“Touching Limits” – such a slogan for a theatre conference can hardly cause a stir today. In the post-modern era, in line with the prevailing neoliberal pressure for progress and transgression, theatre and the world of art have become one of the key drivers of boundary and limit crossing in perhaps every direction. This makes it all the more important to ask at conferences which of these boundaries make sense to cross, and when the artist rather becomes a conformist keeper of the social order.
The conference, which was held in an intimate spirit, was an important probe into contemporary theatre production, especially in relation to the situatedness of people in the world, in their full corporeality. It Ranged from working with corporeality itself, as in the contributions by Shuntaro Yoshida, and Laura Brechmann and Florent Golfier, which emphasized the ecological dimension of creation, to the corporeality of space in architectural and urban lectures by Višnja Žugić and a performative walk by Alžběta Trojanová, to the transcendence of the human in the ethics of artistic work with animals by Tereza Teerink Turzíková and Richard Pettifer.
The boundaries of theatre were dissolved almost completely in these presentations, confirming the trend in contemporary art to let different disciplines permeate it and allow artists to use tools and methods for specific projects that are congenial to their creative goals, rather than confining them within the boundaries of certain types of art. However, at the same time, all these contributions showed how the context of such work is political.
A different perspective – a journey not outwards but inwards – was presented by Attila Antal and Andy Jochman, whose contributions were strongly oriented towards witnessing human experience: in Antal’s case in relation to storytelling and in Jochman’s case to documentary theatre. Here, too, the theatre was not the privileged art form, but rather a tool that is used only when it can effectively convey human testimony.
In all of these cases, it became clear that the questions raised by the work of art in contemporary “liminal” situations are articulated primarily by the artist as an individual who realizes an intention; and even if they present commentaries about the society, speak to it, or seek to shake it up, they are not beholden to it. In fact, transcending boundaries today means completing the post-modern withdrawal from institutional frameworks and liberation of the individual as a creator (Steve Jobs being the ultimate prophet of this neoliberal religion of creativity). In spite of all the proclamations about the death of the author, this proves that the singularity of creation is deepening rather than dissolving. Let us ask: Isn’t the sovereignty of the author and its limits more than ever before the topic for our contemporary society? As the ethical questions that had emerged during the conference illustrated, any plausible radical critique of artistic creation and its relationship to the society must start at this ethical position.
From this point of view, the debate about the artist as a professional seems essential. What is the relation of artistic creation to the post-industrial economic complex? What demands can an artist make of the society while not denying the self? And, last but not least, are artists a privileged social class whose individualism is the mainstay of neoliberal culture? I tried to outline these questions in my contribution. To answer them, we need to go beyond the boundaries of the theatre – to begin to consider who we can meet beyond them, and for whom and how we can speak, especially since the individual experience of boundaries seems to be crucial for the artists, rather than public service. This is a strong message that the conference is contributing to future discussions.
Jan Motal