The Universal: The Simplest Place PossibleRomeo Castellucci, Valentina Valentini, Bonnie Marranca, Jane House

PAJ: A Journal of Performance and Art, PAJ 77 (Volume 26, Number2), May 2004, pp. 16-25 (Article)

Published by The MIT Press

For additional information about this article

Access provided by University of Athens (or National and Kapodistrian Univ. of Athens) (17 Apr 2014 14:47 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/paj/summary/v026/26.2castellucci.html

16 PAJ 77 (2004), pp. 1625. 2004 Valentina Valentini and Bonnie Marranca

THE UNIVERSALThe Simplest Place Possible

Romeo Castellucci, Societas Raffaello Sanziointerviewed by Valentina Valentini andBonnie MarrancaTranslated by Jane House

Romeo Castellucci, with Claudia Castellucci and Chiara Guidi, foundedSocietas Raffaello Sanzio, one of Italys most radical-thinking contemporarytheatres, in 1981. Since that time the group has created many productions,including provocative stagings of the classics of Shakespeare and the Greeks,including Hamlet, Julius Caesar, the Oresteia, as well as mythic texts, such asGilgamesh. Societas Raffaello Sanzio also sustains a unique childrens theatre, aschool, and produces books and conferences on their work. Based in the Adriaticcity of Cesena, Italy, the company artists bring together theatre and the visual artsand often, animals, children, actors, and non-actorsin productions that drawupon philosophical, literary, and visual ideas. Performed in nearly a dozen Europeancities, each as a singular creation, is the latest project, Tragedia Endogonidia, whichunites art and science for a new reading of tragedy in the contemporary age. Thisinterview was conducted in Italy, in June 2002.

Much of your theatre work has been the staging of classics by Shakespeare and the Greeks.What draws you to tragedy?

A spiritual connection exists between us and the classics; through them its possibleto reconnect with the individual and with the universality of the individual, it is alsopossible to find the familiar as well as real solitude. A kind of reverse action shot isinvolved. Work with the classics demands that we confront the traditional, but thatis precisely why the work can surpass the traditional, but never in a literary way.Therefore one mustnt tackle these classical texts as a superstitious person whobelieves the classics to be safe; quite the opposite. One must make an effort to putthem to the test of fire, in order to better determine their supportive structure,which leads exactly to the revelation that they speak to everyone, to the frail andprivate nature of every individual. And the book, as object, is no more.

CASTELLUCCI / The Universal 17

How does it relate to your work?

The new cycle of work, on the other hand, is dedicatedand its the first time thatthis has happenedto a work outside the context of literature, outside the contextof great books, books of the past; outside the book, yet its still work that is partof the discipline of tragedy. We could define the structure as classical, but the tragicform has so influenced individuals, society, and culture through the ages and hasbecome so much a part of our psyches that it can appear in new aesthetic forms inour contemporary world. So, this new cycle of work has what Ill call a universalstructure, and as such it presents more basic problems. The universal is the simplestplace possible to free oneself from narrative structure, from the burden of narrative,and thus also from the burden of the written word, from its visibility: the wordshould go back to being invisible. My tragedy project is called Tragedia Endogonidiaor Endogonidial Tragedy. Endogonidial is a word taken from microbiology;gonidial refers to simple living forms that have inside them two gonads, thus bothsexes, and they consequently reproduce through an endocrine system. The pricethey have to pay for being able to reproduce themselves is not conjunction, union,but division, a perpetual division of themselves. These living things are immortal.

The interesting thing was to contrast these two words. Tragedia or tragedy issomething that is part of our history (or at least the history of this side of the planet);its structure has a place at the origin of our consciousness and our culture.Endogonidial. on the other hand, is a word that falls completely outside culture,in the sense that there is no culture in this process of reproduction and survival. Sowhile tragedy is a mechanism to expose the dead body, a mechanism whosefundamental aim is to display death, these micro-organisms are in fact immortal andreproduce themselves ad infinitum.

Tragedia or tragedy on the other hand, presupposes an end (of the hero). Ourintention with this production is to rethink tragedy, bring it into the here and now.In ancient Greece, the Episodes were sections of a tragedy that presented only thefacts, without commentary; commentary was left to the Chorus. In TragediaEndogonidia there is no Chorus. Out of the Episodes emerge basic recurring figuresand forms, themes and ideas, which make the spectators aware of their existence,their state of being.

In what way is a city involved in the spectacle?

There are various ways in which a city can be involved in the project; in some casesit can be through a specific reference to something in the city even if the city itselfis never actually named. A characteristic of this project on tragedy is that it changesfrom city to city, therefore it is in a process of becoming, but besides being in aprocess of becoming its an organism in continual flux, so the performance is neverthe same; but thats no reason to call it a work-in-progress. Because it really appearsto be the opposite; every time it opens for an audience, its a finished and complete

18 PAJ 77

production that supplies, within itself, the mechanism of endogonidial reproduc-tion, a division of itself by itself, a sort of fall-out of spores, which provide for futureand successive growth.

Furthermore, its a system that completely eliminates the problem of repertory andtherefore of reproduction, of the characteristic repetitive nature of theatre thatscalendar-related, because it is a project that in some way is strongly tied to a conceptof geography and of place.The cities involved are Avignon, Berlin, Brussels,Strasbourg, Bergen, London, Rome, Cesena, Paris, and Marseilles. Tragedia Endo-gonidia also includes a Film Cycle and a Travel Diary of the displacements: Idiom,Climate Time.

In Italy the theatre of the 90s came closer and closer to the language and forms of writingtypical of film or visual installations. Theres a big crisis in the lines of demarcationbetween cinema, video, film, installations, the visual arts. What has glaringly disap-peared in many of our most recent experiences is the boundary between the concept ofentertainment and the concept of art, and the feeling of pathos.

Yes, of course, I understand perfectly. Its a problem for me too; if theres noemotion, for me thats it, its over, its only a sterile idea. And thats true above all forthe new generation; theres no dynamic, theres no thought. I always demand that anartist move me. I even ask that of a visual artist. For me the emotional wave is theineffable nucleus of a work, its breath of life. But its still difficult to be moved atexhibitions, at the biennials, where one sees dazzling and hallucinatory spectaclesand stagings that remind one of amusement parks. Although even that type of ironycan succeed, its a very difficult exercise. Irony is interesting when its fierce, when itrips your mind apart. That doesnt always happen. The artists have to be damn good.

However one very often can have an enjoyable experience when there is an absence ofirony, when there is no discussion about the world. How does European art make itselffelt on the international scene?

In my opinion in certain American artists, such as Bill Viola, for example, therelationship is obvious: his references, in his most recent works, are to the ItalianRenaissance even on a formal level; the composition, I could even say the prosody,becomes a choice of colors, of placements. Hes another example of work on theclassical. In other situations the legacy of the European experience shines through asbacklighting. Pop Art itself, which is completely American, has plainly taken certainpathways left in suspension by Dada and symbolism.

Is there a link here that is missing-how does it relate to Europe question?

Matthew Barney is an artist who is completely and magisterially American. Hesextraordinary because in his works he manages to trigger off a sort of language thatsself-contained, cohesive, endowed with merciless logic. He presents us with thisreality, this complex system of signs, but the most satisfying thing is that he does it

CASTELLUCCI / The Universal 19

The character Bruto [Brutus] in Act I ofGiulio Cesare. Photo: Courtesy SocietasRaffaello Sanzio.

Cicero (background) and Cesar (foreground)in Giuulio Cesare. Photo: Courtesy SocietasRaffaello Sanzio.

Brutus and Cassius in Giuulio Cesare.Photo: Courtesy Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

Amleto. Photo: Paolo Tonti, Photo:Courtesy Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

La Prova di un altro mondo. Photo: Luca dal Pia,courtesy Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

20 PAJ 77

by using the signs of our reality. Hes one of the strongest artists today who is not,apparently, influenced by European art. He appears to be indifferent to the historyof art, because the history of art has no bearing on his work. Brilliant.

How do you work with actors in relation to the Italian tradition?

The Italian tradition is based on characteristics of types. That is, there are charactertypes in the Italian tradition, but meanwhile we know that Stanislavsky foundedeverything really on the idea of digging and interpretation, where the actor analyzesthe character, the psychology of the character. In my case, neither the one nor theother exists; but these two pathways are not negated, theyre simply two unacknowl-edged tracks, two tracks that remain suspended. My work is of a more objectivenature, it relies on the body of the actor. Its a discovery, an encounter that happenswith men and women willing to live this adventure. A professionalism is notnecessarily required, although the actors do acquire it, in the sense that those whowork with me dont work spontaneously, nor do they improvise, but they becomeprofessionals even if they werent at the beginning. What makes an actor importantin this experience is the soul, the face, and the body. The truth of the body becomesinscribed quite precisely in the fiction of the spectacle.

Two temperatures, two expressive registers, are present: on the one hand thelogical structure of the movement principle and on the other the body and its truths,which is the most concise form of communication possible and also the mostdisconcerting, the most pointed. The body is the simplest form of communication,in the sense that even an animal understands you since its in a position to see you,hear you, and smell you. The body is the point of departure and probably also thepoint of arrival, after having completed an ellipse, after having also passed throughand shaken the body of spectators. So I would say that this is a fundamental ideathat sustains the work of the actors; it doesnt repudiate tradition, it ignorestradition, the Italian and European tradition. And the static tradition of the East.

Can you give some examples of the difference between type and body?

In some cases the choice of an actor depends exclusively on the dramaturgypresented by a particular stage situation or by the specific text, the choice is never apersonal one; the choice of a person, the shape, weight, age, walk doesnt depend onme. Theyre all elements that create the truth of the persons body and that spill over,willy nilly, into the dramatic fabric. So the choice depends on the dramaticcharacteristics of a piece of writing for the stage or even a simple text. To give anexample, and to remain concrete, to the perceptive eye, the hallmark of Shake-speares Julius Caesar is its loaded rhetoric.

In my production, Cicero is interpreted by a man who, I think, weighs 240 kg(Trans. note: approximately, 528 pounds). I didnt want to put something shockingon stage, something provocative; on the contrary, although I needed to work with alarge body, in a certain way I hid it, I didnt do anything to make this already

CASTELLUCCI / The Universal 21

oversized choice too obvious. The body was big, in this case, because Cicero is theman who drives forward Shakespeares text the most, who has the most weightbecause he inspires the conspiracy. Even if he doesnt ever take part directly in theaction, hes still like a sort of weight that throws the action off balance. Thus Cicerois an enormous man who always has his back turned to the audience, because heturns his back to the action, and on the set with him are two treble clefs that referto Man Ray.

Quite simply, he, in his turn, became a rhetorical body. In Julius Caesar I alsoworked with an actor whose larynx had been surgically removed, and it was his jobto perform the voice of the character of Mark Antony. Mark Antony is the one whowins the oratorical competition, so working with someone who has no larynx meanthaving a new voice that came from the viscera, from deep down inside. MarkAntonys speech is completely focused on Caesars wounds, it recalls the number ofstab wounds, the blood that came out of them, the fact that the wounds are silentmouths which have no other voice at that moment but his, Mark Antonys. Well,this character in the shape of this actor actually talks from a wound, to make thespeech truthful, outrageous, and moving. The most amazing thing of all is that thistype of emotion is really stimulated by a consciously rhetorical use of the body andvoice.

In what way is technology present in your productions?

Technology is present on the stage as metaphor and spirit. Technology and machinesare bearers of phantoms who inhabit the set, the stagethe concept is animistic. Soa machine has an entrance and an exit, it lights up, it takes up a chunk of the world;in short, it creates its own world. So its quite clear that its not merely a gadget, adecoration, because it is energized and it is triggered by argument with the actor, andthus it has in some way a dehumanizing function. It dehumanizes the actor, putshim in danger, places him in the paradoxical position of deuteragonist, so thatfinally it creates an inhuman tension.

The machine, unlike the animal, is inhuman because its pure function withoutexperience. The actor falls exactly between these two camps, between animal andmachine, hes both things at the same time, pure function and pure exposed body,pure being. Technology becomes a central metaphor and, as such, its often moreuseful to hide it in order to make it effective: its the operation or action of themachine thats important, not the machine itself. The technology I use is verydiverse and ranges from being very primitive to very sophisticated: video technology,endoscopes which reconnoiter the insides of the actor and upset the traditionalrelationship that the audience has with the actor, in the sense that its possible to seethe actors interior. For example, the endoscope in Julius Caesar passes over andprobes the vocal chords and projects a video of them upstage. The first image is theinside of an actor, not a face, not an exterior. But I only do this with verysophisticated technology, instruments that are very difficult to use to which I devote

22 PAJ 77

twenty, thirty minutes of performance time without any human intervention by theactors. Pneumatic, hydraulic, oleic dynamic or oil-pressure machines, taxidermy,automaton mechanics, microscopes, organic chemistry, chemiluminescence, tech-niques for breeding certain animals, acoustical physics, robotic components, butalso little pieces of sacred wood that have been badly nailed together . . . in short,whatever.

What is the spiritual dimension of your work? Can you describe its place in your theatre?

I cant say, I dont know anything about it, really. Its something that escapes mecompletely, it must be there somewhere, but I cant know it, I cant say what it is. Itry to plunder the spirit of others, in order to move myself. It can happen in certainsituations, in certain total creations. It can even happen in certain ancient texts thatI tackle in which everything seems clear to me, even the power that they trigger.What is very difficult, however, is what happens, at least for my sensibility, with acontemporary author. Its difficult for me, if not impossible, to stage a contemporaryauthor like Beckett. Ill never stage him, not because Im a coward, but because wereon the same level. Beckett has, like me, like a contemporary man, the same kind ofbox, one might say, the same type of aporia. We both find ourselves in the samecircumstances, and it is not possible to work with someone who is in the samecircumstances as I. Its like an algebraic sum: two similar signs cannot stay together.I need a classical structure, one thats universal, pure, transparent. Being universal, itbelongs to me, because it resonates in me. Beckett doesnt resonate in me, really, butI see my neighbor in him. The classical structure is pure, and being pure I canmanipulate it. And once manipulated, I can purify it.

The universal allows you to dig inside yourself, to extract, to add.

Exactly, in a word . . . its possible to work, its possible to live. In freedom. Noabsolute freedom exists in a contemporary author. Again, contemporary texts are allpackaged, ready-made, in speech.

Do you feel that you have any fathers or sons?

I have a putative father, a false father, and hes a shining figure, one of the ghostsof my turbulent adolescence, Carmelo Bene, whom I didnt follow in any way. Forme, hes simply an icon, but the important thing is that hes an icon that is part ofmy adolescence; theres a personal story there. However, I reject the idea of masterteachers, it has no meaning at all for me. Im completely outside, and it would beworse still if I claimed a master teacher. Naturally there may be figures who were,and continue to be, fundamentally important to me, but they are invariably outsidethe orbit of theatre. Thats perhaps natural and human. But following in the tracksof a method, for me thats a mistake. Following a model means taking anotherspath, and I want to question the very idea of a path.

CASTELLUCCI / The Universal 23

Oreste in Orestea.Photo: Courtesy Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

Clitennestra and Egisto in Orestea. Photo:Luca dal Pia, courtesy Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

Oreste and Pilade in Orestea.Photo: Luca dal Pia, courtesySocietas Raffaello Sanzio.

Hansel E Gretel. Photo: di Silva,courtesy Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

The companys experimental theatreschool for children, directed byChiara Guidi, Photo: Courtesy

Societas Raffaello Sanzio.

24 PAJ 77

In your opinion, is Pirandello relevant to present-day theatre?

I dont know. No, Id say he isnt. Pirandello is a figure whos central to Italian literaryculture, but I personally have never followed him, because he sets off a kind of self-reflection, a sort of tautology that is mirrored in the actors. Its not part of mythinking, it never has been. Pirandellos theatre is self-reflective, and a sort of newawareness happens through language. But the limits of Pirandello lie in the fact thatlanguage becomes linguistics. The energy and power are buried by the situationcreated, penned, by a man who knew a lot about books and short stories. Payattention: Pirandello is literature. Thats something else. For example, when thesix characters are searching for the author, thats more than a symbol, I have to say.These people are renouncing the disconcerting truth of the stage, the rift or barrierof the stage, the alienation that is an essential characteristic of the stage experience.They are renouncing all of that, thus they are also renouncing their stage roles. Theyare completely dependent on an author, on a poet, on the script, and thus they justrepeat the script. All of this was happening at the same time that, beyond the Alps,a tortured Antonin Artaud was tearing words from his flesh, and paying a high pricefor it. Theres an abyss here, I would say. These are two separate worlds that willnever know each other.

In Tonight We Improvise theres a scene where the actors send away the director, who inhis turn had sent away the author, and they end up doing everything themselves. To endthat scene, Nina plays her part, she sings etc.; and then theres the one who doesnt die, butshe does faint. This infers how dangerous it is when an actor does without the director,without the author, because it changes from being performance to being life.

Yes, but its even more ironic that it was written, fixed for all time through artifice,through a kind of somersault. Its strange. I admit theres a great sharpness of visionthere, but it belongs to a piece of writing, a script thats completely dead, one thathas already divulged everything. One thats descriptive, demonstrative. Life on thestage . . . why are we afraid of that word on the stage? What harm is there in it? Theysay its dangerous. But I embrace the danger that is so essential to theatre. So? I thinkits really the divide, the barrier, that causes all the furore.

Pirandellos style is to mix up the levels, but everything remains in the linguisticdomain. Its like the sweet yarrow, an herb with many leaves but only one flavor. Ifind thatto continue the parallel which gives a sense of proportion to the thingswere talking aboutArtaud is a figure who doesnt belong to the past, hes not partof tradition. Thus Artaud represents an aspect of making theatre in this sense; hesnot simply a playwright, indeed, he really isnt one at all, and thats a dimension Ifind pregnant with the future, despite the fact that academics try to manage him, toconjugate him. Artaud wont be taken, really, he wont be held.

The theatre of this century, of our century, does it go beyond the text and literarylanguage?

CASTELLUCCI / The Universal 25

No, not always. I believe that in this era theatre can really be created in all possibleways, even by simply reading a text from beginning to end. I dont believe thattheres any problem with form. I believe that in this era we can finally say that we arereleased, indeed liberated, from the burden of style, from the burden of form. Youcan create theatre through the written word, through a text, but theatre doesnthappen just because theres a written text, its not automatic. What counts is thespirit, the emotion.

Does a new theatre of Europe in the 21st century exist?

In my opinion, it is a theatre that no longer has the problem of formal boundaries.I find that the most interesting experiences are those where certain choreographerscreate spectacles with very little dance, or theatrical spectacles that are reallyconcerts.The most interesting situations, in my opinion, are those in which theres abreakdown of styles and roles, or where what happens is of a radical nature worthyof this era, and this idea can happen even when there is not much tension, when theheat is low. The most interesting experiences are often those that, from a formalpoint of view, assimilate more from the visual arts, and I believe that, all in all, themost creative energies are coming from there. Theres a whole mode of theatre tiedto tradition; I dont call that art, only bourgeois decoration. Essential theatre is whatcan be done either in the middle of a war or in a museum. I believe that, in the end,whats very important is the ideamental giddiness, temporal suspension from thisworldand presenting it for discussion, and the actual possibility of anotherparallel world, another language which, suddenly, as Alice knew, stops being other.

VALENTINA VALENTINI is an Italian critic and curator who lives inRome and teaches at the University of Calabria. She has published severalbooks on performance and media, including Teatro in immagine and DalVivo. She edits a theatre series, with volumes on Franco Scaldati, SquatTheatre, Teatro della Fortezza, Peter Sellars, and Eimuntas Nekrosius. Heressays have been published in Biblioteca Teatrale, Ariel, The Drama Review,Theaterschrift, FilmCritica, Drammaturgia, and Performance Research.

BONNIE MARRANCA currently teaches at Princeton University.

JANE HOUSE co-edited, with Antonio Attisani, 20th-Century ItalianDrama, An Anthology: The First 50 Years (Columbia University Press, 1995)and has translated works by, among others, Ettore Petrolini, Pier MariaRosso Di San Secondo, Manlio Santanelli, and Natalia Ginzburg.