Antonin Artuad as he relates to Xiu Xiu

[Anders]

Has anyone on these forums ever read any Antonin Artuad? He was a French actor turned philosopher on art. Real weird guy, totally addicted to heroin, disappeared in Mexico. But his philosophy on the nature of theater still provides an interesting look into how one reaches audiences and the emotions one must evoke to provoke an audience. What I feel is his more substantive philosophy, Theater Of Cruelty is of particular interest in the case of Xiu Xiu. Cruelty, not that of medieval tortures, of torn flesh or bloodshed, but cruelty “first unto myself” not a cruelty to ones body but first of all a cruelty unto ones mind.

This Idea of torture to the audience in order to allow them to experience of the thundering blood of life through the methods of spectacle, or as outlined in his book The Theater and It's Double, the almost excessive use of symbolism as a means of communication to move away from the word, and towards the action. Artuad felt that French theater had gotten a little dry, it's typical piece, being one of everyday life (think friends but in French and 50 years ago) with nothing to draw an audience in. The patrons moved on into cinema and the circus, where they were delighted with flames, and dancing clowns, and moving pictures. The Theater of Cruelty is an Attempt to reinsert the “spectacle” into the stage.

Anyways, this theory makes for really interesting theater, but when taken in it's broadest forms artuad speaks of attempting to break down the intellectual barriers we build during everyday life that prevent us from reaching an emotive understanding of art. (ie, the Apollonian and Dionysian tendencies of man) His means to this is end intellectual cruelty and the use of spectacle. I've felt since listening to xiu xiu, the Jamie Stewart has present a second solution to this problem, with his use sound. The dissonant percussion and keyboards found on much of xiu xiu's releases is a sonic cruelty that tears at the intellectual barriers we build, that allows for the emotive nature of Jamie's vocals. In other places Jamey simply uses his voice as this tool, creating warbles, screams of outrage and pain, and the like. Regardless I fell that without this “cruelty”, the raw emotion expressed in the lyrical, and vocal content of xiu xiu could not exist.

Anyways, Just thought I would open up discussion.

ANDERS#nosmileys#nosmileys

[dr. strangelove]

at the end of this last semester, in a final for my senior seminar in theatre, i began a presentation by playing "i broke up (sj)" in its entirety to a very confused class i do think there is a link between artaud's theories and xiu xiu, although i think a les savy fav would be a more obvious choice as a "theatre of cruelty", at least on a surface level. have you ever studied grotowski? he was a follower of artaud's, but unlike artaud, grotowski actually implemented some of his theories on stage... well, i guess artaud technically tried, but everything was a complete disaster (just read "the cenci" for further proof :} ). grotowski's production of _akropolis_ is probably one of the most intense & honest moments in theatre history that was fortunately captured on video

[Mike Schnapp]

I like Les Savy Fav and all, but I think you're giving them a little too much credit... LSF and Xiu Xiu exist on different levels. Not to say that one's any better than the other, but the music of Xiu Xiu has to be appreciated on an entirely intellectual level, whereas Les Savy Fav is rock and roll with a great live show and a crazy frontman.

[Anders]

1)I agree with Schnapp here, Les Savy Fav, although much more about spectacle than xiu xiu, never achieves the intellectual symbolic state that artuad demands. I'm not saying that xiu xiu adheres very strictly to his theories either, only that when you dig down to the meaning of cruelty as it relates to art, I think xiu xiu hits more of the bases.

2)For a class on aesthetics the first assignment was to bring in a “piece of art”. (I know it sounds like a bullshit way to start a class, but it's by far the best class I've had in my 3 years of college) The point being that we would eventually learn to argue why we considered that piece to be art, and whether our ideas were founded. Essentially analyzing our own subjective taste in art. Anyways, I considered bringing in knife play and arguing it's artistic merit (knowing that the class would cover artuad). But I wussed out and did a Dali painting instead.

3)I'd just like to thank who ever removed the asinine response from this thread, it's a welcome and pleasing relief to see effective forum moderators... Thanks!

4)Last thoughts... really I think the xiu xiu adheres much more closely to artuad theories of the theater of the plague than the theater of cruelty, (which are really two very similar theories), or maybe a combination of the two. I KNOW THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE! Haha

well, great so far, I'm excited to see where this goes

I'll take a look at grotowski, but you should check out Alejandro Jodorowsky if you haven't already a great surrealist film maker. His movie “the holy mountain” actually has within it a staging of “the conquest of Mexico”.

Anders

[dr. strangelove]

i actually agree with the statement that xiu xiu are far closer to artaud's theories than les savy fav. i was just stating that they are more obviously confrontational, and therefore another possible direction to take it in. i didn't really state what i meant properly, as i was only half awake, so i concede the point :) it's so funny, but theatre people get really touchy when it comes to artaud (myself included). he is so often misunderstood, and he misunderstood so much himself, that discussion on his writings even make me uncomfortable, despite the fact that i absolutely adore his theoretical writing.

you should have taken in a song to that class. when i opened my presentation with "i broke up" rather than some film scene or piece of poetry, my prof was pretty impressed, even though the volume was perhaps a little high :)

on a similar note, i recently thought of the following parallel: someone once said that "all of modern art history is retribution for van gogh's neglect"... perhaps modern theatre history is retribution for artaud's neglect?

as to the deleted post, i never planned on deleting asinine posts (there are many here) but such an obvious piece of idiocy made me experiment with that all too alluring "delete" button :-}#nosmileys

[Anders]

There is so much to say about even just two things you brought up in the last post that’ I’m having troubles breaking down and organizing my thoughts. Maybe just writing this out will be help enough.

First, you’ve said that les savy fav was just another direction to take it, which, in turn has lead me down that path. Les savy fav throws out one of the greatest live shows you’ll ever get to see, straight up insanity and well…spectacle, filled with costumes, dancing, and general tom foolery. One of my favorite bands to go see and although not intellectually provocative, they’ve managed to capture some of what artuad talked of, in the same way that he waxed on about the glories of the circus, or cinema, the Marx brothers. They capture the audience’s full attention, and whip them into a frenzy, yet they never attack our minds they never push that a level further and utilize that frenzy.

Second, that quote could probably illicit an entire essay, let alone the few minutes between classes that I’m about to a lot to it. It’s obvious as soon as you delve into what artuad said (and is going to be true for what I have to say in a second) is that much has been left out. But he has provide basic guidelines through which he understood the capture of the human mind, based on watching people be entertained, and being an entertainer himself. He spoke very lucidly of the way in which the mind is captivated by actions, and not by words. He strove to create active dissonance, or a dissonance in the way in which we perceive the world.

(Side note for a second) I feel like all art that has ever touched me or affected an emotion within me is based in dissonance. Dissonance I feel is the way in which art motivates change in thought and feeling. For example, even when looking at a great painting (the least favorite of the arts for me) what stands out is not the parts that fit together seamlessly, but those parts that go against the grain of your common sense. Examples can be as extreme as the visual imagery of Dali, or as simple as the expressionistic styles of van gogh (whose dissonance comes not from the visual image but the way in which it’s presented). Dissonance is arts blade to cut through our rigid logic, it drives a wedge between what is perceived to be real, and what is perceived within the piece, it doesn’t require a suspension of disbelief, it in fact creates belief by inserting us within a world where such actions can exist.

Xiu Xiu uses real dissonance (that of music) but also takes that a step further, it’s not just dissonant chords played to us in rhythm, but dissonance used to further the emotional state of what is being expressed. Jamie Stewart’s vocal styles add a second layer to this, splitting and tearing at our preconceptions of typical vocal patterns.

Well that’s about it for now, I’m afraid I’m not as lucid as I would like to be on how xiu xiu fits into this pattern of things. But then, it’s one of the reasons I opened it up to discussion.

Sorry about the disorganized thoughts, just kinda going for it here.

Anders

[dr. strangelove]

actually, i thought your thoughts there were quite interesting. and you pointed out the one problem i've always had with artaud, and where i see a possible contrast between artaud's philosophies and xiu xiu: artaud's denial of speech. perhaps he only stated his opinions to the extreme that he did to make a point about the power of movement and sound, but he did ask for plays with almost entirely no dialogue, and the lyrics in xiu xiu's music is just as important as the instrumentation, vocal qualities, and any other aspect you want to distinguish. but what xiu xiu does so amazingly is combine these different elements that perhaps would not work when seperated as individual elements, but on a whole, create something that possibly transcends the parts. for example, the song "hives hives" has some incredible instrumentation, and jamie's vocal qualities are stunning, but would the song be nearly as powerful if those vocals werent singing "A.I.D.S. H.I.V."? the fact that he has chosen to blend the discussion of an uncomfortable topic with music that is dissonant makes the song the brilliant piece that it is. now, i feel that somtimes people take artaud too literally, and if he hadn't destroyed his mind with psychotropic drugs that he probably would have eventually developed a similar style, as grotowski, one of his followers, would later develop. in fact, i see this amazing trend in music today of blending discomfort with pop music that reminds me very much of artaud's and grotowski's work. not only xiu xiu, but also deerhoof, young people, and even less experimental groups like why? and mu. i like your choice of the word dissonance, and find your conversation on it very interesting, because i feel very much the same way. my favorite painting is picasso's "woman with mandolin", and he is probably my favorite painter due to the fact that he created such dissonant pieces where something always feels off at first, but in the long run, you almost feel as if you know the subject better due to the artists decision to show unattractive qualities.

ok, now i'll stop rambling and pass the conversation back to you :)

[Anders]

This will be short and sweet for now (I wish I could say this is all I had to think about, but I can't). I'll try and post more on these topics later this week when i have more time.

First off, I had the pleasure this Christmas to visit the www.guggenheim.org/ peggy Guggenheim Museum in Venice, which is just about the sweetest collection of art I've ever witnessed. Everything from Pollok to Picasso. It seriously raised my impression of the ability of the paint medium. I had never really gotten the chance to see this type of painting live before, and the difference is amazing. If you ever get the chance I'd check any of her exhibits out after seeing this one.

Secondly, on dissonance, what I like about that word is that it's truly what comes to mind first. It's exactly how it feels when you're confronted with the kind of artistic situations that your mind just can't get around. They feel painful sometimes, they feel grating and tearing, and something about them just sends you reeling. Dissonance is everything that Artuad wanted from cruelty, he wanted mental dissonance.

On that note, his ideas of removing speech from the stage were warranted I'm sure for they're time (believe me, I've been going to this “dramatic writing” workshop/class, the last couple quarters and so many of the playwrights could learn from removing a bit of speech), the French theater being largely that of exposition. But that's where one has to remember that his theories are based on the stage and theater, and not in attempting to reorganize contemporary thoughts on music. I believe an understanding of his desire for symbols, spectacle and staging, are enough that one can consider the insistence on minimal speech as a reaction to the state of French theater during which he had to work. (see el topo for an example of cinema that's taken minimal speech to heart)

Finally (this may sound like shameless self promotion, and then... maybe it is), I'd be really stoked if you went to www.bytecave.net/anders/blog my website and poked around in the achieves, you'll find quite a few papers on artuad and theater and art in there, as well as plays I've written, and stories an what not. A general collection of my thoughts and creative efforts. It'd be great to hear any criticism you would have to offer, since you apparently have some for knowledge of many of the ideas I discussing on there. (you might have to much about a bit to find something that peaks your interest by I encourage you to dig around). you'll see I posted the conversations we've been having here, there (wow that's a little syntacticly weird) I hope you don't mind, but I like to post any real thinking I do.

Anyways, this is great, I'm really diggin it, (i really should have played knife play for the class, but I totaly wussed out, maybe I'll take the class again some day and go for it). I look forward to more.

Anders

[midwest shock]

totally unrelated but related, i think the line "my behind is a beehive" is copped from/inspired by a dennic sooper novel called frisk. or maybe closer. i forget which book but i've totally read that exact sentence.

two cheers for literary references!

xo justin

[shockmidwest]

hahaha. i just reread my post and i went the wierdest sort of dyslexic when i wrote "dennic sooper" becuase what i meant was

dennis cooper.

duh. sorry i'm stupid.
xoj

[shockmidwest]

hahaha. i just reread my post and i went the wierdest sort of dyslexic when i wrote "dennic sooper" becuase what i meant was

dennis cooper.

duh. sorry i'm stupid.
xoj

[dr. strangelove]

i love dennis cooper, and any link between xiu xiu and him is much appreciated... you're right, the line does seem familiar now that you mention it... if jamie ever reads this, was it a reference? have you read dennis cooper? etc?