Relationship between circus and other artforms
What can I add to another conference on circus? I would rather be making the work….
But it is important for artists to be articulate about their work.
I've been thinking about things I have realized in the past few years about circus. Firstly, the old circus problem identified at the last conference - the debate between traditional and contemporary circus. I have found a really good analogy that has help me understand what I feel about the two:
'a modern architect bought an old house and he built a wall around it in corrugated iron and glass. He had created a new living space between the walls and the house in which the text (the house) and the context (the material) were visible.'
For me, contemporary circus is like that, it has built itself around traditional circus, I don't think there is an enormous distinction between them. In all of the work that you see, even the form, all the content is visible to us in contemporary circus. We've learnt an enormous amount from traditional circus and will continue to do so.
Contemporary circus has revitalized the form and has created a new dialogue so that it is able to use key features of our society today. It is able to use a juxtaposition of genders and genres, fragments of dance, music and physical and visual image. It uses pastiche and modern technology and it represents both celebration and chaos. There are really clear reflections of the modern society in which we live.
For me, this is where circus has changed most recently. There is a sense now that we reflect something really important in our culture, and that is one of the reasons that audiences are coming back to circus. Circus says something about people's lives. Whether we re-invent the circle or transform the wheel, the key features of circus are still the same. It still privileges the body. The body is the primary mode of communication in circus. Mat at Mamaloucos once said, the tent and the ring and the form that we use for circus changes an audiences expectations.
'Circus is the only ageless delight that you can buy for money' [Ernest Hemingway]
I think that this says two things; he goes on to say that circus is the only spectacle he knows that has the quality of a truly happy dream, and some circuses do that. Some circuses now represent the nightmare. This is equally important. That is what we live in - a dream and a nightmare of our own time. Ernest Hemingway's print views that circus has always a business - we cannot remove ourselves from the fact that we have a product and want an audience to see it. So there's nothing different between traditional and contemporary circus on that level to me.
While circus as an artform enjoys worldwide support and recognition in other countries, it has consistently failed to be regarded as an artform in this country. This is changing but whatever reasons are - circus in this country asserts its presence by its absence.
In relation to other artforms, circus is characterized by the incorporation of many other genres, contemporary and traditional. It is also true that other artforms have and are borrowing from circus.
I did a quick survey of artforms in London and their venues (theatre, dance and opera) and skills of circus are extremely well represented. We've had Robert LePage at the National; he uses a webcast in 'Geometry of Miracles'. At Sadler's Wells we've seen dance companies using circus techniques. One of the things that other artforms are borrowing from circus is the ability to create images in the mind. From my own experience, opera has always used circus for its scale and its spectacle. Theatre has made use of circus techniques and skills. Throughout, the use of the non-narrative linear phrase.
Directors are searching for a new vocabulary that can explain what it is about life that we need to understand at the moment. I think circus does that. It would appear that circus is making its way into the cultural canons of our society. It looks good - we're getting there!
If you examine media and TV - circus is increasingly used to sell things from cars to clothes to the millennium. Circus has become a commodity. There is no point in running away from that fact - we live in a consumer society and circus is one of the commodities that we have. Looking at facts and figures: circus has always been a business. If we look at the major contemporary companies in the world, they are 80% self-generating after initial production investment.
A survey in 95/96 shows the effects of lack of funding. I have felt as an artist, an effect from a current lack of funding and foresight from the Arts Council of England in terms of policies. In 1995/96 circus received £11k from ACE, this represents less than 1% of the total ACE budget. In 1995/96 in Australia, circus represented 10% of the Australian Arts Council's performing arts budget.
I believe that things are changing in England because circus reflects the culture that we live in. I think people want to see circus; it says something for them. My real concern with this country is that I feel circus is being over exploited whilst it remains underdeveloped as a form. As an artist, the process of developing the form and content in circus is capable of crossing the age and cultural barriers. Being able to communicate to an audience and to help us understand what it is about our life and our love and our society that we live in. I think that is what theatre, circus, whatever we make and direct is about. Trying to make sense, understand even if its by breaking it apart. It takes an enormous amount of time and discipline and it is investment in companies, in artist, in infrastructure, in the initial stages. And really I can say that time is nigh. I don't want to end on a bad note. Circus is changing quite dramatically. It is time to take the bull by the horns and go with it……
Deb Pope