MOVING INTIMACIES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF “PHYSICAL THEATRES” IN FRANCE AND THE UNITED KINGDOM EUGÉNIE FLEUR PASTOR ROYAL HOLLOWAY, UNIVERSITY OF LONDON DEPARTMENT OF DRAMA AND THEATRE A Thesis submitted as a partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Ph.D. August 2014 1 DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP I, Eugénie Fleur Pastor, hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly stated. Signed: ______________________ Date: 7 August 2014 2 ABSTRACT This thesis is an exploration of movement in contemporary “physical theatres”. I develop a renewed understanding of “physical theatres” as embodied framework to experience both spectatorship and theatre-making. I analyse how, in this type of performance, movement blurs distinctions between the intimate and the collective, the inside and the outside, thus challenging definitions of intimacy and tactility. The thesis consists of a comparative study of examples of “physical theatres”, in the 21st century, in France and in the UK. The comparison highlights that “physical theatres” practitioners are under-represented in France, a reason I attribute in part to a terminological absence in the French language. The four case studies range from itinerant company Escale and their athletic embodiment of a political ideal to Jean Lambert-wild’s theatre of “micro-movement”, from Told by an Idiot’s position in a traditional theatre context in the UK to my own work within Little Bulb Theatre, where physicality is virtuosic in its non- virtuosity. For each case study, I use a methodology that echoes this exploration of movement and reflects my position within each fieldwork. I argue for bilingualism as a methodological tool, and I coin an approach that draws on both a phenomenological perspective and on dance ethnography to take into account the embodied knowledge I acquired through fieldwork. This methodology also allows me to reflect on my own experience as a French “physical theatres”- maker within a British context. The comparison highlights the conditions, in each context, that enable “physical theatres” to be alternative and potentially subversive. It also suggests 3 that contemporary “physical theatres” enable an embodied experience that, somatically breaking down perceived boundaries between “self” and “other”, allows a collective intimacy to arise. This in turn suggests potentially subversive modes of organisation and proposes an alternative to dominant ways of making and experiencing theatre. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................3 TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................9 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: MOVING BETWEEN LANGUAGES, MOVING BEYOND GENRES: A FRANCO-ENGLISH DEFINITION OF “PHYSICAL THEATRES”............................................................................................................................ 13 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INTIMACY IN MOVEMENT ................................................................. 16 Intimacy as embodiment and proximity ...............................................................................18 FROM PHYSICAL THEATRE TO “PHYSICAL THEATRES”: A FRENCH LEGACY AND A BRITISH TERMINOLOGY....................................................................................................................................... 23 A brief and non-exhaustive overview of physical theatre..............................................26 Unsatisfying definitions ................................................................................................................28 “Physical theatres” and devising...............................................................................................34 An Anglophone framework .........................................................................................................38 “Physical theatres” in the United Kingdom..........................................................................40 Overspills.............................................................................................................................................42 ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CHANNEL: LOCATING “PHYSICAL THEATRES” IN THE FRENCH CONTEXT. ............................................................................................................................................... 46 “Physical theatres”: a genre with no name. .........................................................................46 Experimental practices: Franco-British cross-pollinations in the twentieth century. ................................................................................................................................................48 A few words on mime.....................................................................................................................53 Why is mime marginalised? A few hypotheses. ..................................................................58 A very brief overview of circus and street performance.................................................61 A few words on dance....................................................................................................................63 “Créations collectives”...................................................................................................................70 Political theatres..............................................................................................................................75 Linguistic explanations.................................................................................................................77 THE CASE STUDIES............................................................................................................................... 81 Escale....................................................................................................................................................82 Jean Lambert-wild et al. ...............................................................................................................85 Told by an Idiot ................................................................................................................................87 Little Bulb Theatre..........................................................................................................................90 CHAPTER 2: WRITING FROM A PLACE OF EXPERIENCE......................................... 92 Bilingualism as methodology.....................................................................................................93 Reflecting on my position as a researcher............................................................................97 Applying dance ethnography to a study of theatre....................................................... 100 Experiencing theatre: phenomenology and kinaesthetic empathy........................ 103 Writing as a “physical theatres” practitioner.................................................................. 110 Writing the “feeling body” (Paterson 784)........................................................................ 114 The Spaces of the theatre.......................................................................................................... 115 CHAPTER 3: THEATRE IN MOVEMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE FRENCH TRAVELLING COMPANY ESCALE. .................................................................................118 MOBILE SPACES ..................................................................................................................................123 Escale’s itinérance........................................................................................................................ 123 Public homes................................................................................................................................... 127 TO INVITE AUDIENCES “CHEZ NOUS, CHEZ EUX”...........................................................................134 5 The tent as a pocket of intimacy............................................................................................ 137 Disrupting geographies. ............................................................................................................ 138 PHYSICALITY IN MOVEMENT ............................................................................................................141 Movement and spaces in Escale’s creative processes: An analysis of Façades (2008)................................................................................................................................................ 142 SUBVERSIVE PHYSICALITY ................................................................................................................145 Alternative physicalities............................................................................................................ 146 Est ou ouest..................................................................................................................................... 148 Krausse’s subversive physicality. ........................................................................................... 151 FINDING A VOICE ................................................................................................................................156