ON INNOVATIVE PERFORMANCES(S): THREE
DECADES OF RECOLLECTIONS ON ALTERNATIVE THEATRE.
By Richard Kostelanetz.
Review Published in: Text and Performance Quarterly, Volume
16, Number 4, October 1996. 380-381.
Around
1960, when he first “learned to think of culture as important,” poet, novelist
and occasional critic, Richard Kostelanetz, began regularly attending the
theatre. Out of a fear of losing touch with the sensation of live performance,
he adopted the practice of describing and evaluating individual productions on
the back of 4” by 6” note cards. The nearly two hundred ensuing notations now
comprise the bulk of On Innovative
Performances(s): Three decades of Recollections on Alternative Theatre.
Interspersed between these entries weaves a series of longer essays previously
published in other locations. Part diary, part journalism, part scholarship,
Kostenlanetz’s book defies easy categorization. At its worse, it is dated,
pedestrian, and opportunistic-hope for the publication of grocery lists
everywhere. At its best, Kostelanetz’s eclectic assortment proves a probing,
insightful history chronicling and ultimately predicting many of the more
controversial and exciting performance trends of the past thirty years.
The collection’s emphasis on
alternative theatre corresponds with Kostelanetz’s other efforts in performance
scholarship. Of his earlier works, The Theatre
of Mixed Means (1968)-ripe with insights into happenings and multi-media
events-may well be his most significant offering. No surprise should be taken,
then, that Kostelanetz incorporates the title essay from Mixed Means to serve as a “kind of introduction” to this new
collection of essays (1). Loaded with discussions of “simultaneity,”
performance as ritual, and the devaluation of the spoken word in favor of
cacophonous music (7-8), it is easily imagined how this essay stoked the
artistic/critical fires of the previous generation. However, in the shadow of
Turner, Schechner, Appel, and the rest, these observations now seem dated in
both terminology and insight. Although such a condition goes with the territory
of reprinting, irony exists in the fact that the opening essay focuses on
subject matter intended to be ground-breaking in its times.
Yet, the dated quality of
Kostelanetz’s essays does not completely devalue their inclusion and
effectiveness in On Innovative
Performance(s). Similar to the “Mixed Menas” opening, the other eight
recycled pieces contribute very little that is new. They remain alluring,
however, when viewed as documents of their time and as playfully accurate
prognostications of the contemporary scene. For example, in the three decade
old essay, “The American Tradition,” Kostelanetz embraces the then heretical
notion that, in the recent shadow of Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller, the
legacy of American Theatre lies in the work of its directors and actors rather
than a formal, literary drama (50). Likewise, his 1978 essay on Robert Wiolson
foreshadows many contemporary views of the ground-breaking director’s
contributions. Kostelanetz’s biographical essay on George Rhoads, written in
1988, does a fair job of illuminating the interactive, audience-centered
qualities of the artist’s installations. Finally, his lucid connections between
modern dance, visual art, and professional football found in his 1969 essay,
“The Artistry of Football,” predate contemporary fascinations with the athletic
event as cultural performance. Despite references to now long retired players,
this convincing essay still supplies ammunition for those esthetes brave enough
to admit that they enjoy watching contact sports.
Undoubtedly, the heart of On Innovative Performance(s) lies in its
many entries on individual performers and performances. Certain readers may
question the necessity of many of these entries. After all, enough quality
scholarship goes unread without pouring over descriptions of forgotten solo-performances
enacted in basements of condemned buildings. However, even these descriptions
are ripe with larger insights. For example, by condemning the “smugness” of a
now forgotten solo performer who thought “his audience less literate and less
sharp than himself” (11), Kostelanetz unwittingly identifies the self-indulgent
pitfalls that still plague so much performance art. Similarly, Kostelanetz’s
attempts to come to terms with the early performances of John Cage, The Living
Theatre, and Mabou Mines-to name but a few-provide a fascinating look into the
origins, development and eventual appreciation of these remarkable artists. In
itself, the twenty-seven pages spanning twenty-one years of Merce Cunningham’s
contributions to modern dance goes a long way toward making the overall text
worthwhile.
Perhaps the book’s greatest asset
lies in its value as resource and investigative tool. To his credit Kostelanetz
did a remarkable job of attending productions that still elicit enquiry and
infamy within the theatre world. For example, he witnessed four separate
performances of the Performance Group’s Dionysus
in ’69 and three different performances of The Living Theatre’s The Brig. Each of these entries provides
pithy and provocative descriptions devoid of the prejudices and
responsibilities of mainstream journalistic criticism. Just as Kostelanetz’s
pronounced distaste for realism make him a poor candidate to cover Broadway,
his dedication and commitment to things avant-garde make him a worthy guide for
the winding path of alternative theatre. Through Kostelanetz’s able narrative, On Innovative Performance(s) offers a
kind of cultural and critical road map charting theatrical terrain often
discounted or poorly understood in other, mainstream accounts.
More than likely, readers will pick
and chose from the entries in this collection. The brevity, humor and
accessibility of the performance reviews make them excellent material for
students of performance history in search of immediate insights. At times, On Innovative Performances(s) reads like
a cross between Sam Shepard’s Rolling
Thunder Log Book and Bernard Dukore on laughing gas. It is uneven,
occasionally mundane, and, for the most part, ignores productions outside of
Robert J.
Hubbard
Northwestern College