But I have been looking back over my recent interviews. I have a habit of getting hold of really interesting artists, and then asking them about my own personal obsessions.
Here's an example: Orla O'Loughlin is the artistic director of the Traverse. This venerable institution - the book of critical theory I got out of Oxfam mentions it as the home of The Fringe - has supported new writing since the 1960s. O'Loughlin is just presenting her first production. So, here's my interview question.
GKV: Can I ask if you feel that critics can be a dynamic part of the debate not around theatre itself but the way theatre engages in wider discussion?
Never mind that you are bringing back an author who has demonstrated that Doric is a viable theatrical language, Orla. Let's not waste time with any chat about whether you are continuing the Traverse's proud tradition of cultivating new scripts. O'Loughlin did reply though, with considerable grace.
OOL: Of course, critics are a vital part of the debate about the way theatre engages in a wider social discussion. The very nature of their role is to publicly and regularly go on record with their opinions. Theatre, and in particular new writing and new work, is inextricably bound up with what it means to be alive in these times. A contemporary view is being expressed or explored. A voice is being heard. An experience shared. A question being asked. As such, theatre is a political art form. not least because it invites debate. And the critics are charged with professionally taking that on and as we've seen in Scotland recently that opinion has extended to include not only the politics inherent in the work being made but who has the power to decide who should make work in the first place and how it should be funded.
OOL: Of course, critics are a vital part of the debate about the way theatre engages in a wider social discussion. The very nature of their role is to publicly and regularly go on record with their opinions. Theatre, and in particular new writing and new work, is inextricably bound up with what it means to be alive in these times. A contemporary view is being expressed or explored. A voice is being heard. An experience shared. A question being asked. As such, theatre is a political art form. not least because it invites debate. And the critics are charged with professionally taking that on and as we've seen in Scotland recently that opinion has extended to include not only the politics inherent in the work being made but who has the power to decide who should make work in the first place and how it should be funded.
I think that this proves two things. First of all, if I ask an idiotic, self-regarding question, directors are more than willing to give me a sensible, measured reply. That says more about their generosity than my ability to ask incisive questions. Have you noticed how most of my writing avoids including my questions?
Secondly, Orla O'Loughlin has made a very precise challenge to me, as a critic. I have a responsibility to engage seriously with the work and the broader consequences. And I just wanted my ego stroked.
Next piece of evidence for the prosecution: an interview with David Hughes' choreographer for The Chinaski Sessions. Kylie Walters became an instant art crush for me about half way through the conversation - and I really ought to put up the whole transcript on-line. However, here's the stunningly original question I managed at the end.
GKV: What was your route to becoming a choreographer and what keeps you doing it?
Hold the front page! Vile's found the diamond cutter of a question! Either that, or he found a "how-to-interview-an-artist" guide for idiots. But once again, the artist is able to fashion an interesting reply.
KylieWalters: On the most basic level I guess I see things choreographically. In the street, the cadence of people walking in time, the weird symmetry of a bus pulling up and a cloud passing by in the opposite direction, the movement of a crowd when they start head banging in unison at a concert. The way someone holds their drink and leans in to say something in a conversation. I never think of making a "dance" piece, "theatre" piece or "music" piece. It's the ideas that keep me going, and then finding the best means to express those ideas kicks in. Choreography is one of the tools I have in my bag to do that.
Walters subverts the question elegantly, deconstructing my laziness and reminding me that I am just doing that "putting people into boxes" routine.
Luckily, some artists know how to deal with me. We end with a few words from David Hughes.I kick off with a blistering question.
GKV: But finally- what can an audience expect this time?"
David Hughes: This time an audience can expect a full on evening of in your face, relentless testosterone, you get to the end and go ‘what was that!’
If you don’t like the dance, you’ll love the music. If you don’t like the music, you’ll love the dance. If you hate it all Gareth Vile will run down the street nude- or, as a registered charity, we’ll accept donations for him not to!
Orla O'Loughlin directs The Artist Man and the Mother Woman @ Traverse until Nov 17
David Hughes Dance present The Chinaski Sessions @ The Arches 9, 10 Nov
No comments :
Post a Comment