytavernKilkenny, Ireland, anassistant

Foot TDR from a repurposedhotelsuite. embraced willingparticipantsin (2010), hebathed, fed, and Being: Washing, Feeding, Holding the one-on-oneThePleasure of massaging theirscalps, andin closure arealmostindistinguish- in whichself-analysisanddis- cultural interestinconfession, mediatized apotheosisofthis sion talkshowbecamethemass- early 21stcenturies, thetelevi- this kind. Inthelate20thand labor oforganizedintimacy questions abouttheallureand while alsoraisinginteresting gious practicesofconfession, heavily ontherapeuticandreli- Howells’s approachdraws Performing Intimacy 59 - - - - As Erin Hurley has argued, As Erin Hurley has argued, 3 In this the performance perhaps inadvertently reveals the complex affective-economic bind In this the performance perhaps inadvertently Hardt and Negri suggest that in the latter half of the 20th century, the hegemony of industrial labor gave way to to way gave labor industrial of hegemony the century, 20th the of half latter the in that suggest Negri and Hardt as such products “immaterial than objects tangible making in invested less was which labor, immaterial of that (2004:208). response” emotional an or relationship, a communication, information, knowledge, But despite the vulnerability to which this interaction exposed both of us, the performance both of us, to which this interaction exposed But despite the vulnerability on expec- perhaps based fulfillment in mind, If we arrive with a specific kind of emotional 3. an element of “-labor” is particular to most theatre and performance activity, a term she to most theatre and performance activity, is particular “feeling-labor” an element of in all its types and moving feeling managing, “the work theatre does in making, uses to describe an audience sensations) in a publicly observable display that is sold to moods, emotions, (affect, so scenario, This quality and expectation is heightened in the one-on-one (2010:9). for a wage” care in Howells’s practice is also an imperative to that what on the one hand seems like bodily to keep the show going; both Howells and I had to engage in the laborious production of affect at least to seem to. or “happen,” work to make feeling it out pub- in which the desire for intimacy is experienced in the contemporary world: seeking and in this labyrinthine circuit we even pay to work for it, we work for it, we pay for it, licly, might blithely deduce We there appears to be little difference between intimacy and industry. actually involves a lot so frequently presumed to defy structure and organization, that intimacy, we might both worry about the , it in public as work But in paying to experience of hard work. to involve. which such a process seems displacement of a more personal and private intimacy, we might also take heart at participants’ readiness to support and sustain the perfor However, the show would cer without someone willing to engage in this labor, After all, mance event. tainly not go on.

vice. He also invited me to breathe methodically, which in the company of just one stranger felt of just one stranger which in the company methodically, also invited me to breathe He vice. studio or beauty clothes evoked a performer’s white The than talking. more intimate my feel- and the appeal to a religious practice, verbal justification his touch and its salon setting, with oscillated, At times these registers more erotic still. parting something ings and the by held in balance mostly they overlapped, but than the others, more pronounced one seeming to these contingencies of contact, he too was exposed Of course, Howells’s palpable sincerity. this work Heddon suggests, As Deirdre leading and ostensibly in control. even though he was exchange anchored in the dia- with of transaction and transformation, “dual notions pivots on that asks for a committed and the spoken and the heard [...] and exchange logic: the oral/aural, (2011:1). of spectatorship” at times vulnerable sort that both enabled intimate choreographed structure of actions took place within a carefully of us feeling exposed against our such as either the more obvious risks, contact and kept at bay and I trusted him; I happen, Howells told me what would or even violated. vulnerable, will, nonhierarchical service that Howells ver The model of “spectator.” behaved like a compliant considered not just in terms of more ethically complicated when bally proposed may appear any emotional or affec- so that but rather in terms of foot-washing we pay for, foot-washing, This may in many ways be an intimate exchange. is predicated upon monetary “transaction” tive touched, but it also takes place within an economy of service where we pay to be experience, gen- despite Howells’s be touched (as with the kiss, and in turn may even feel an obligation to In this one-on-one envi- to act. to feel or at least to appear moved; in other words, tle request), and freely think, the latter expectation is uniquely charged: we are not just here to see, ronment, won’t happen. the performance If we do not engage in this labor, but to work affectively. feel, we fail Howells. fail the performance, We we audience feedback book left in the waiting area, tations of the performance whetted by the to participate in what here we feel a compulsion In particular, may even feel short-changed. in (2004:108), “immaterial labor” Antonio Negri refer to as an economy of Michael Hardt and carry the performance. which we must work to produce affect to asked me to talk about how I felt about my feet, and to offer thoughts on forgiveness and ser on forgiveness and to offer thoughts and about my feet, talk about how I felt asked me to 60 Figure 3. Ontroerend Goed, Fintan Walsh Schreyen, of Ontroerend courtesy Goed) Four line up with four company members. (Photo participants by Virginie the otherhand, purposelymanipulatesrelationshipsamongparticipantsandperformers, pres- else aroundtosee, influence, orjudgemybehaviorHowells’s. OntroerendGoed’swork, on mainly sat, andthemostsignificantpartofmyworkwasaffective. Further, therewasnoone not relyontheparticipant’sactivephysicalcontribution, assuch. DuringmyexperienceI Even thoughHowells’sperformancetestsboundariesbetweenhimselfandaudiences, itdoes Ontroerend Goed’sInternal Flirting about thecompany wasthatithaddeveloped a reputationontheEuropeantheatre circuitfor Goed 2014). relationship withastranger, andhowthiscanbetranslated toatheatricalsetting” (Ontroerend sonal stuff, privatethoughts andfeelings?[...] We investigatethepossibilityofameaningful mance’s guiding question: “What ifwewouldlookforinternalinformation ofthevisitors, per Goed’s workmoregenerally. The productionnotes signalthisterrainbyoutliningtheperfor ,often contradictoryanxietiesarousedandexaminedbyInternal andindeedacrossOntroerend that relationshipswillbreakdown. Indifferentways, theseareamongthecomplexdesiresand achieve. Itspursuitisundergirdedbythefearthatcontact willnothappen, thattoomuchwill, best efforts, ormaybeevenbecauseofthem, intimacy isnotagiven, norisitnecessarilyeasyto tenance, andresponsibility;atworstnarcissism, claustrophobia, andindividualism. Despiteour more nebulousemotional, affective, andsocialkind. At bestintimacycanpromotesupport, sus- other andtotheworld;tiesthatmayincludebiological, legal, andpolitical, aswellthe it, butratherbecauseitenablesustoconsiderthevarious waysbywhichweareboundtoeach of touchy-feelytogethernessitpromisesorevokes, although thatmaywellbejustifiablypartof atrical performance. among ostensiblestrangers, exploredintheambiguouslypositionedpublic/privatespaceof- is especiallyconcernedwiththepossibilitiesfor, andproblemswith, thedesireforintimacy and evendupedintoindiscriminatelysharingpersonalinformation., InInternal thecompany the theatricalequivalentoftalkshowsorrealitytelevision, inwhichparticipantsareencouraged Before Iattendedthe2010performance intheSmock Alley Theatre, Dublin, allIknew What makesintimacysuchanimportantanddifficultareaof inquiryisnotjustthemeasure Internal. Mercure Point Hotel, Edinburgh, 2009.

Radosavljevic; 2013:245). lates as “feel estate” (Bauwensin company, whichroughlytrans- tured intheFlemishnameof the ensemble’sworkiscap- ity ofaffectiveexplorationto other aspossible. The central- as uncomfortablewitheach suring ustofeelascloseand ness oftheimmersiveeventas nection betweentheseductive- the groupinvestigatescon- You situations.tive With physical, emotional, andaffec- audiences inoftenchallenging mances, theensembleimmerses (2011). Ineachoftheseperfor Face (2007)and A Gameof You also includesTheSmileOff Your works, ispartofatrio Internal inparticular, andInternal Personal Trilogy , which A Gameof - - - Performing Intimacy 61 - - - . Mercure Point Hotel, Hotel, Point Mercure . Internal Figure 4. Ontroerend Goed, Goed, Ontroerend 4. Figure Keyzer, de Aaron by (Photo face. to face Flirting, 2009. Edinburgh, Goed) courtesyOntroerend of - - Maria led me to a booth in After about 10 minutes, the conversation with Maria ended and everyone was brought to the the conversation After about 10 minutes, ticipant. I was selected by Maria, I was selected by Maria, ticipant. but I did not know the criteria nor the purpose. the corner of the dimly lit black She poured me a box space. told me a little shot of vodka, and inquired bit about herself, about my interests and val- whether or not I believed ues, wonder She asked me to imagine that we were in a special place together, in at first sight. tain. The curtain opened, and we The curtain opened, tain. member of were each faced by a They looked at us the company. obviously up and down, intently, Then the four reshuf- judging. before finally each company fled, member committed to one par and face-to-face in She was flirting with me, if we were kissing or not. ing what we were doing, I did not mention being if only to please her. it was hard not to play along, this environment, off course; she was trying to be personal and spon- gay because I sensed this would throw her In this urge to share and support the performance event, but clearly there was a script. taneous, generated here so that whatever intimacy was being I was arguably working harder than Maria, Maria affected genuine inter compulsory labor. was not only the fruit of her acting but my the Even though I knew it was a device, performance. asking if we could be friends after the est, and the of novelty, the sense the alcohol, her eye contact, physical intimacy of the encounter, What this was I too. seemingly personal anecdotes made it very difficult not to share something, I may have just made something up. cannot remember. I found (Later, as if at a group counseling session. center of the room where we sat in a circle, “the female out from the company that each performer had a defined role: while Maria was “the and “the one with criteria,” “the silent one,” “the negative one,” others included seducer,” the performers disclosed information they discovered about each of the In turn, male seducer.”) they began Steadily, prompting us to do the same. discussions, “closed” participants during our or trying to embar to deride the intimacy they cultivated by adding or embellishing details, and another female performer flashed her stiff, Maria mocked me for appearing rass us. they were all he was interested in throughout their shouting that in a male participant’s face, offering interactive, difficult, and difficult, offering interactive, experiences. even exploitative was commu- This forewarning reviewers who tended nicated by the core content not to reveal in order work, of the company’s So like to preserve mystery. Goed many other Ontroerend I was pri- audience members, experience, marily chasing a new uncomfort- possibly even a risky, piece The 25-minute able one. shoul- began with me standing four other with der-to-shoulder black cur facing a participants, 62 Fintan Walsh Ontroerend Goed) possibility for intimacy. (Photo by Aaron de Keyzer, of courtesy Edinburgh, 2009. Follow-up extend the letters with participants Figure 5. Ontroerend Goed, Internal. Mercure Point Hotel, of themiddleclasses is madeanessentialaspectofeconomicbehaviorandinwhichemotionallife in atimewhereemotionalandeconomicdiscoursesshapeeachother, somuchthat “affect that theperformerswereunwillingtobearalone. narcissistic, anditsostensibleproductionwasexposedasaneffectoftheatricallabor, aburden felt liketheyalwayscameoutontop. The desiretoexperienceintimacyinpublicwasderidedas of theperformancewascompany’srejectionourdesiretoshareorbeclosethem, it the group, andarguablythemoralsatisfactionoftheatrecompanyitself. Insofarasthecrux lessly underminedattheend, andtheintimacyofcouplewassacrificedforpleasure initially relocatingaffectfrompublicexposuretoprivateintimacy, thenthatreadinesswasruth- tice” (2012:1). Ifthispiecebeganwiththeperformersappearingtotrygetcloserus, by a multitudeofquestionsaroundthenature, formandeffectofperformancestudiesprac- mance relocatesregistersofaffectfromthepublicspheretoprivateexperience, triggering conversation. MariaChatzichristodoulouandRachelZerihanclaimthat “intimacy inperfor that weexperience thisdesireasaproblemto be waryoforevenashamedabout, reproaching macy inpublic, butprovocatively subvertsthatambition. The companyblatantly worksusso festation ofthis, anditisapracticethatmirrorsmarket logic: cally debilitatingnarcissism. The testingofoneanother’s self-interest, hesuggests, isonemani- sees thefloodingofpublicspherewithintimateconcern as thecentralmarkofasociopoliti- plays withtheaudience’sunrelentingself-absorption. Inthe Fall ofPublicMan, RichardSennett ities forintimacywithstrangersbeyondtheimmediateperformance space, butmorethanthis, my encounter, andmade theconnection. Sotheensembleextendsquestionofpossibil- includes theminshows. Irememberedseeingawallofletters fromotherparticipantsasIleft In herbookColdIntimacies: The MakingofEmotionalCapitalism, EvaIllouzarguesthatwelive Ontroerend Goed’swork, like Howells’s, harnessesourdesiretoexploreorexperience inti- and intimaterelations. (Sennett 1977:8) being authenticand “straight” witheachotherisapeculiarstandardofmarketexchange and perverselyintohumanrelationships. Insuchasociety, thetestofwhetherpeople are the basichumanenergiesofnarcissismaresomobilizedthat they entersystematically organized intwoformswhichleadtothisunintendeddestructiveness. Insuchasociety, In asocietywhereintimatefeelingisanall-purposestandard of reality, experienceis — follows thelogicofeconomicrelationsandexchange” (2007:5). Inthis company retainsthesedocumentsandeven I didnotwriteback, thoughmanydo:the test ofmywillingnesstoconfessandinvest. strategy todrawmebackinagain, afurther Others receivedphotographs. Itwasanother she genuinelyfeltwehadaconnection. received aletterfromMariatellingmethat chased orexchanged. feeling, thatintimacycannotbeeasilypur erfully countered. We leavethinking, and would-be coollydetachedspectators, ispow- as anintimatemachinethatworksforus, the text thenaturalizedunderstandingoftheatre to dealingwiththatexpectation, inthiscon- ences feelthattheyareapartofanevent, or strangers tothetaskoftryingmakeaudi- performers andperformance-makersareno tion ofcapitalarealmostinseparable. While view, theworkoffeelingandproduc- I A fewweeksafterattendingInternal — especially that - - Performing Intimacy 63

- - and some —

middle-aged man walked . Tate Modern, London, 2012. 2012. London, Modern, Tate Associations. These I caught the rapid repetition of “electricity” I caught the rapid repetition of Paid volunteers walk slowly and silently down the installation space. (Photo by by (Photo space. installation the down silently and slowly walk volunteers Paid Cannam) Chris Figure 6. Tino Sehgal, Sehgal, Tino 6. Figure —

In London, in 2012, These in 2012, In London, like the space was dotted with what looked When I first encountered These Associations, These Associations Sehgal’s These Tino mance quite literally makes an exhibition of the public’s desire for intimacy, and the company’s and the company’s desire for intimacy, exhibition of the public’s literally makes an mance quite frustration of that desire. spectacular Whispering with most of his perfor within a visual and conceptual artistic tradition, Sehgal works Tino is perhaps best known for cre- Sehgal place in museums and art galleries. mance pieces taking in which these environments, best described as interactive situations in ating what might be institutions are state funded) public (though obviously many of these a typically non-paying is exposed to choreographed reflection encounters that invite to other on our relationships in people and artistic spaces In the early urban environments. (2005), This Is So Contemporary first performed at for example, museum Biennale, Venice the guards suddenly broke into joy- and in This ful song and dance, staged at the (2010), Progress Guggenheim Museum in New spi- Wright’s Frank Lloyd York, ral gallery was emptied of art- and visitors are led up the work, staircase by an intergenerational who asked partic- cast of guides, ipants what they thought about the idea of progress. Associations, was programmed Modern’s Turbine in Tate the Hall — a five-story-high- con with crete commissioning venue, piece was made with paid volunteers rather than pro- The 3300 square meters of floor space. a variety of who worked with Sehgal over the course of a year to create fessional performers, this location, Owing to its ground-floor the large hall. seemingly spontaneous situations within or when vis- entering or exiting the building, is an area people often pass when absentmindedly iting the gallery shop. and small groups emerged, divisions Moments later, ambling group of people. an incidental, they Collectively, the next slow. one minute fast, formed and moved up and down the hall, whispered barely audible comments to experience individuals fell off from their groups to speak to visitors (whether they were here A ­ I do not know). the performance intentionally or accidentally, that that we never had time to ourselves, towards me and remarked on how busy London was, swept up again by verve of the I had a chance to reply, He was off before we should change this. mainly about our relationships to cities. different stories, Other visitors reported hearing group. City, York “I belong to New Riley reports someone saying to him, Travis critic For instance, The lights flickered and dimmed as a young 2012). (Riley now it’s time to go somewhere else” as if anchored by her standing on the spot, quietly, She mumbled woman paused next to me. us affectively for wanting it in the first instance. The wall of reply letters outside each perfor The wall of reply letters first instance. for wanting it in the us affectively 64 Fintan Walsh up and down the hall, one minute fast, the next slow. (Photo by Phil Rogers; Creative Commons) special washappening. back intothecenterofhall, chattingandclambering, beforesplittingupagainasifnothing own thoughts. The lightsroseandshetoowasoff. Suddenly, alltheperformersweredrawn Figure 7. Tino Sehgal, of SigmundFreud andKarlMarxneverfeltfar behind. They are, ofcourse, amongthe most make usfeelutterlyseparatefrom expensivelypricedvisualartinparticular. space Sehgal’spiecealsofunctioned toironizetheeconomicrelationsthatwouldotherwise towards closurenorcommodification. Featuringnotangibleartobjectassuch, within the Tate ness itseemstoproposeintimacy asamobileformofattachment, whichisneitherdriven mat performances considered, thereislesscompulsiononthe partofspectatorstobendthefor offered it, whilemakingroomfordisinterest, refusal, oraquickexit. Comparedtotheother close toeachotherfeelemotionallyso, thisperformative situationmodeledcontactandeven opposite: thatwecouldtakeitorleaveit. Whereas inthecitywearefrequentlytoophysically piece, particularlywhencomparedwiththeotherperformances Idiscusshere, wasexactlythe fully structured, “we havenochoicebuttoparticipate” (Bishop2012). Myresponsetothis the whilediscoveringexpansivespace. from differentvantagepoints, bumpingintootherknowingvisitors andunwittingpassersby, all of forcedintimacy, weinevitablywereshiftedaround bytheirmovements:seeingmoreofthem while theperformersdidnotinsistonouractiveparticipation, orexposeustotheawkwardness ple risetotakeoverthemainthoroughfaresbeforedroppingawayagain, outofclearsight. And These formationsmightevenbeseentoevoketheshapeandrhythmofdailyurbanlife, aspeo- suddenly swellingup, nowalmostperfectlysynchronized, thendissemblingandfallingaway. mat ofOntroerendGoed’sshow, heretheperformersmovedlikeamurmurationofstarlings: Unlike theone-on-oneorganizationofHowells’spiece, orthedating/grouptherapyfor Wandering aroundthe Turbine hall, straining toconnectwithpeopleandart, theghosts Writing about TheseAssociations,ClaireBishoparguesthatbecauseofthewayitissocare- — we neitherhavetopaymoney(atleastnotdirectly)norattention. Initsaestheticloose- These Associations. Tate Modern, London, 2012. Small and movedgroups formed - - Performing Intimacy 65 - 6 (2001). Edition Standard The close enough to others, close enough to close enough to others, — Having us pursue people as art, or art as people, it feels like it feels like or art as people, as art, Having us pursue people 5 , particularly the section on “Estranged Labour” particularly1844, of Labour” “Estranged on section Manuscripts the Philosophic and Economic prompting us to think afresh about the contact we already make and want. prompting us to think afresh about the contact And Marx considered alienation as an effect of capitalism, under which workers depend under which as an effect of capitalism, considered alienation And Marx 4 See, for example, Freud’s writings on the Oedipus complex in complex Oedipus the on writings Freud’s example, for See, Marx’s see this On 2007:67–83). ([1967] is who mother enough” “good the of idea Winnicott’s D.W. of think I intimacy, of model enough” “close this In enough- of idea the in something is There 1–34). esp. (1991: care of provision moderate ordinary, her in effective little intimacy. too or much too of dangers the against warn and illuminate usefully to seems that ness Lauren Berlant expresses concern that intimacy gets too easily normalized by its association concern that intimacy gets too easily Lauren Berlant expresses Contrary to Jacques Derrida’s championing of hospitality as radical openness to others (see Contrary to Jacques Derrida’s championing of hospitality as radical openness to others — 4. 5. 6. Seghal wants us to experience and reflect upon these complex spaces of desire too, but in a play- spaces of desire too, and reflect upon these complex Seghal wants us to experience way. ful rather than punishing “[w]hile the fantasies associated that and argues and public ideals, institutions, with the state, in practice the drive toward it end up occupying the space of convention, with intimacy usually While (1998:285). or any way” that is not necessarily organized that way, is a kind of wild thing comparable to a sustained situation can hardly be seen to stage anything Sehgal’s performance public intimacy in its modeling I think it finds a place for or solidarity, social support system even fleeting attachment of the pleasures of fluid, art

gird intimacy, and the impossibility of ever fixing the “moment” of contact. (Of course, one (Of course, of contact. “moment” ever fixing the and the impossibility of gird intimacy, Sehgal’s but the opportunity is not built-in.) In this, could leave the other performances too, the contemporary surge in immersive art practices. piece seems like an interesting antidote to suggests to me the value of not trying to labor His choreography of real and symbolic spaces Sehgal’s theatre of proxe- nor forcefully closing the distance between us. intimacy too much, that one of the effects of globalization and popu- mics puts me in mind of Slavoj Žižek’s claim is supplemented by “understanding-each-other” of lation growth is that the prevalent attitude distance” “maintaining an appropriate or “getting-out-of-each-other’s-way” the imperative of expectation Žižek argues that efforts to know our neighbors better are couched in the (2006). others retain an element of the radically different that we should not know them too well; that This insight usefully alerts us to the possibility that con- and unknowable that might destroy us. might not only be symptomatic of a globalizing world, temporary desires for intimacy in public in cities; particularly compression of physical space, in which population expansion effects the by the even more powerful desire to avoid get- but that the impulse is supported and protected is very much interwoven into the intimate textures of so much so that alienation ting too close, the social sphere. Žižek suggests that a certain caution in this regard might Derrida in Kearney and Dooley 1999), Intimacy’s After Effects about Sehgal’s performance encounter is that its One of the features I find most interesting the goings as well as the comings that under emphasis is more on dispersal than immersion: Dispersive Performance Dispersive - bind in the past cen intimacy/alienation understanding of the thinkers to shape our important - in which subjectiv effect of socialization, as a foundational understood alienation Freud tury. we) desire what (we leaving us to (think unconscious realms, into conscious and ity is divided of to fill our sense other people and things so that we seek out so much not have, think) we do lack. - separated from the prod as workers, in so doing only survive but money to live, on labor for For work- from other workers. and ultimately from themselves, working, from ucts of work, and one which propels social bond, capitalism is an essentially alienating according to Marx, ers, fetishism. us towards commodity 66 Fintan Walsh contact withstrangersinpublic. that initsfrustrationwearepressedtorethinkitasotherthantheeffectofpurchase affect, intheseexamplesIsensethatnotonlyisthefailureofintimacyalwaysexpected, but atre’s mostpowerfulaffectsareproducedinthe(expected)failureofitsattempttorepresent remain private, orprivatized, forverylong. While NicholasRidout(2006)hasarguedthatthe- work, performance’sawkwardsocialityinsiststhattheintimacyostensiblyonoffercannoteven will notnecessarilyprovidethekindofengagementIseek. Despitethepersonalthrustofthis ily asmoneyforgoodsorservices. Iemergeremindedthattheperformersorperformances ultimately undermine(sometimesinadvertently)theideathatintimacycanbeacquiredasread- duction ofperformance. Maybeperformancewasallwewantedalong. These encounters ways theyrerouteourdesireforintimacybacktowardsus, bymakingusworkforitinthepro- uine desireforintimacy, andoffertheirownrehearsedspontaneousrewards, indifferent (2000:387). ButwhilethepracticesIhavedrawnintoconversationmaywellrespondtoagen- how we “create apublicrealminwhichpeoplewilltoleratebeingstimulatedbytheother” performances mayalsobeseentoexplorewhatSennettidentifiesastheburningquestionof lic. We mightevendoubtthataclear-cut private/publicdistinctionanylongerstillholds. These private sphere, orjustacuriositytosamplethefrissonofnewformssocialencounterinpub- desire, greed, orenvyarekeptlockedup” (1977:5). rors, civilizedrelationsbetweenselvescanonlyproceedtotheextentthatnastylittlesecretsof the idiosyncraticimpulsesofselfhood: “because everyselfisinsomemeasureacabinetofhor that apublicrealmorganizedaroundintimate, personaldesirewillinevitablybethwartedby site, ifwegettooclosetoeachother” (2006). This perspectivechimeswithSennett’sassertion tion: globalizationwillturnexplosivenotifweremainisolatedofeachother, but, ontheoppo- for thepeacefulcoexistenceofwayslife. Sometimes, alienationisnotaproblembutsolu- be crucialtosociety’sethico-politicalstability: “Sometimes, adoseofalienationis­ Chatzichristodoulou, Maria, andRachelZerihan. 2012. “Introduction.”Visceral InIntimacy:Across and Bishop, Claire. 2012. “In the Age oftheCulturalOlympiad, We’re allPublicPerformers.” TheGuardian, Berlant, Lauren. 1998. “Intimacy: A SpecialIssue.” 24, CriticalInquiry 2(Winter):281–88. Bauwens, David, Alexander Devriendt, andJoeri Smed. 2013. “On Courtingthe Audience.” InThe References on contemporaryperformance, particularlytheworkthatisfocus ofthisarticle. Adrian Howellspassedawayduringtheproductionofthisissue. Hehadanenormousimpact Postscript and feelslikejustanotherwordforalienation. what seemslikeaparticularlycapitalistsystemofexchange, inwhichintimacyoftensounds the performanceathand. Butwemightalsowonderaboutthepossibilitiesforintimacybeyond bit uncomfortableorcheatedforhavingtoengageinintimatework, orfulfilledforbuoying solicits viapracticedseduction, inordertogenerateandsustainitself. We mayleavefeelinga 7. We could speculate thatthedesireIhavetrackedherereflectsawaningofintimacyin be experienced and understood as a relation in tension. far as I’m not sure what totally achieved or failed intimacy might be in this context. I suspect intimacy can only I prefer the term “frustrate” here instead of failure, and have tended to use the word throughout this piece, inso- Palgrave Macmillan. Digital Performance, eds. MariaChatzichristodoulouandRachelZerihan, 1–11. Basingstoke: -olympiad-public-performers. 23 July. Accessed 2December2013. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/23/cultural London: Routledge. Contemporary with Ensemble:Interviews Theatre-Makers , ed. DavidRadosavljevic;, 243–59. 7 Instead, intimacydemandsourlabor, whichperformance indispensable

- Performing Intimacy 67 New

[blog]. Accessed 2 December 2013. Accessed 2 December 2013. Aesthetica [blog]. , eds. Richard Kearney and Mark Dooley, 65–83. 65–83. Dooley, Kearney and Mark Richard eds. , Debates in Philosophy Ethics: Contemporary Questioning In London: Routledge. Vintage. London: . Works Other and the Id and The Ego (1923–1925): Vol. 19 Penguin. York: 1:1–12. Art 33, and of Performance A Journal Dover Publications. York: http://vimeo.com/18162606. 2014. London: Routledge. University Press. www.aestheticamagazine.com/blog/tino-sehgal-these-associations-at-tate-modern-london/. 2:135–59. Sociology 52, Current Life and Social Change in the Early 21st Century.” Blackwell. Oxford: 380–87. Watson, Sophie . www.lacan.com/zizantinomies.htm Accessed 2 December 2013. The Standard Edition of The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud: Freud: of Sigmund Works Complete Psychological The Edition of The Standard (1961) 2001. Sigmund. Freud, New of Empire. Age the in and Democracy War Multitude: 2004. Antonio Negri. and Michael, Hardt, PAJ: A Confessional Journey.” to Silence: Talking “From 2011. Howells. Adrian and Deirdre, Heddon, Palgrave Macmillan. Basingstoke: . & Feeling Theatre 2010. Erin. Hurley, Polity Press. Cambridge: Making of Emotional Capitalism. The Cold Intimacies: 2007. Eva. Illouz, Martin Milligan. and ed. Trans. Manuscripts of 1844. Economic and Philosophic (1961) 2007. Karl. Marx, Oberon Books. London: . Plays No Work All forthcoming. Ontroerend Goed. Accessed 20 July Vimeo. Productions. Balcony Howells Part I.” Adrian “Interview with 2010. Dan. Prichard, . Theatre-Makers Interviews Ensemble: with The Contemporary 2013. ed. David, Radosavljevic;, Cambridge: Cambridge Theatrical Problems. and Other Animals, Fright, Stage 2006. Nicholas. Ridout, “These Associations: Review.” 2012. Travis. Riley, ‘the Family’: Personal beyond “Cultures of Intimacy and Care 2004. Budgeon. and Shelley Sasha, Roseneil, London: Penguin. of Public Man. The Fall 1977. Richard. Sennett, Gary Bridge and eds. In A Companion to the City, the Public Realm.” “Reflections on 2000. Richard. Sennett, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. . Theatre 2013. & Therapy Fintan. Walsh, London: Routledge. and Reality. Playing 1991. D.W. Winnicott, , Lacan.com is Loosed.” Tide A Blood-Dimmed Reason: Tolerant of Antinomies “The 2006. Slavoj. Žižek, Derrida, Jacques. 1999. “Hospitality, Justice, and Responsibility: A Dialogue with Jacques Derrida.” Derrida.” with Jacques A Dialogue and Responsibility: Justice, “Hospitality, 1999. Jacques. Derrida,