web analytics

Slava Polunin: The Monologue of a Clown – 7: Audience

Audience

English audience was one of my biggest ‘finds’. It takes everything very seriously. Perhaps, if I were occupied with another kind of theatre, it would be an obstacle, because the English are too concentrated, but it’s very good for me, actually. Just as me, they like digging to the truth till the end of time. Their absurdity, nonsense, English humour, ‘Alice in Wonderland’ are on to a good thing for me… They come to the theatre well prepared. The Italians are easy to accept any unexpectedness, any novelty, they agree to any experiment. The English say: “Now, wait, an old bird is not to be caught with the chaff. We will watch it ve-e-ry attentively”. It’s impossible to make the Italians to watch something attentively. It usually goes like: “Wait, guys, let me say just one more word!” – “Relax, it’s fine as it is! Nothing more to say!” While in England there is a ringing silence in the audience. It’s such a pleasant thing for the theatrical performance, you don’t know!

As Grotovsky stated, there is a special exercise for every kind of theatre. Same for national traditions: a special theatre for every nation. For me personally, America is bad. But when I came there with my troupe for the first time and we began running on their heads, an excessively free American spectator quickly understood that he is besieged by the true anarchists, and he cocked them a snook and said: “Now you will see what the real freedom is”. But this game wasn’t interesting to me. It made sense in Russia under Brezhnev; it was my hobbyhorse there. Licedei (Pagliazzi) was an island of spiritual freedom in the country where there was no freedom at all. That was the reason why the audience supported us. People thought: “At last, there is freedom somewhere, at least in the clownery some do what they want, they crush the aesthetic canons, at least it’s them who get the joy”.

America is not a bad country, it’s just too young. In fact, the Americans are like children, they can only understand eccentricity at the moment. When I came there for the second time, accompanied by the Canadian Cirque du Soleil, I already knew that I wouldn’t clutch them on philosophy or poetical emotion. And I decided to conquer them: I went for the techniques, I based my performance on a simple attention to it. I’d make a turn, and while a spectator swallowed a hitch and felt pleased, I’d stop and immerse in thoughts. I’d take a strange thing off the stage, and the spectator began to wonder what it was for. Once I heard the grumble, I’d make next turn. I extended the pauses up to 10 seconds, till the silence became static. It’s a great problem for the Americans – to keep a mind on something that doesn’t move. They do not watch Bergman in America. But fighting with them gave me an immense professional pleasure!

This year I was ‘fighting’ with the French when we had performances at the Casino de Paris. I was looking for a hitch for a long time. Whatever I tried, didn’t work. It was so till I guessed that poetical emotion would be a place of our meeting. Good for me, ‘cause fortnight of my ten weeks tour had already passed. Now I know exactly which countries do need me, and which do not. For example, Spain doesn’t need me. All our attempts to demonstrate tenderness in Barcelona last year failed miserably. They couldn’t understand a thing. The Spanish audience doesn’t forgive if you do not address it personally. Columbia needs me. While in Belgium or in Portugal I am absolutely useless: their society is in such condition that my ideas have no meaning there.

And our Russian audience is just like me. We are so similar. I prefer when comedy and tragedy are together, for me it’s the top of the theatre, and here it is everywhere around you. There is nothing to think up. Who is the favorite personage in Russia? The exhausted, the drunkard, fool, blockhead, the outcast. My personage was an easy-going member of this company. I don’t mean it ironically, it’s true. It’s in our blood – to sympathize with the lost people, with those who didn’t succeed in life. There are not many heroes and victors in Russia. The success of my clownery here based upon the fact that this is the country of anti-heroes. But at one moment I felt that I have nowhere else to go. People loved me, I didn’t have anything to do, I only had to come out to the stage to get applause. It wasn’t just dull – it was scary. There was nothing to overcome. And I left my country. But what is funny – now in Russia there is a nostalgic feeling for what I have done in England and what was absolutely up-to-date there. Nostalgia is one of the most profound emotions in Russia. People need a base to stand on. “We want to get back to what was necessary or even seemed important”, they say. That’s why novelty is impossible here at the moment.

JD – The interview was made in 2001/2002. Below is an extract from Quidam by Cirque du Soleil, the famous and much-loved Skipping Rope routine.

Translated from Russian by Julia Shuvalova.

 

Museum Photography: Examples from Three Countries (UK, USA, and Russia)

How do museums regulate permissions for museum photography, and is there a conflict between personal photos and official museum merchandise?

museum-photography
Industrial Gallery, Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery (@Julia Shuvalova, 2008)

In the first week of December I went to Birmingham, and one my destinations was the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery that houses the works of some leading Pre-Raphaelites. Taught by experience, I asked about museum photography. Yes, I had to fill out the form again, but this time the rules were set out in more detail, although once more there is a clause or two that may potentially be difficult to interpret even for the staff themselves:

1. Any copyrights (including publication rights) created in the photographic materials produced under the conditions stated below are reassigned to Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery.

2. Any photography is for personal reference only. No permission for any reproduction rights of any kind is granted or may be assumed. Permission for reproduction rights should be applied for, in writing, to the Picture Library. Each case will be evaluated independently.

3. Any work, which is protected by the artists’ copyright, may not be photographed without the permission of the copyright holder.

4. Any works on loan, including temporary exhibitions, may not be photographed.

5. Flash photography is permitted unless otherwise specified.

6. The use of professional photographic equipment is prohibited. Tripods and monopods may not be used under any circumstances.

7. Video cameras or camcorders may not be used under any circumstances. Filming is prohibited.

Fair enough, reading these rules may put an intrepid visitor off taking pictures in the gallery altogether. However, the first two points just further reinforce what I have highlighted in the previous post on the question of reproduction. The problem is seemingly not only about a picture’s commercial use, but about the multiplicity of such uses. Naturally, if the photo is included in a book, it will be reproduced as many time as the book. For this, it is essential to apply for a permission to a museum.

Regarding the 3rd point, my feeling is that this needs to be discussed with the copyright holder before their work actually gets to be displayed. This is something that many professional artists’ and photographers’ websites tend to lose the sight of. By creating a website and making it public, they by default agree that this information can be shared. It is the same as with the printed word: if it was printed, you cannot stop people from quoting it. This is not to say that their work can be reproduced for commercial purposes by other people, but this should mean that a blogger may wish to not only write about them and give a link to their website, but also to include an image in the post, to illustrate why it would be good to visit the website at all.

Likewise, when an artist is displaying their work at the museum or gallery where photography is generally permitted, they have to be aware that a visitor can upload a taken photo online. It makes every sense to restrict this, on the one hand; but, on the other hand, the world has grown bigger with the Internet, and this potentially means that artists, especially young, may find it more and more difficult to compete with other artists and to assert themselves in the world. Social Media tools, and particularly photosharing, will facilitate this to an extent.

With loaned works and temporary exhibitions, I feel the galleries would need to spare some resources to clearly display the permission signs in such spaces of the gallery. As more and more often galleries intercept the regular display with a temporary exhibition, it is difficult for a visitor to understand where a photography permission ends and where it resumes again.

Regarding the specialist photography permission, this is a good point and the one that I think can be reinforced to avoid the taken photos being reproduced to a commercial end. This is how the Brooklyn Museum defines their stance on photography in the gallery:

Photography and videography are allowed in the Museum so long as the images are taken using existing light only (no flash) and are for personal, non-commercial use. Photography and videography are often restricted in special exhibition galleries.

Add to this also that many paintings are displayed under the glass, hence the photographic image of a painting in the gallery space can be far from ideal for reproduction.

A different take on photography and videography in the museum comes from the State Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg, Russia. As you need to purchase tickets to view the collection, you can also purchase a permission to make photos or videos in the museum. The website explains that there are warning pictograms in the halls where it is not permitted to take photos or to use flash. I did use this permission once myself in 2002, and this was great to show the museum to my parents who happened to have never visited the Hermitage.

The question rises, of course: why would I film, and not buy a video cassette or a DVD? Well, we all count our pennies, and on my memory even 6 years ago it was cheaper to pay for a photography pass rather than to buy a DVD set. I have been taking a notice of what people photograph and film, and I have never seen any of them making a complete record of the collection. If any of the readers have been to the Hermitage, they vividly imagine the sheer grandeur of the place: you would not know what to photograph because there is too much to see, and all too splendid! They say it takes 5 hours to quickly run through the entire Hermitage (i.e. only stopping at a few paintings), so imagine the weight of this on your photo- or videocamera. But what the Hermitage achieving with this is very valuable. On the one hand, they allow people to create a personal record of a visit to this art depository, a historic monument, and one of the most beautiful sights in the world altogether. On the other hand, by asking for a small fee for a photography permit they also bring in money to the museum.

More on Photography and Blogs and Social Media

error: Sorry, no copying !!