Share this page
BETWEEN TAKE
Encounters and perspectives in the course of artistic development
A meeting
Sometimes an event is enough to give them the renewed energy that is inevitably lacking in the course of a stage journey.
Without such an opportunity for rebirth, the circuit that has become badly or well oiled is fatal: desire withers, then gangrene belief, confidence; eats away at strength. Then, without new perspectives, it is gradually the wardrobe for the costumes, the drawer for the manuscript, the dungeons of a cellar for the scenery, the methodical and joyless storage of audio CDs, computer files, video supports, when it is not directly the dumping ground for the cumbersome accessories.
This time, however, I had decided not to allow myself to eradicate the material elements of a show - in fact of a series of shows - which would sooner or later intervene when I had decided that the subject was closed, that it could not happen again, convinced that it would no longer 'play', as they say in the jargon of the stage.
Following the mourning of the end of my collaboration with a group in which I had invested my entire being, I decided three years ago to attempt, through a process of voluntary metamorphosis, to wrap my vision of the production of my works in a fresh layer of management. By this I do not mean training in this field, but information capable of initiating an upheaval in my vision, my thinking and consequently in my choices and, by extension, in my future encounters.
Refreshing the pages of the adventure
Informing myself and learning what I could adapt to myself, I had the desire to inspire my functioning from now on from that of a company.
It suddenly occurred to me that a good number of artists of my kind were grossly neglecting the economics of their activity. Ill-educated, ill-informed, we did not consider ourselves capable of thinking about "profit". Profitability seemed a dirty word, incompatible with a true artistic vocation. Yet contemporary art, specifically through the visual arts, has been displaying before our eyes for decades its capacity to generate profits and not systematically harm its authors; sometimes even far from it.
What was the clever gene in us that made us so pitifully different from the gallery start-ups that art makers and designers had become? Were they making product? What were we doing? What were we doing? So what about the ephemeral? Don't they say that everything sells. So why not poetry? Even if the idea, I must say, seemed rather far-fetched, especially when it was my own. Fascinated by my new readings on personal development and the discovery of what some business creation enthusiasts even considered to be an art, I decided to understand a little better what the spirit of the "private" consisted of and to consider the beauty of the gesture of undertaking.
Scrupulous in my research, eager for knowledge and intellectual encounters, I even went so far as to ask for an accreditation from Entrepreneurs' fairI had to take a closer look at what a strange beast a banker, a marketing strategy advisor, a savvy communicator was. In doing so, I was well aware that I was momentarily opting for a new role, but doing so with conviction was the sine qua non for gaining any understanding of this landscape so different from my own. Proud of my badge, for two days I walked the carpeted aisles of the exhibitors' booths and attended the conferences I could get into. I didn't really have a strong motivation to actually create a company whose business plan in my field seemed very random at first, but again, what mattered to me was to grasp the background of a thought other than the one I had always operated with. I didn't come back from this foreign country completely empty-handed, but it was mainly through reading numerous blogs on this subject that I got my access code to a new area of my brain.
One in particular, with its author's sensitivity and obvious passion for believing in the benefits of free enterprise for everyone, caught my attention. Its evocative title was and still is, " Rich mind ". Convinced by the clairvoyance of its author, Michael, I decided to contact him after having read his coaching offer. Despite the particularity of my request and its newness for him, he agreed to look into my case. We agreed on the price of the intervention and he proposed two telephone sessions after which he would send me a summary and personalised advice. I would like to say here, for all those who would suspect me of cleverly hiding my lifestyle under 80's rags, that I did not miraculously become rich after the treatment. I didn't expect it and it wasn't the purpose of my approach. It was, as I had hoped, the impact of these discussions that was truly enriching, which corresponded perfectly with the thinking behind the blog. Being rich meant having enough time in your daily life, while being free and happy in your work. And to be free was rooted in the management of one's life, both psychologically, socially and materially.
Of course, this was not a discovery in itself, and what is more, I was not in the situation of an employee who believed himself to be a prisoner of the limits of his skills and the devitalized job market. Fortunately, I had already come a long way on the relative path of autonomy and had never imagined myself alienated from any hierarchy. No, what I had learned invaluable during these interviews and through the reflection that had resulted from them, was that I saw in a brand new light the idea of undertaking as a priority everything that would lead me to a good, a gain, a progress, a satisfaction... a profitability. And in artistic creation, however marginal, this rule was just as applicable as in economics. Gone were the meagre appointments, goodbye to the importunate, goodbye to the costly and indulgent forced outings, bye-bye to the harmful time-wasters of all kinds. Make way for positive relationships with me - which does not mean uncritical ones - for sincere and beneficial affections and for enriching my life according to my own criteria. And among these, one of the most important to me:
From that day on, however ephemeral it was, my creation should no longer depend on others, be they actors or programmers. For my well-being and survival, it had to exist outside of everything, including in the absence of performance spaces.
My work was more than ever my home
And it would grow and evolve just by the primordial fact of its conception in my head, on paper, but also via all the other media I was already used to using, including video, audio and the Web. It would be everywhere, all the time and in all weathers, he and I as one. And so much the better if sometimes we could make ourselves visible thanks to an enlightened and intelligently proposed welcome. For the rest, my production was going to be organised and structured in spite of any emotional link, without being deprived of the traces of the attachments that would, as always, compose its substance. It did not have the vital necessity of any, and moreover, had never had it, except in my own sentimental eyes at the time. It was no longer time to painfully get rid of the materials that made it up, props, costumes... but also, desire and thereby lose the chance of being able to resurrect it one day. No pretext would be valid today that would justify the negation of my work in favour of forgetting disappointments, betrayals, failures and illusions, by letting it dissolve limply in the fallacious solvent of interdependence with others.
Becoming rich is not about giving up what you have created. In fact, it is quite the opposite, and freedom does not lie in erasing the traces of one's own life. We sometimes wonder if something is "worth it". It would often be useful to divert the expression in favour of asking whether it is "worth the cost" and of what nature this cost really is? The attachment to happy memories of shared moments becomes an inhibiting burden if the price of its preservation is the sacrifice of what gave rise to it. In this case: my strength and my work tool.
Other energising encounters are coming, if we are willing to look at them when they brush against us. Encounters with a new potential for profitability for our own human enterprise and more appropriate to our current environment than conservative nostalgia. We must desire them, we must provoke them, we must seize them.
I consider myself today as a small celestial body among thousands of others, some of which are far too many light years away for us to ever get close. Having set off on a journey for which it has not chosen all the coordinates, sometimes drifting too close to other planets, gravitation obliges, by dint of revolutions the little body feels it is reaching its proper orbit. In the distance, an unknown solar system looms. I enter it slowly, in a cloud of asteroids.
Today, a rebirth is scheduled in this brand new world. The countdown to a new journey begins. For a whole year, the joy of adventures will be able to stretch its thread along this encapsulated time that is already ticking away. Whatever happens, nothing will ever be worth these interstellar journeys for me.
Thanks to Anne Dreyfus and her GeneratorI would like to express my gratitude to the artist, the cosmos expanded within four walls, for having created and allowed to live a place of art which definitely gives a real meaning to the expression Dating site.
A totally innovative and exciting approach. A priori unprecedented.
(admittedly, one company has already taken over the operation of a business by selling services: not an unattractive approach, but the company in question is heavily subsidised - which it does not deny since, by virtue of a principle of "financial transparency", the budget is presented in detail to the spectator during the "non-show" - this remains a method of financing that requires an approach of institutional prostitution)
To focus on the material profitability of a free artist (a restricted view of profitability I agree). The question remains what to sell (and what to buy). It seems that the human being is ready to pay - a lot - to possess (cf plastic art). What about an artist who does not make an object, whose work is intrinsically associated with his body? Can we buy the artist or at least rent him? Should we propose a rental offer (by the hour, by the package?) (be careful, I recommend a "concrete" contract as to the conditions of rental, the artist must continue to do what he wants, otherwise it has no more value than an hour of housework in my opinion). Should we propose a "souvenir" of the artist at the end of the performance (such as a lock of hair, a trace of various bodily excretions, an unpublished text, a kleenex bra, etc.)?
In any case, as "black" is an absolutely unique product, the potential market and profitability are enormous, bringing erectile growth. What remains to be done is to find an offer, a concept and create desire to stimulate market penetration. Consumers are thirsty, dried up by normativity. They are ready to pay dearly for a good splash.
I fully agree with your analysis of the question "what to sell?
This is indeed the heart of the machine and even a sadly philosophical heart, I would say, since it contains within it the question of their own raison d'être in this world for the artists of the independent theatre scene. What sense does it make to produce one's art in the eyes of others if in return there is no material alleviation of living conditions? For we know that showing 'at a loss', to say that you exist, is not an end in itself, even if it gives us pleasure to see that others hear you and even 'share' you through your expression. Financial recognition is not an empty concept in art production. It is equivalent to the free time needed to carry out one's task while limiting the wear and tear of dynamism. The idea is one that I ponder daily because it is difficult to find a plausible and satisfactory answer. The famous goodies or derivative products, as their name indicates, seem to me to be too closely linked to the notoriety of the characters they symbolise to constitute a first entry or, as we see in the case of mainstream cinema or rock music in the case of addiction phenomena, derive from the infatuation with the mythology that the works themselves already carry. The problem really comes from the archaic nature of live performance, which requires an inordinate amount of money to balance any production with its inputs. Hence this atrocious dependence on institutions that have become an evil for a so-called good and, in my opinion, a plague that persuades the artist of his status as a marginal invalid who cannot survive without the infusions of a good daddy doctor. "It's for your own good", Alice Miller would have said. I believe logically that an artist should be able to support himself through his creation, like any other working individual, since he too is a product of society and therefore a necessary entity in the balance of forces at play in any human society. You don't have to be a star to live on a normal footing. But everything is distorted by the vision we have of them, by the "separate" status we give them. It reminds me of the status of women not so long ago, who were thought not to be able to be autonomous because of their potential nature as mothers. The pill has greatly helped them to take control of their destiny. It is up to us to invent the contraceptive that will block our propensity to conceive at any cost, almost in spite of ourselves. I believe we need to manage the inconveniences of our vocation in the same way that women have been able to control their menstrual cycle. Artists allow themselves too much to be subjected to their own desire to produce, including myself naturally, rather than to do so when they want to, under favourable conditions that would not burden their development any further. The analogy ends there, but I see in it the fruit of a whole system that keeps women, children, artists and, in less gleaming ones, sick people and delinquents in the same golden jail. In short, I am apparently straying from the main subject, but I think that the link is not as convoluted as it seems. As far as the performing arts are concerned, pragmatically, I tend to think that at present they remain, in the first place, their own loss leader. Or, where applicable, its author when the latter is clearly identifiable. This in no way excludes derivative products which, in my opinion, are real poetic modes of publishing, the published theatre text itself being nothing more than an accessory, a score, and in no way "the play" as it is so often called by abuse of language. I personally believe in the recording and the medium, including dematerialised, as ambassadors of the stage. But I also believe that they need to be thought of differently so that they can really restore something of the human dimension of the performance, as the record does for the concert. You have to be able to imagine what is going on around you and not be faced with the distorted poverty of simple recording. Everything is falsified; from the scale of the people to the vibrant and unpredictable nature of what can happen in real life, not to mention the lights which no longer have their impact. The whole technique of stage writing is therefore screwed up if we are not careful. It's extremely delicate, but the living always exists on the side of the viewer. That's why I hope that the arrival of 3D screens (without the need for glasses) and the democratisation of this shooting technique will help things to progress. There is always a new technology at the base of artistic revolutions and their diffusion, two things that are often linked. Tube painting allowed us to leave the studio and move around "on the spot" with a transportable easel, and electric amplification took music out of the living room and into the football stadium. The same goes for the printing press and the digital camcorder, although I don't understand why there is still no network of rooms to broadcast what we create from home. The internet makes up for this, as well as a very innovative TV channel for video art like souvenirs from earth. Perhaps one day holography engraved on the equivalent of a DVD medium will give a chance to the restitution of volume and its emotion in live. But I believe that from now on, it is important to make people understand what stage writing and the languages of staging really are, by not always confusing them with the packaging of a story; the stage text is not itself a simple tale put into words and action. Very often, we read without realising that its similarity to literature is only a delusion; that it must be deciphered through a vision of the living and the body in play in order to give it back its physical and sound form. So much confusion is generated! So many false pretenses contained in its very matrix! It is truly an art of confusion, difficult to hear because its code seems accessible from the outset through its proximity to everyday words. So much does it imitate life. The practice of its transmission in the classes gives painful evidence of these misunderstandings every day. A lot of work ahead, isn't it?
I agree with you about the vast erotic potential of erectile markets. I have made consumable prototypes of my own after casting. For the time being, I'm still at the stage of local craftsmanship. But I intend to remodel the issue.
The site you mention interests me because of its original approach, but it seems to have been abandoned; I would have listened to the interviews with Laurent Goumarre to better understand, but the links are invalid. Is it still active? Do you know their productions?
Here is a first attempt to put online a sound recording of one of my productions from last May by the publishing company Zingy:
https://soundcloud.com/david-noir-production/david-noir-le-nouveau
Thank you for this enlightening and visionary answer. As a "spectator" in search of vibration, I have for example bought the mp3 of the new testicle. Like a "score" text, listening does not allow one to vibrate in the same way as experiencing it. It's sometimes frustrating if you're trying to relive what was felt in the live, untouched moment. On the other hand, different vibrations and emotions (let's go with that word "jawbreaker") can appear on the occasion of an abandonment, of a return to a certain innocence. Which, to return to the subject, has a value (notably financial). As for 3D, it is an exciting opening towards an experience that is even closer to the proximity of bodies (without the smell).
As far as La Coma is concerned, I attended Scan in 2003, a suprising, philosophical experience, as boring as "marketing" can be. Interesting approach at the time) They have produced other "things" since but I did not attend. I think they have a site that is still active (la coma / Bordeaux on google).
Didier
Paris
38 years old
Middle management in a multinational company
Thank you for these details which demonstrate a visionary and original approach to the production, dissemination and funding of live/dramatic/performance art.
As a spectator/fan/consumer/consumer, I bought the mp3 of the new testicle when it was released both to support the artist's scholarship (sorry for the repetition) and to feel the vibrations of the performance. Obviously, the sound support only partially restores the "human dimension of the performance". The desire to relive this moment is therefore - as was foreseen - a kind of failure. Clinging to a past moment (as a kind of 'good memory') can only lead to frustration. But I discovered that approaching this medium (but it could also have been a text) with a form of virginity, of innocence by evacuating the memory of the experience, allows to feel different vibrations. The medium becomes a "sister"/daughter work of the real performance. It is part of the same family (let's not be afraid of swearing) but has its own particularities. I am not forgetting the mother (let's not use bad words), the knowledge of the mother is even indispensable, but listening to it leads to a different and different experience each time.
The arrival of 3D is a source of curiosity and excitement. The proximity of bodies (and the smell) will always be missing, but after all, amplified voices have become widespread and there are few concerts where people sing in the audience's ear. So I am firmly waiting for the introduction of the 3D living artist in my (bedroom). As for theatrical text, it is indeed often almost unreadable but so 'speaking' when it is said in action. But after all, it is not meant to be read 'in your head'. Only the vibrations of a body can give it a backbone.
Not being a professional of the performing arts (quite far from this "world") but aware of the vital character for society of living artists in its midst, this is a modest testimony on this decidedly stimulating blog.
As far as 'the coma' is concerned I have only seen their 'scan' production in 2003 which at the time was quite unique. An experiment in customer satisfaction extremism that leads to abyss and terror (hence laughter) as far as I am concerned. They have since produced other 'things' and their site is still active but I don't know more about it.
Didier
38 years old
Paris
Middle management in a multinational company
Thank you again for your clarification. You changed your nickname in the meantime, so I didn't recognise you straight away 🙂
I have posted both your comments which seem to be redundant though different; but as I did not know if it was a voluntary act...
I hesitated to ask you if you were part of this milieu and I am all the more interested in your opinion as you say you are far from it. When you have a moment, if you wish, I will be very interested to know exactly what leads you to develop reflection and interest in questions that are often brushed aside by "professionals". Even so, I consider that being a spectator is already largely an integral part of this milieu, or at least, undeniably of this process that is stage creation.
The first comment was written in a hurry on the metro on an iPhone. A comment that I thought was lost due to a bug. The other was more thoughtful. Well, I hope they reflect the same thought or at least a certain coherence. As for the reasons for these comments, I will elaborate, but the first simple answer is that this artistic field seems vital to me, individually and collectively, and that its disappearance for lack of "means" is not desirable for anyone who is at least a little sensitive to the notion of freedom, survival, resistance and dignity in the face of powers and systems that destroy the vital impulse, desire and pleasure.
Didier (the one on facebook) 🙂
Ah Didier! So it was you hiding behind this multiple mask. This Belphegor aspect is great for my first series of comments. Thank you. But apart from your active part in a multinational company, you are also a comedian, as far as I know, aren't you?
Amateur comedian. A few hours a month. Not at all confronted with questions of funding. But intrigued by those who "live" from their art (the "professionals"). Curious to know how this art (and especially what it conveys) can exist and develop outside of state dependence. Because I love it. Because I think that it can convey profound vital changes, provided that it does not disappear and that it becomes free.
Didier.
Yes, let's try to put it on the map, like Spartacus or the postage stamp, even if it's a leap into the void of generalized indifference (or almost). I recently saw Harold and Maud; it gives wings to the improbable suicide.