Theory & Media Centre
THE SKIN OF CRITIQUE
lecture series with artists / theoreticians / critics
What makes the skin of critique today crawl when art gets into touch with it? And what makes it get thin when art contacts society, nudges it? How much contact and contamination do art and critique bear, while remaining autonomous and political at the same time? In what way is critique itself an art of politics, and how is art critical without merely practising subversion rhetoric? What does get under the critical skin of contemporary art? Can critique evade normativity, and do we have to weaken it immediately, as soon as it empowers itself? How to criticise critique – weaken in order to strengthen? And concretely: which critique today strengthens contemporary dance and performance, and first of all – which critique is strengthened by these? (continue reading)
FRI 31. MARCH
17.30 h in TQW / Studios — Admission free
HELMUT PLOEBST / CHRIS STANDFEST
THE PLEASURE OF THE TEXT
A Discursive Ménage-à-trois
lecture series with artists and theoreticians
“The pleasure of the text is that moment when my body follows its own ideas – for my body does not have the same ideas I do.” (Roland Barthes) The placeless pleasure of the text, which once again differentiates the body from the ego, also moves the tongue of contemporary dance, which also takes pleasure in minimalistic stories, scores, scenarios, statements etc. But how does the pleasure of the text also become, according to Barthes, a “critical principle” of a performative aesthetics of contemporary dance?
»Nothing can overcome the resistance to theory since theory is itself this resistance.«
What is so dangerous about theory that it has long provoked such strong resistance – and still today particularly in a cultural and university-political context? Is this resistance inherent in theory itself? And does it even constitute theory’s very weaknesses for practice?
* The isotopes of one and the same element have different mass numbers but chemically behave largely identically and appear in the same place in the periodic table.
What still makes us laugh in the theatre – and do we know why and whether? And to what extent does this uncertainty shape the conditions of possibility of the comical? And also of the performative? And what has the repeated questioning “and” between the listing and repetition and difference got to do with the conjunctive, splicing and simultaneously splitting contrariness only marking possibility, which laughing articulates – laughing as “a chaos of articulation” (Walter Benjamin)?
To what extent does laughing as embodied disarticulation, as a tension between language and body, influence dance and performance today? To what extent does it form its critical potential? The comical as well as the performative certainly mark the aporias of conventions, the missing of place and time, the chances of possible failure, the body’s doubting of the language and vice versa, the lapse as an indicator of the repressed, the power of the diffuse, the racy standstill of the punch lines. And all the crisis symptomatics of the performative, in which body and language upend each other, talk at cross purposes, pass each other by, collide with one another.
Philosophy On Stage#3
theorie [dot] info [at] tqw [dot] at