Therapy in a performative process

When looking at exposure as a theme, originally we saw a purely physical revelation was the best way to explore this. We began to discover than a mental vunreliabilty was something as complex and uncomfortable to be presented with and to personally expose. Through asking members of the public, the thing you would least last to be asked, we gathered a hundred questions, with content varying from sexual experiences, to physical insecurities and matters of the heart, that we opened and answered. By documenting this process, we began to find subject matters and themes in the questions that forced us to reveal something inner, to the camera, something we found uncomfortable or unsettling to answer, as well as hearing. This concept we took further, but writing questions that delved deeper into the emotions and stories provoked by the publics written questions. Over a period of time the documented change became evident, our answers became more thorough and emotive.The process presented several unexpected revelations, in the sense of learning about the other participants as well as the stream of thoughts I presented.

Our process began to become a therapeutic experience, revealing dark thoughts and experiences for the first time. The documentation of these questions were so organic and genuine, that we did not want to replicate them through a live medium. The security and acceptance installed within the group throughout the various experiments conducted throughout our process, created an environment in which we felt comfortable to release information that we felt we could never fully explore or reveal, in front of an audience.  When exploring a physiological perspective on creative setting used as self-exploration, Carl, R, Rogers emphasizes the explicit link for such therapeutic process to happen due to the setting created by the other participants.

‘The directional trend which is evident in all organic and human life – the urge to expand, extend, develop, mature – the tendency to express and activate all the capacities of the organism, or the self. This tendency may become deeply buried under layer after layer of encrusted psychological defenses; it may be hidden under elaborate facades, which deny its existence; it is my belief however, based on my experience, that it exists in every individual and awaits only the proper conditions to be released and expressed.’(Rogers, 1999, pg. 351) The core conditions that we had unknowingly created;

‘The core conditions are:

– Empathy

– Congruence or geniuses

– Unconditional Positive Regard or a Non-judgmental warmth or Acceptance.‘ (Rogers, 1991, pg.351)

We felt could not be replicated in the [performance by and unknown audience. These conditions, which through varying experiments, acts of acceptance and non-judgmental traits, enabled us all to push our own exposures out and be as honest as possible. Due to the environment we had created not being easily if at all replicated we found the medium of film was the best way of capturing the essence of our answers and truths that then could be in as a scopohilic form presented to and audience. Our honesty’s and reactions where them ‘subjected them to a controlling and curious gaze.’ (Mulvey,19765, pg.186)

We found when filming the answers the other group members observing and not speaking reactions were powerful in their own right. The sympathy or disgust or surprise provoked in itself, was a performative physicalization of our thoughts. It was the body language and facial reactions that we thought was important to incorporate into our performance. Theses reactions were not manufactured and varied dependent of the person witness to the answer. We decided due to authencity of emotion revealed from the speaker and the observer was something we needed to present in the space. The live per formative element in relation to the video of our answers, were no ‘acting’ but were the honest reactions of the audience and our own responses to what we were hearing and seeing. The idea of cringing or crying or turning away, presented us in the most broken down way. This was highlighted through the space in which the piece was presented in and the time it was held for.

1. Rogers, C (1991) Becoming A Person. London, Constable & Company Ltd.

2. Mulvey, L (1957) Visual Pleasure and Cinema. Screen 16/3 (Autum)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *