friedafritz meet Beautiful Boyz, questionnaire I

There they are! First answers, questions etc.

(one of the writers did not see the Performance, wrote just about what s/he heard, guess who)

  • Which colour describes it?
  1. Grey
  2. – Ivo-Dimchev piggy-colour
  3. orange/blue like this boring radio pop band
  4.  White
  •  If ‘All those Beautiful Boyz’ was a story, which genre would it be? Give it a title.
  1. A Self-agrandising- fake- autobiografic-pseudogonzo-novel called „mine is bigger than yours-yeah like, whatever, man.“
  2. – satire. How Performance-Theatre likes to see itself.
  3. any combination of genres obliterating each other to an indefinite mash title: kale (in reference to AG AST) for „a mega pimp“ in urban language and also for „A leafy green vegetable that smells and tastes like ass.“
  4.  Tragic Comedy Trash Science Fiction
  • Choose the points you would give to the performers on a sexiness-scale from 1 to 10.
  1. 1,5
  2. – Changing between 2 and 8 during the performance, I consider this as irrelevant.
  3.  ¼
  4.  First part: 0 Second part: 4 Third part: 8
  • Find three attributes to describe the piece from an over 50 year old lady’s perspective.
  1. boring, uncontroversial, cute
  2. – Cute. Harsh. Interesting.
  3. you never know! „the last adventures“ Why are there people in the audience/ on stage? Why am I here?
  4.  Actually, there is no ’50 year old lady‘ that I can refer to from my position. Two ideas: Lady ONE: rude, ignorant, provocative Lady TWO: provocative, ambiguous, intensive
  • Into how many parts would you structure the piece? Give each part a name.
  1. the  neverending strongnesscontest
  2. – Introduction for the Intro. Peanut-Ouverture. The Performance-Scene-Entering. Visual Stuff, considered modern.
  3. 1part peanuts 2part theory talk, babbeling 3part masurbation 4part „fin“ 5part euphory
  4.  1: Arrogant Assholes 2: Flip Chart Monsters (Triangles) 3: Tempting you to play: ‚Licht/Dunkel‘ 4: I got my personality done: I) My weird Homestory II) Who wants my image? 6: Private Voyeur / Look me in the eye
  • What does the term ’whiteness’ signify for you?
  1. Nobody talked about whiteness
  2. – Possibilities. Self-Pity. Western Society.
  3. Western, still unquestioned self-designation, social construction
  4. Racist ideas about skin color, racist reference to purity. The absence of color. A Gap. Something to be written on.
  • Was there a point at which the performers represented this ’whiteness’ to you? When? Why?
  1. Nobody talked about whiteness
  2. – Most of the time.
  3. maybe for themselves – but that isnt catching. In a claim to be political – this is totally unnecessary
  4.  Overall, they were obviously playing on the racist idea of whiteness, that would produce exclusiveness, is desirable for us and dominates in the field of intellect and knowledge.
  • Was there a moment where you felt explicitly white? When? Why?
  1. Nobody was talking about whiteness
  2. – Only in the beginning, before the performance had begun, I noticed because of the performance’s title that the audience was completely white. After the text had begun, this topic didn’t interest me any more for the endurance of the evening. Dear White on White: An intellectual art audience just loooooves to discover things for themselves, because then they feel smarter themselves. Maybe take this more into consideration next time.
  3. No. Why?
  4.  In this white room with the two white performers talking about whiteness, I felt very much underlined that I was looking from a view of a ‚white‘, priviledged part of society. At the same time, I felt disgusted and irritated by the way, how white was pictured by the performers. I de-identified myself with their ‚whiteness‘, but the performance brought up clear patterns of society to me. Patterns how to perform identity.
  • Which colour describes it (again)?
  1. Something between grey and silver
  2. – Nordic Pale.
  3. Grey…
  4.  Grey
  • If the audience had been to act or respond, what would you have done or said as part of the audience? (During, before or after the performance?)
  1. – I would have liked to have a laughing and a yawning contest with them.
  2. getting up earlier to exit, but maybe the heat healed my cold.I was disappointed yesterday evening. Today: I dont care at all.
  3. Before the piece, I wondered why they have this arrogant look. I would have liked to turn around for a moment. I would have liked to stand up and touch the performers, in the moment, they said, that it would be impossible for us to cross the line public/stage and touch them – I would have liked to prove them and their ‚untouchable aura‘ wrong. After the piece I wanted to applaud, but it wasn’t very much the right moment.
  • Find an associative image for the atmosphere of the performance. Describe it in 2 sentences.
  1. After a hailstorm, when mostly everybody is pissed that their stuff got broken, but some are happy their stuff didnt got broken so much, and some other who where out of town think: why do people talk about the wheater the whole time, lets talk about important stuff.
  2. – Looking sharp, without trying to create any wounds. Talking about acting, without allowing themselves to respond to their actual audience.
  3. When you accidentally borrow a book about rabbit breeding. Watching oneself yawning in the mirror.
  4.  The atmosphere was slightly hostile and tense in the beginning, but it loosened in the second half of the performance, when several ridiculous and hilarious science fiction scenarios were pulled up. Still, I felt there was irritation mingling with fascination throughout the piece.
  • What was your strongest, dominating feeling when watching the piece?  When was it most intense?
  1. Pissed, after 3 minutes
  2. – Recognition. In the description of the young artists’ ideal soul.
  3. B’dum – b’dum
  4. Irritation, in the end (irritating on reality and fiction and on intimacy and superficiality).

Ein Gedanke zu „friedafritz meet Beautiful Boyz, questionnaire I

  1. I wonder if it’s anyhow possible to know about theory and positional problems, but still being able to show it in a constructive way that does not inflict the audience negatively. Does theatre have to attack the audience, if it wants to acknowlege the fact that there is an audience needed? Which other, probably more constructive ways of reflecting this need would be possible?

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Abmelden /  Ändern )

Google Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Verbinde mit %s