Performance, Identity and Community 2018

Full Name: Dr Adam Alston

Annual Conference Theme (if applicable): Anarchy, Optimism and Performance

What were the main points that emerged from your WG this year?
In the Spring – on a non-strike day, but in the thick of the strike period – the working group held an interim event on “Anarchism, Desire and Performance” at Camden People’s Theatre in London. We set ourselves two main goals, as our interim event report sets out: firstly, we wanted to “map fields of thought, practice and action related to anarchy and anarchism”; secondly, we wanted to “think about anarchy and anarchism in terms of optimism and desire, particularly as an antidote to vilification and demonization of anarchy and anarchists that does a profound disservice to the spaces of creativity and interdependence that anarchism opens up”. This provided us with a point of departure for this year’s annual conference on “Anarchism, Optimism and Performance”. We were keen to continue mapping historical and contemporary performance practices that have directly or indirectly aligned with anarchist ideals, whilst continuing the group’s engagement with notions of dissonance, dissensus, agency and strategies of challenging institutional and other frames of exclusionary legibility. Recognising chequered histories of anarchism and the ease with which anarchist politics and aesthetics have been vilified and commodified, we wanted to approach anarchism as a site of creativity and hope – not least at a point in time threatened by worrying geopolitics (Brexit, the rise of the far right, the demonization of foreign others, the election of political candidates unfit to run a country, etc.). We kicked off proceedings with an excellent panel on “Queer Anarchism”, featuring contributions by Stephen Greer, Aylwyn Walsh and Andrew Lennon. Stephen began by discussing the work of comedian David Hoyle, and his provocation to “kill all in authority”, and to “kill yourself, ladies and gentleman. And I mean that in a lovely way. Sometimes it’s good for you to reincarnate yourself”. A particularly interesting aspect of Stephen’s talk was when he described anarchism as “a refusal to finesse that which is destroying us”. Aylwyn Walsh then turned to “poethics”: quoting Silva, she framed this as “an ethics which, instead of the betterment of the world as we know it aims at its end”, and advocated for artists who set out prefigurative modes of poetic justice. This panel concluded with Andrew Lennon’s account of Chris Goode’s performance Weaklings, which sparked a fascinating discussion around the ethics of the work and particularly its engagement with issues of consent, submission and slavery. The Q&A led us to question the entanglement of optimism and futurity, calling instead for the present to be thought of as a time for radical action. Our second panel on “Collaboration and Participation” featured two contributors, and kicked off with Simon James Holton exploring anarchism as a collaborative principle in performance making. This ended up producing some very interesting discussion about hierarchies in performance making, looking not at the abandonment of hierarchy, but rather questioning the kind of hierarchy one might wish to see in a collaborative process. Astrid Breel then introduced us to a rigorous theorisation of agency in participatory performance, dwelling on how participatory performance has a habit of inviting conformity to the demand characteristics of performance. This prompted some great dialogue in the Q&A about relationships between agency, perception and self-awareness, and the importance of social context in approaching how we might understand agency and autonomy. We then hosted an Open Panel on “Labour, Occupation and Action”, which was very well-attended and demanded co-optation of chairs from adjacent rooms. Martin Young gave a highly engaging and well-researched paper on theatre strikes, asking us to consider how “any relation between anarchism and performance needs to keep labour relations in view”. This seemed particularly relevant in light of our interim event and the strike action that surrounded it. He reminded us that if we are to understand theatre as a site where strikes are to occur, we must first understand it as a place of work where it is not just work that is refused, but the generation of surplus value. Elyssa Livergant then discussed her inspiring work at Limehouse Town Hall, inviting us to consider thinking about the imaginary and the social together. This led to some thought-provoking dialogue about scope for sustained intervention. Tom Cornford concluded the panel by looking at the Secret Theatre initiative at the Lyric Hammersmith, referencing a question posed by its artistic director, Sean Holmes: If you can only work within the structures that exist, why not challenge those structures? This prompted Tom to consider how such an ambition in that context may in fact just be plugging a gap in infrastructural development. Our final paper again featured two panellists, and set out to explore “Protest and Radicalism”. Annecy Lax addressed ideas of beautiful trouble and the irresistible insurrection, alongside consciously juvenile tactics of provocation and the weaponisation of humour. Ciara Murphy then brought our panels to a close by considering Margaretta D’Arcy’s inspiring commitment to a life of protest, focusing especially on the “no-wash protests” in Ireland. Both papers led to some strong connections between this year’s conference theme and our closing discussion at the end of last year’s conference, which dwelled on protest and the radical.

What was discussed at your business meeting?

On the final day of the conference, Gareth Evans acted as a respondent to the Working Group’s meeting this year, piecing together threads running through all of the papers around ideas of dignity, tolerance and intimacy, while introducing a fresh focus on sustainability. This prompted a rewarding brainstorming of ideas that we may wish to consider as we look ahead to 2019, which include productivism and efficiency, utopia and futurity, emergence and immanence, care and cooperation, resource and repurposing, and entropy, ruination and sustainability.

Types of contributions:
All contributions took the form of academic papers, although we were keen to strike a balance between presentations and discussions.

Number of formal contributors (those listed in book of abstracts) 11

Approx. overall number of delegates who attended your WG Sessions 19
Composition of WG (PG, ECR, etc.)
50/50

Did you have any non-UK participants? Yes

If your WG hosted an Open Panel, do you have any feedback?

We did not receive written feedback, although informal feedback was highly positive. The room was also packed, and it was a delight to find such positive engagement with the group’s activities.

Any additional points or feedback not covered above?

Philip Hager will be stepping down as co-convenor of the group. We would like to both thank and praise Philip for his work and commitment. His impact on the group’s identity and trajectory has been pronounced. We are also excited to announce that Stephen Greer will be joining Marissia and Adam as co-convenor, and we are excited by the possibilities that this brings forward as we look ahead to next year, and beyond.