C:NTACT – Et Integrationsprojekt
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Et teatershowroom En analyse af de personlige historier i C:NTACTs forestilling Maveplasker Af Helle Bach Riis Integreret speciale i Dansk og Kultur- og sprogmødestudier, 2008 Institut for Kultur og Identitet, Roskilde Universitetscenter Vejledere: Erik Svendsen og Birgitta Frello Abstract This dissertation comprises an analysis of the play Maveplasker. Maveplasker is a production of the Department of Integration and Education, C:NTACT, at the Betty Nansen Theatre in Copenhagen. C:NTACT’s intention is to use theatre to portray the diversity of the so called “others” in the Danish society. They do so by creating plays with young people from the age 15 to 25 who get on stage and tell their own, personal stories in the form of a coherent play to a live audience. The young people are not professional actors, and partly for this reason C:NTACT uses the term “reality theatre” to describe these productions. This dissertation argues that the Department, C:NTACT, plays an important role in the shaping of these personal stories – from the beginning the department defined what genres the young participants could express their personal stories through – while acknowledging that genres such as hip-hop an street-dance can lead to a somewhat stereotypical and impersonal portrayal of the young participants. With Maveplasker as its focus, this dissertation investigates what representation of “the others” C:NTACT actually ends up producing. The dissertation presents theories of performativity in order to see how identity categories such as “the others” are produced, reproduced but also possibly transformed. It presents theories of performative aesthetics in order to try and place Maveplasker somewhere in between the representative theatre and the performance in order to investigate the play’s potential to transform a generalised conception of “the others”. In the dissertation a thorough textual analysis of Maveplasker is also presented. It particularly focuses on the genre of the play, including the surroundings, such as the theatre building, and the way that C:NTACT speak about their “reality theatre” in the public sphere. The textual analysis also focuses on how the play enunciates the personal stories and the interaction between the enunciation and the genre. In particular the element of the young participants playing themselves is investigated, since this is a central part of placing Maveplasker in between representative theatre and performance. The dissertation concludes that genres as hip-hop and street-dance do cause a somewhat stereotypical representation of the young participants, but it also incorporates them in a general, popular youth culture, and in that sense Maveplasker has a potential to show an increased diversity of “the others”. 1 FORTÆLLEREN: Og spørgsmålet om identitet? VALERIE: Ikkeidentitet er svaret. Ikkekvindelige kvinder, ikkelesbiske lebber, en ikkeunderklasseret underklasse. Pæoner lugter som magnolier. Hunde lugter som hunde. Og haver lugter forskelligt på forskellige årstider. Der findes ingen givne identiteter, der findes ingen kvinder, der findes ingen mænd, ingen drenge, ingen piger. Det er kun et lille dukketeater. Et uendeligt langt lortestykke med et lortemanuskript. FORTÆLLEREN: Så behøver det ikke ende sådan her? VALERIE: Du må skrive nye ting babywriter, du må finde på nye slutninger. Der kommer nye rosenhaver. Sara Stridsberg Drømmefakultetet, 2006, s. 313 2 1. INDLEDNING ....................................................................................................... 5 1.1. PROBLEMFELT.................................................................................................... 5 1.1.1. Historiefortælling....................................................................................... 5 1.1.2. Den kunstneriske repræsentation............................................................... 7 1.2. PROBLEMFORMULERING .................................................................................... 8 2. PRÆSENTATION AF C:NTACT..................................................................... 10 2.1. DE ANDRES TANKER........................................................................................ 10 2.2. PLAYERS PROJECT OG C:NTACT .................................................................... 11 2.3. C:NTACT SOM MARKEDSFØRINGSSTRATEGI................................................... 12 2.4. C:NTACTS VISIONER ...................................................................................... 13 2.5. C:NTACT OG BETTY NANSEN TEATRETS BRUG AF ”DE ANDRE”..................... 15 2.6. PRÆSENTATION AF FORESTILLINGEN MAVEPLASKER OG DE UNGE DELTAGERE . 16 3. METODISKE OVERVEJELSER...................................................................... 19 3.1. NARRATOLOGIEN I BEVÆGELSE ....................................................................... 20 3.2. VALG AF TEORETIKERE .................................................................................... 22 3.3. AFGRÆNSNING................................................................................................. 28 4. FASCINATIONEN AF VIRKELIGHEDEN – MEN HVILKEN VIRKELIGHED? .................................................................................................... 30 4.1. MELLEM VIRKELIGHED OG REPRÆSENTATION.................................................. 30 4.1.1. Kan man sætte virkeligheden på scenen?................................................ 32 4.1.2. Performativitet og performance: to brede begreber................................ 36 4.2. PERFORMATIVITET: FASTHOLDELSE ELLER FORANDRING?............................... 37 4.2.1. Citation og gentagelse ............................................................................. 39 4.2.2. Diskursen som mulighed og normativ autoritet....................................... 40 4.3. PERFORMANCE: MELLEM PRÆSENTATION OG REPRÆSENTATION...................... 45 4.3.1. Tegnforståelse: ophævelse af de traditionelle relationer ........................ 48 4.3.2. Performance: leg med det virkelige......................................................... 51 4.3.3. Brud med betydningstilskrivningen ......................................................... 53 4.4. FORHOLDET MELLEM PERFORMANCE OG PERFORMATIVITET............................ 54 4.4.1. ”En performativ mulig udgave af subjektet”........................................... 55 4.5. HISTORIEFORTÆLLING SOM PERFORMANCE OG PERFORMATIVITET .................. 56 4.5.1. Historiefortælling i teatret....................................................................... 58 4.5.2. Tableau 1: ”Gummibånd”....................................................................... 60 5. BETRAGTNINGER TIL MAVEPLASKER SOM TEKST ........................... 64 5.1. TILGANG TIL ANALYSEN .................................................................................. 64 5.1.1. Genre og udsigelse................................................................................... 64 5.2. MAVEPLASKER – OG ALT DET RUNDT OM FORESTILLINGEN ............................... 68 5.2.1. Resumé..................................................................................................... 69 5.2.2. Tematisk fokus.......................................................................................... 69 5.2.3. Virkeligheden – nu med manus!............................................................... 70 5.2.4. Edisons medskabende kraft...................................................................... 71 5.2.5. Den sekundære tekst ................................................................................ 73 3 5.2.6. Tableau 2: ”Lykke – ulykke”................................................................... 76 5.3. DE FORSKELLIGE PLANER I MAVEPLASKER........................................................ 79 5.3.1 Handlingsplan........................................................................................... 79 5.3.2. Fortælleplan............................................................................................. 80 5.3.3. Virkelighedsplan ...................................................................................... 81 5.3.4. Tableau 3: ”Jeg elsker min dyne” & ”Blive drillet” .............................. 83 5.4. RELATIONEN MELLEM AKTØR OG SCENEFIGUR I MAVEPLASKER........................ 89 5.4.1. Brug af realisme i Maveplasker............................................................... 91 5.4.2. Brug af fremmedgørelse og distance i Maveplasker ............................... 94 5.4.3. Musikkens betydning i Maveplasker........................................................ 96 5.4.4. Tableau 4: ”Kærlighed mellem ham og hende”...................................... 98 5.4.5. Realisme eller distance? ........................................................................ 102 5.4.6. Så hvad er meningen?............................................................................ 103 6. DISKUSSION..................................................................................................... 105 6.1. DE ANDRE ELLER DE UNGE? ........................................................................... 106 6.2. AVANTGARDESTRATEGIER............................................................................. 107 6.3. C:NTACTS INTEGRATIONSINDSATS .............................................................. 109 7. KONKLUSION.................................................................................................. 110 LITTERATURLISTE ..........................................................................................