Atrey 1

Ashish Atrey

Dr. Urmimala Sarkar

AMPP

8th May 2019

Understanding ‘Presence’ in Pina Bausch’s ‘Café Muller’

“ ‘Presence’ is not some-thing I, as a performer either ‘have’ or should strive

for; rather, I argue that the performer’s relationship to ‘presence’ is
paradoxical in that the spectator is most likely to perceive ‘presence’ as
emergent when the performer begins from a dispositional state of bodymind
readiness where enactment takes place ‘on the edge of the absent’(Zarrilli
2002:164). For the performer ‘presence’ can only ever be a question – an
emergent state of possibility.” (Phillip Zarrilli)

The phenomenon of stage presence carries within several perspectives. If one goes back to the
classic version of presence we can see an emphasis primarily around the performer’s agency, and
depends either on specific training in acting, methodologies that enhance performer’s presence,
or relates to the mystical qualities of a performer, their charismatic abilities. Those studying
presence in a more relational way, in an inclusive fashion respond to the traditional model with a
belief that presence emerges from the encounter of audiences and performers.

The above quoted lines deliver the concept of presence in a structured manner. Zarrilli’s
language treats ‘presence’ as a subject with which a relationship is possible. This subject
therefore upholds a state of being of its own, it’s a given therefore; can be the most important
factor of any form of performance all together. He further elaborates that this relationship is a
paradoxical one, one that seems impossible together. The interest of this essay lies in this
paradox. This paradox is created by one crucial factor that makes a performance a ‘live’ medium
– perception of the audience. The only important ‘presence’ is of the audience for which a
performance is showcased. This presence is not paradoxical though. The corporeal presence of
an audience body in a live performance is not under question, this is a presence that is
appreciated and crucial for the performance to begin or take shape. Another relationship from
this perception is of the performer and the audience, this relationship is again not paradoxical.
They need each other, their bond is not something that shouldn’t or couldn’t be thought of
together. Their togetherness is also the one that is of the crucial kind. Here, the presence of the
performer or presence of the audience is not what creates a ripple. What Zarrilli is trying to talk
about is the relationship between the performer and presence itself. He goes on to provide a
visual articulation of when and how does presence shows effect. Its only when the performer
begins from a dispositional state of bodymind readiness, presence is perceived. The phrase
“dispositional state of bodymind readiness” is an interesting one. It carries the undertones of
elaborate visual action happening on stage. The bodymind readiness of a performer is not just
once in the whole performance. It is the state of being during a performance, it’s not something

1
 Atrey 2

that the performer prepares for and delivers on stage or for an audience. It is the performance
itself. So can whole experience of performing be equated to ‘bodymind readiness’?

The word emergent means the state of beginning, and therefore for an audience the key
enjoyment comes from anticipation. If a performer’s presence can only be a question, then with
every action this question either changes or intensifies. With a change comes another form of
anticipation and with intensification the curiosity increases. In both, however the involvement or
the engagement of an audience is under surveillance. The phenomenon here then is of co-
presence of the one who delivers and one who perceives.

When I finished writing Talk to Her and looked back at Pina's face, with
her eyes closed [emphasis added], wearing a small petticoat, arms and hands
outstretched, surrounded by obstacles (wooden tables and chairs), I had no
doubt that this was the image that best represented the limbo in which the
protagonists of my story lived. [...] If I had asked for that on purpose, I could
not have done better. Pina Bausch had unknowingly created the best doors to
get in and out of Talk to Her. – Almodovar, 2002.

This quote is by the director, Pedro Almodovar who invited Pina Bausch to participate in the
opening scene of his film, Talk to Her(2002), and wanted her to perform her piece ‘Café Muller’.
The quote shows the meditative performer, who generates energy or the emerging presence from
within. Her closed eyes are a factor in placing her in the performative state, from where the
director now perceives her. He predicts, “if I had asked this on purpose, I could not have done
better”. What is killed by purpose? What is that unsaid equation between the one who performs
and the one who perceives that makes the whole exchange so easy. Is it the absence of purpose
that necessitates this exchange or it is something else? When we talk about the contemporary
minds trying to experiment with forms of theatre and dance, Pina Bausch is a name that keeps on
echoing. This name finds its space like the meditative Pina for Almodovar gives him the
narrative structure of his film. The performative power of her closed eyes is mentioned and
recognized as an oneiric and interstitial co-presence. The space-time rift caused by the mise-en-
scène of the absence of a past present in the dance was what, in fact, interested Almodóvar.

The notion of co-presence is worth noticing here, it absorbs the essence of things, the images
formed in the performance ‘Café Muller’ can be understood as a conscious play of co-
dependence of actors, rooting in trust. The co-presence takes another form in an ongoing
performance of this particular piece. Also at the same time, strengthens them by the relation of
an action that can carry multiple interpretations for the reader/spectator while witnessing the
dancing body object - Pina Bausch with closed eyes - in Café Müller.

Café Muller is a choreographed dance piece by Pina Bausch that she created and performed for
her dance company Tranztheater Wuppertal. It was opened on 20th May, 1978 at the Openhaus
Wuppertal. It was inspired by and is said to be based on her childhood memories of watching her
father while he worked at his café in Germany during and immediately following World War II.
The piece is set to the music of Henry Purcell. It has been performed regularly since its creation

2
 Atrey 3

and in May 1985 was performed and filmed at the Opernhaus, and broadcasted on German
television in December of that year.

In a deserted café we see a set of sleepwalking characters coming in and out. They seem trapped
in an existential loop, they endlessly repeat their actions. Whatever is happening on the stage is
happening many times in a time loop. Every character has their own pace and the music
corresponds to it but the disjoint between the characters is evident. From the very beginning the
presence of these characters is dependent not on their preparation but on the audience. The
presence established by this dream- like performance relates to the characters’ ability to appear
invisible. Monotony is a crucial factor that can make a performance sink into absence, but
repeatedly, the whole performance slips back into the presence again and again. “There's a
hawk-faced man in a suit who enters and exits with blank purpose; an anguished waiter
endlessly clearing away the furniture; a blind woman caught in a revolving door; and a couple
who attempt mutual support but end up battering each other against the wall. Perhaps they are
all already dead: their hopeless, desolated faces certainly suggest this. Overlaying the
melancholy, meanwhile - so delicate as to be near-invisible - are passages of exquisite, minimal
dance. Arms extended in sad, imploring farewell, bodies swaying as if animated by some faint,
underwater current. The result is as uplifting as it is intensely sad, and shot through with a
haunting familiarity.” - explains a review by Gaurdian.

The monotony created by the performers is deliberately broken by the music and introduction of
new characters. If these are figments of memory, the repeated action definitely elaborates that,
and the introduction of a new character each time corresponds to that visual effect. Another
important function that this repeated action serves is to underline the presence of these
characters. The break from monotony in a repeated fashion is actually a loop of absence and
presence on stage. The actions when become monotonous seem to get absent from audience’s
perception but the moment the break happens, the presence is felt. Traditional notions of
presence hold no place in the notions of modern presence, in a mundane scenario on random
day(s) what the audience witnesses is this co-presence of multiple beings and them together in a
time loop.

While talking about the performative piece in the film by Wim Wenders, named Pina, one can
talk about the mise-en-scene of the closed eyes in Café Muller which again presented in the film
In the two excerpts analyzed, the current and virtual images, constitutive of the dance artist,
came to light from verbal testimonies and also embodied by the mediation of the screen. The
moving bodies of Pina Bausch and the social actors of the Wuppertal Tanztheater in
physicalizing the qualitative power of the time-image celebrate the dance itself in its opening of
senses. The dancing kinetic icons on the cinema screen appear as if are separated from the real,
they have no commitments while they are mediated by the screen, they open themselves to the
imagination of the viewer. Both dance and Cinema then allow themselves the ability of being a
déjà vu, they re-present themselves to each other and reuse reality in a creative and pure form.
Time and space play a crucial role in establishing the scheme and exploration by these dancing
bodies. It seems like a virtual image is getting to action and recreating itself again and again,
current image on stage/screen gets crumbled up and then a new yet same image takes its place,
making dance in the same signal mesh of reversibility. “The reverberation of the dance with the

3
 Atrey 4

closed eyes gesture takes place at different moments in the filmic text. However, the gesture
transforms itself into a mise-en-scène of co-presence of itself as an iconic power. It is precisely
in this way that Pina Bausch and the social actors of the Wuppertal Tanztheater, with their eyes
closed, slide through and beyond the time and space of (re)presentation of documentary fiction
and come to dance in our imaginary.” , comments Christine Wosniak.

The closed eyes contribute to an inner presence of the actors, their subjective relation to their
being.

I danced Café Muller… We all kept our eyes closed. When we did it again, I
could not feel the same thing…A feeling that was so important to
me…suddenly I realised that it makes a lot of difference,being with my eyes
closed…if I look down [at this moment there is synchrony between gesture and
word – when she pronounces ‘down’, Pina looks down and points to her index
finger of her right hand] or looks up [the same synchronic procedure between
gesture and word happens] this way…it made all the difference. The right
feeling came at the same time…it’s amazing how crucial this is. The smallest
detail is important…it’s a language you learn to read. (Pina, 2002)

Another important perception of presence noteworthy here is of people going back to archives
and viewing the recorded material. The ‘presence’ of the artist is not limited to just one
performance but is surely gets limited to that one performance that was recorded. Our
imagination gets triggered, our theories about dance and our knowledge on presence takes shape
with respect to our perception of presence on screen. This presence comes from the actual
presence of a great artist, the director who made the documentary (who himself is an audience
with a perception), and the medium of film that isn’t live. It can be said that the medium freezes
the artists’ performativity and its relation to their presence, but also gives a way to look back and
re-imagine their presence. The new audience doesn’t share a corporeal space with the artists but
they do share what we can call the subjective presence.

References –

1. ‘…presence…’ as a question and emergent possibility – Philip Zarrilli

2. Alternative Approaches to the Classic Model of Stage Presence in Performing Arts – A
Review – by , Sarah Pini
3. Review on performance Café Muller by Gaurdian.

4
Atrey 5