Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 18

Sorins 2008

23

Marina Abramovid and the Re-performanceof Authenticity

Jessica Chalmers

Introduction

Thisessayarguesthatthecritiqueof authenticitythathasdominatedacademic discourse sincethe early 1980sis cur:rentlybeingdismantledunderthe rubric of

a general1960srevival-including a revival of authenticity,a rnoralcategory havingto do with representationalpurity.Evidenceof authenticity'sreturn-and

transformation-can be seenin the phenonrenonof "re-perfolmance," whereby scantlydocumentedperfonnancesarerecreatedfor thepurposeofre-experiencing, documenting,and preservingthem.Theserecreatedperformancesfrom the late 1960sto niid-1970sarenot nlererepetitionsof theoriginal works.mostof which werenot meantto be repeatedeitherlive or in photosor on videotape.Most of there-performancesof thisephemeralart havebeenpresentedfbr thepurposesof historicafpreservation,includingMarinaAbramovii's SevenEasyPieces,which

is discussedin this essay.Curiously,the preservationof work whoseauthenticity

onceexpresslyreliedon its not beingpreservedhasnot met any resistance,even

from thoservhohadpreviouslyinsistedon ephemeralityasperforrnance'sdefining feature.I readthisdevelopmentasevidencetlratattitudestolvardsrepresentationare shifting.at leastin the avant-garde.It seemsthatauthenticity,itself,is changing. As PhilipAuslanderhasshown,rthemeaningof authenticityisnotstable,but hasshiftedin relationto technologicalandgenerationalchange.In what follows,

I attributethe welcomereceptionbeing accordedre-performanceto the current generationalconfiguration.With the looming retirementof baby boornersand theriseof thenew "millennial"generation,the 1960s-a periodI understandas beginningaround1963andendingwith theU.S.pulloutfrom Vietnamin 1914-is

beingrecalledwith ner.vinterest.In theartandperfomanceworlds,thisisoccurring throughtr,volinked processes.First,thereis a nostalgicprocessofhistoricization and sacralizationthat seeksout and honorsneglected1960sfiguresand works. Second. thereis a regenerativeprocessthatblingsbackideas,frameworks,styles, andrcchniquesasmodelsfbr lutureartisticendeavors.Subjectto bothprocesses. manyworksthatweredismissedasnaivelyessentialistin the 1980sand1990sare

being rediscovered-their rescuefrom oblivion renderedevenn-roredramaticby the ideaof their originally intendedephemerality.Having beencreatedto exist authentically only in thepresent-andthushavingbeencreated.asPeggyPhelan

Jessica Chalmers teachesperfbrmanceart and perfonnancestudiesin the University ofNotre Dame's Departmcnt ofFrlm, Tclevision, and Theater.This essayis part ofher current book project on generationand represcntation,tentatively entitled The Authentit'ity Revivol.

24

Journal of Dramatic Theory and Criticism

hasnoted,in orderto disappearr-theseperformancesarebeingresurrectedinto art historyandre-performedasa generationallegacy.

The 1960sToday There is a sensein which the 1960shaveneverreally died, andthe current revival doesbeara general resemblanceto other 1960s-re1'erencingmomentsthat

havecycledthroughpopularcultureover the pastfbrty years.One might recall. for instance,Coca-Cola's1994launchingof Fruitopia,a"revolutionary"beverage with flavorslike "StrawberryPassionAwareness."The appearanceof that kind

of marketing,alongwith thereappearanceof chokersandotherfashions,werea parl of the brief retro phenomenonof the rnid-1990s. Yet the currentrevival is distinctfiom suchcommercially-dt-ivenrevivals,rvhichlackedtoday'swistfulness towardsthe period.Along with a generalshift in mood towardspositivethinking (includingtheadventof HappinessStudiesin academia),therehavebeenseveral fortieth-anniversarycelebrations(a day-longSummerof Love celebrationin San Francisco,to namearecentexample).thereleaseof newBeartlescoversby younger bands,the publicationof severalnew booksabor-rtthe Beatles,at leastone film aboutthem (JulieTaymor'sAcrossthe Uni.verse).as well as the publicationof autobiographiesof Eric Clapton and Bob Dylan. who hasalso beenthe subject of a recentTodd Haynesfrlm, I'm Not Here.Bell-bottompantshavealsomade

a comeback,but the biggestsurpriseis the returnof 1960sart, andin particular,

1960sperfbrmanceart, whosebrandof authenticitytendstowardsausterityand awayfrom audienceentertainmentof anykind. Most of the revivedperformanceworks havelain dormant,untouchedeven by their creatorsfor thirty to forty years.This neglectwas due, in part, to the

changein inteliectualciin'rateat the end of the 1970s,a changethat cast these works in a rathershamefullight. In the 1980sand into the 1990s,they reekedof "essentialisrn," a qualitythathasfinallylostits vituperativeenergyandcometo seemalmostvague.As an accusation,essentialismhascertainlylost most of its sting.As anaccusationthat.in particular,f'eministsof the"theorygeneration"had becomeaccustomedto flinging at theirdirectelders,essentialismnolongerseems to havethemoralcurrencyto upholddifferencesbetweenthoser,vithanoutmoded, traditionalunderstandingof (gender)identity as given and authentic,and those

with a more sophisticated,theoreticalunderstandingof identityascontingentand

constructed.Startingin the late 1990s,the austerityof the critical discoulsethat

brandedearlyperformancear1asessentialist- alongwith thegenerationaltensions

thatthis brandingupheld-began to fadesuchthattodaythis work finally begins

to acquirethefeelingof history. "This period lthe l960sl is nor'vl.tistory,"Roselee

Goldberg announcedin conjunction with the 2005 founding of Performa, the performance-centered organizationdedicatedto the resurrectionof older work andthe inspirationof new.It is therefore,shewrites,"ripe for excavation,which

Sprins 2008

25

explainsthe increasingvisibility of perfbrmance,especiallyin the museum

context."3

Art institutionshave indeedcontributedto the greatertrend.Examplesare the Whitney Museum of Art, which held a celebratoryStmtnterof Love exhibit in2001, andthe currentshowat theLos AngelesCountyMuseumof Art, SoCai.' Southern California Arr of the 1960sand 70s from LACMA'S Collection.There have beenmultipleretrospectivesfocusirrgexclusivelyon the avant-garde,many of which havefeaturedwomenarlistswhoseworks rvereunder-recognizedin the 1960s andafter:CaroleeSchneernannat]'he New Museumin NervYork (1997).

Martha RoslerattheIkon Galleryin London( 1998),andEleanorAntinatTheLos AngelesArt Museum(1999).TheRonaldFeldmanFineArts Galleryin New York alsorecentlyput HannahWiike's Intra-Venustapeson display. Perhapsthe most curiousdevelopment,however,is the re-performance phenomenon.which revivesthe aestheticsof authenticityreviledby theory.Re- performancesareperformancesfrom thepastthat,in recentyears,havebeenbrought

to life againwith theintentionof renderin-ehomageto theiroriginalcontext.Rather thancomparingthemto a theatricalrevival,whichimpliesmererepetition,Phelan hascomparedre-performanceto the musicalpracticeof "covering" the works of others.The following examplesreveal that this recenttrend in re-performance

hasbeendedicatedto coveringtheworks of 1960sartistsalmostexclusively:The

Museumof ContemporaryArt sponsoreda recreationof JohnCage'sMusiCircus in 2005 and2007. The WoosterGroup hasbeenworking on rwo piecesthat use re-performance-Poor Theater,anambivalenthomageto JerzyGrotowskiandthe PolishLaboratoryTheatre'sproductionAkropolis (as it was recordedin a 1962

fllm), andanotherpiece,Hamler,which repeatedandreworkedRicharclBurton's 1964film of the Bloadwayproduction.A recreationof the ur-pelformanceof rhe

l960s,AllanKaprow'slsHappeningsitt6Parts(1959),r,vasfeaturedatrhesecond

performance biennial sponsoredby Petforma, an organizationwhosefounding itselfmarksa revival of theperfbrmanceart form basedon modelsestablishedin the 1960sratherthanthe 1980s,whenperformancehada ratherdifferentform. As a way of looking into the meaningof theserevivals,I offer the example of Abramovi6'sre-performanceprojectSevenEasyPieces,rvhichwaspresented

at the GuggenheirrMuseum in New York in 2005.Curatedby Nancy Spector, Abramovi6's recreationsof seminal works from the 1960s\,vasan exhaustive excavation of performanceauthenticityasit wasmanifestedin enduranceart.At the

same time,this newly resurrectedauthenticitywastheatricalin a way thatwould

havebeenscornedduring the 1960sitself. "In the beginning,"Abramovii once

remarked,"you hadto hatetheater

rehearsal situation,in which everythingis predictable,thetime structureandthe predetermined ending."aBy contrast.Selr'r Ea.sr.Piecesusedtheatricalrneasures

to enhancethe experienceof the original works: video projectionson multiple

to rejectall theartificialityof thetheater.the

26

Journal of DramaticTheory and Criticism

largescreens,thepresenceofdocumentarycameras,andprops. Gaugingfiom the response,theperceptionof thepieces'authenticitywasnot undermined.Instead, autlrenticityseemedtohavebeentransformedintosomethingthattook placew'ithin representationratherthan,impossibly,outsideit.

The Abramovid Re-performances SevenEasyPieceswasa highly visiblerecreationof severalkey performance piecesfrom the 1960sand1970s.includingoneof Abramovi6's.TheBelgrade-born Abramovi6'sso-called"easypieces"took placein the atriumof Ner,vYork City's GuggenheimMnseumon sevenconsecutivenights.Eachni-ehtthe performance lastedfor sevenconsecutivehours,endingwith anewpiececreatedbyAbramovii for the occasionin which sheappearedin an enormoussheenyblue dressthat encornpassedthestagelike atent.Thedress,which garneredtheleastcommentary in the publishedresponses.slitied her high abovethe groundfloor audienceand

into the spiral of the Guggenheim.The piecesthat got the most attentionfrom the presswerg more raw, iessclothed.and, in them,Abramovid took her usual meditative-even zonedout-approach to self-tortureandsexualdisplay.Whereas in the big blue dressshehadfairy-taleproportions.theolderpiecesrecreatedthe matter-of-factness-theearneslness-of 1960sart.The blue dressrvasa fiction. anexaggeration:theolderpiecesmostlyreturnedto theaestheticof literalism-of authenticity-that demandedreal time duration,unfalsi{ieclemotionalresponse, andtask-likededicationto the rvorkathand. Enduranceis the slne qua non of performanceauthenticity becausethe performerproceedscalmly,in astateof quasi-rneditation,in anatmosphereof crisis.

ln pain or just stillness,Abramovii is asstraightforrvardaspossible.Ordinarily, shespeaksvery little. Her calm acceptanceis explicitly not entertaining.Neither is hernuditymeantto beentertaining.In manyworks,shepresentsherselfwitlrout the "pretence"ofclothes, asonly herself.The nudebody alsobecomesa passive vehicle.madeavailabletoharm,derision,andstimulation,aposedescribedby some criticsasa gift or,in curatorNancySpector'sterm, "an essayin subnrission."6The mostfamousexampleof this is RhythmO (1914),in which Abramovidpresented herselfseatedimpassivelybehinda tableof implements,manyof themweapons, which spectatorswere invited to useagainsther.The pertbrmancewas stopped whenthe audiencebecametoo violent:a manheld a pistol up to her head. PatricePavis,rvho describesAbramovii as a "Calamity Jane""rvho causes constantproblemsin additiontobeingthevictim of theseself inflictedproblems,"T points out the traditionaldramaticstructurein Abramovii's performances:she puts herselfat risk and then rescuesherself.This definition,horvever,makes Abramovii soundlike a circusperformeranddoesn'ttakeinto accountthelength ofher performances or theirintendedstatusasspiritualordeals.The audienceand the performer sharehours of silenceand stillness-a sharingthat continues.in

Snring 2008

27

Abramovii's thinking, evenif the audiencemembersleave.The long roundsof applause Abramovii receivedat the midni-ehtendof severalof the moredifficult

evenings of SevenEasyPiecesindicatedadmiration,but also relief. lf there is rescue involvedin this work, it is alsoa rescuingof theaudience.

'.Back to the Days of crotchlessPantsand a DeceasedRabbit" was the irreverent title of theNew YorkTimesreview of theAbramovii re-perlbrmances written by RobertaSmith.sThetitle refenedto two pieces:AustrianValieExpolt's

Action Pants:GenitalPanic(1969)andJosephBeuys'sHow trtExplainPicturesto

a DeadHare (1965).In addition,Abramovii performedapieceof herown,Lips oJ

Thomas (1975),asrvellaspiecesby Vito Acconci(Seedbed.1972),GinaPane (The

Conditittning,1913), andBruceNirumann (BttdyPressure,l974).Eachpiecewtis

chosenbecauseof its influence,on bothAbramovi6'sartisticdevelopmentaswell astheentiretyof performancehistory,makingtheeveningssonlethingof alaborof canonization asrvellasa personalqueston Abramovi6'spart.In beconlinga part of history,performanceart-the art thathadforevershunnedtheinauthenticityof

collection,docutnentation,andthe market- wasbecomingrespectable. This new respectability "rescues"the form from popularculture,which has

borrowedplentifullyfrom avant-gardeperformance,irrcludingAbramovii's work. Oneepisodeof the sixth seasonof Sexin tlte City featureda fictionalizedversiotl

of Abramovi6's 2002performance.The House With The Ocean View.Also, as depictedin the book PerJbrma,Vogueltalia did a fashion shoot that exactly

copiedJaapde Graaf's documentaryphotographsof Relation in Space (1916), which Abramovii performedwith her former paftner,Ulay. The Guggenheim's presentationof SevenEasy Piecesindicatedthat this type of perforltlancehas

beenre-routedbackto thehigh-artmainstreirm,andtl.ratit hasemergedrelatively unscathedfrom its mass-cultureexistence.It now canboastofhaving a rosterof starswhoseappearance-albeit "virtually," throughAbramovi6-has put the art form back on the map asa commodity.lts anti-markethistory only enhancesits

value on theacademicandart markets. MostreviewsweremorereverentthantheTimesand,notably,did notmentiol) theyearswhenthis sortof performancewasnot made,seen,or written about.There-

performances renderedtherecentpastcontinuous,asif anti-essentialismhadnever

fractured the academicpublic's interestin

Abramovi6, who has referredto herself as the "grandmotherof perfbrmance

art," and the mediumby which shemadeher nameand in rvhosenameshehas

continuedto createfor over fbrty years.In particular,they rvelcomedthe idea

of re-pertbrmance.which providesan overview of the field for thoseunfamiliar with it. and is a validatingsaluteto someof the key figuresin a disappearing

past. From all accounts,seeingAbramovi6 re-performtheseseminalworks was a vivid blastfrom a pastthat,moreoftenthannot,hadequatedremembrance-at

least technologically-aidedremembrance-rvithinauthenticity.Their paradoxical

the art form. The an world rvelcomed

28

Journal of Dramatic TheorLand Criticism

existence,asbothdocumentandevent,allorvedthere-performances tocircumvent inauthenticity,deliveringa blastthatresonateswith thecunent l96Osrevivaleven for audiencemembers-once-removed,like me.

The Guardians of Community If beingoneselfwasoneaspectof the I960sethosreflectedin thestarknessof perforrnanceart.the otherwascontmtmih,the ideathatcrowdsmight be capable

of organicallyproducinganauthenticexperienceof selfamongothers.More than trventyyearsafterthenegativecrowdsof fascism,theradicalsof the 1960sretained the notion of a like-mindednessthat would not promotecontbrmity or violence

butcelebration,cooperation,evenlove- althoughanyform of intensity,including

angrycontiontation,seemeda signthatsomethingrealwashappening.Curiously non-exclusiveof the inflammatorycrorvdsof fascismdescribedby EliasCanetti, theauthenticcrowdof the 1960srvasonethateschervedno afliliativeact,negative or positive.lt wastheintensitythatcounted. By all accounts,being in the audienceof SevenEasy Piecesbroughtback this 1960sfeelingaboutthe utopianpotentialitiesof grouplife. Responsesfocus particularly on Abramovii's recreationof Vito Acconci's Seedbed,a piece in which he hadmasturbatedunderneatha galleryfloor,"seeding"the galleryspace ashe listenedandrespondedto the soundsof visitorsabove.For many,the party atmospheregeneratedamong the audienceof the re-performedAcconci piece seemedto pick right up whereRichardSchechnerleft off rvhenhe wrote in 1973 that "lplarticipation takesplace precisely at the point where the performance

breaksdor,vnandbecomesa socialevent."oThe critic TheresaSmalecillustrates this perspectivewhen she writes of the circular spacewhere the audiencesat aboveAbramovi6 (for fifteen minutesat a time) that it seemed"a spaceof true reciprocity"r0becausetheinteractionsamongaudiencememberstook on asudden intimacy. She also describeshow, at a certain point, the "break-dorvn"of the performance(as Schechnerhasit) wassointensethatit requiredthe intervention of a museumguard,a situationthatcompelledanevengreaterdegreeof bonding amongthecrowd. As transcriptsfrom therecordedconversationsof Seedbedaudiencemembers reveal,l I thesenseof inhabitingacommunalspacewasproducedby theabsurdity- aswell as,nodoubt,thefaniliarity-of theideaof sexasanenduranceart.aswell asby thereliefexperiencedamongthosewho hadbeenin theaudienceon previous evenings,rvhenthecontentof thework wasself-torture.Ironically,thecommunal t'eelingwasalsoproducedby theinvisibility of theperformer,who washeardbut not seen.Without hersober,fbcusedgaze,theaudienceseemsto havegrown giddy at

themereideaof interactingwith eachotherundersuchunusualcircumstances.Critic JohannaBuftoncommentsin thisregardthatthe"moststrikingof all" in IheSeven EttsyPieces"was the audience'snewfoundinterestin itself." In the transcribed

conversations,recorded d'ring theactualperformances, audiencemembersoften commentedon lvhatit lvaslike to bethere,chattingasAbramovii moaned belolv

them.As Burton and othersalsopoint out, rhistbcLrson the experience or

in theaudiencewasencouraged by theGuggenheim's theatricar architecture:

muchaspeoplelookedtorvardtheplatformconcealing theartist,tl.reyalsolooked

pastit to

of a

bein_e

As

an

activityencouraged by the presence

members to bond

con'ect with

whispered

high-powertelescopeplaced on the

Abramovii's invisibility may have encouraged audience

with eachother,but her sexualtarkalsoencouraged the audience to

her throughfantasy.In keepingwith the Acconci model, Abramovi.

secondfloor.,,r2

descriptionsof what below'According to

ethosbecauseAbramovid's

describedspectators'contributi.ns as

pleasure,"Abramovii," writesSmalec, i'sists that

we must activeryimmerse ourselves in shaping our

quotesAbramovii's

closed.Forgetyou're at

meall thatyou desire."l3

shewasthinking anddoing into a microphone fiom a roon

Smalec,the model superceded the origina's participatory

sexualtalk was ressobjectifying. wt rr. Acconci

his fantasy and

,.our footsteps arenot enough;

pas.sivery contributing ;

contact with her.,,Smarec

eyesandkeepthem

rathermaternal invocation to ,.[c]rose your

themuseum. Don't be afraicl.Don,t beashamed. Give to

According to

severalaccounts. at reastoneof see.dbed,.s audience responded

give of himself with a literalness that, to the other

floor besidehirn, bespokethe authenticity of his

to Abramovii's invitatiotr to

audience members seatedon the intentions. Smalecwrites thathe

startsvigorously

circle. As Marina climaxesyet on all fours and luridly yells,

immediately rushes in, commanding hirn to leave.

uplifting is how onlookersprotest thisencroachment: ,.you don.t

understand theperfbrmance!,, .

theunruly manis permitted to

. . Eventually, theguards relent:

rubbing

hisgroin againsttheedgesofthe inner

Does again, he drops to the grouncl

thatexciteyou?,,

Security

What,s

stay.we've won our little victory

againstthesanitized machine.ra

From the rg60s perspective smalec

museum guards represent the machine-a

audience could

and evena higher

apprcciation. RobertaSrnith, who

treats them as the heroes of SevenEasr

expressed disappointment, sayingthat it seemedrike

stood in line to reachthe stage,rvaited on the stagefor soundsof a crimax and

espouses at this point in the essay,the

repressive presence againstwhich

the

bond. yet from anotherperspective, the guards represent order

aesthetic inteiligence in the faceof the crorvd's chaoticself_

refers to someguards by

pieces,writes that

nameandin general

A

young guard

a carnival

ride as people

30

Journal of DramaticTheory and Criticism

thendisernbarked."For Smith,theguard'sview is the authenticone.Not only are they describedas being in sympathywith the true aims of the performance.but theirpertbrmanceof professionalwatchingprovidesa gracefulcounterpartto the agitateclcrowd: "A slim young man tried to vault onto the stagebut was almost soundlesslycaught just in time by Rob Rominiecki,the directorof the nruseum's

notablyalertandtactlulsecuritystaff."ls Interestingly,Abramovi6,who nevermentionsthe youngman,speaksof the Acconcipieceasoneof the hardestto performbecauseof the kindsof endurance involved. First, sincesheset as her goal the productionof as many orgasmsas

possible,therewasthesheerdifficulty of thetask.Also, unlike themajority of her own pieces,Seedbedrequiredher to usespeechto communicateher experience. With only an audio connectionto the listenersabove,she had to prove her achievementby continuingto speakof and incite her own pleasurefor the full

sevenhoursofthe performance:

I{aving orgasmspublicly, being excitedby the visitors. steps aboveme-it's reallynoteasy,I tellyoulI've neverconcentrated sohardin my life. My friendgaveme sonresexymagazines,but

I reallydidn't usethem.I concentratedon the sounds.andon the ideathatI hadto haveorgasms,asproof of my work. And

so I did. I don't fake it-I neverfake anything

nineorgitsms. l^

I endedwith

Theotherdifficultyrvasherisolationfrom thecrowd. "The problemfor me with this piece,"Abramovii latersaid,"was the absenceof public gaze:only the sound."r7 In her own work, the exchangeof gazesverifiesher sacrifice.The audiencealso comesin order to be verified,to be seenby the performerwho. in the rlidst of

her ordeal,is possessedof an extraordinaryauthenticity.Starvingor in pain,the performerseemsto confersomethinglike gracethroughher gaze.Ifnot grace,her performanceis at leastan occasionfor an exchangeof recognitionthat createsa specialbondbetr.veentheperformerandheraudience.Abramoviddescribesherself

in perfornranceas in an extraordinary,trance-likestateo1'extremereceptivityto the spectators."I don't havethis kind of feelingin real life, but in performanceI Iravethisenormouslove."rsRefemingto a performancein which shelived, naked

andfasting,in agalleryfor twelvedays,shespeaksof a"connectionwith theeyes" thatnourishedandhealed:

Theyprojecttheirown sadnessontomeandI reflectit back.And

I cry out in thesaddestway,sotheyarefiee.Peoplewouldcome

like drunks- insteadof a shotof vodkatheycameto havea shot of thisconnectionwiththeeyes.Thegallerywouldopenatnine'

andtheywould comein, look atmefor 20 minutesandgo away. I wasthinkingthatpeopleusuallydon'tlookatthemin this

intimateway, somaybethey just neededto be lookedat in way beforegoingto work.le

that

Severalofthe otherSevenEasyPiecesdid featurethis catharticexchangeof looks. For instance,in the Valie Export piece.Action Pants:Genital Panic, the

spectator rvasconliontedby theartist'sgazewhile in aposeof unapologeticsexual exposure. Abramovii replayedExportrvith machismo.receivingheraudienceseated on thestage,legsspreadpointedlyin crotchlessleatherpants,holdingarifle.That

her recreationwas.in fact, of

itself (in rvhichtherewasno gun)might beconsideredironic,but Abramovii was

notconcernedwith beingrigorouslyliteral.ln 1969,Exporthadwalkedup anddown theaislesof anart cinemain hercrotchlessactionpants,telling peoplethat "what youseenow is reality,andit is notonthescreen,andeverybodyseesyou rvatching thisnow."20The original audienceapparentlyleft thetheatreratherquickly after

beingconfionteclwith this aggressivereality andthe shameof havingevet'ybody seethem seeit. In the 2005 version,the bravadoof the original was eventually underminedby Abramovii's femininestillnessasshesatand lookedout into the audience.By stretchingtlte works to sevenhours,Abramovi6 managedto turn everypastwork into a spectacleof endurance.ln ActionPants,sheassumedlong

poses,transtbrmingExport'sflashingintoa seriesof excruciatingstills.Thusshe did not capitalizefully on the shock-valueofExport's genitalshow.Instead,she slowedtheexperiencedown to thepointof sadness:atonepoint.shelockedeyes

with a (female) spectatorfor nearly an hour, during which they both begauto cry. The spectator,lockedinto Abramovii's stillness,herselfbecamesomethingof an enduranceartist,andthespectacleof thatshared,unspecifiedsufferingreportedly mesmerizedthe crowd.

apublicity photographratherthanof theperformance

The Authenticity of Witnessing lf Seetlbed'stltopianresonancelay in its pafty atmosphere,this was not the casefor theself-torturepiecesin |lteSevenEasyPiecescycle,which tookplacein near silence.Understandably,mostaccountscreditthesepiecesasthemostdifficult, mainly becausetlreyrequirethe audienceto endureits own desireto watch.The crowd is unitedin a traditionalway in keepingwith Aristotelianprinciples:they

havepity tbr thesut'fbring,andfearfor hercomfortor evenhersurvival.Theyalso fearfor theirown predicamentaswitnessesto suchanexcessive,unnecessaryart. They want and don't want to watch.They are unitedby curiosity; they arealso

united by disgust-fbr theperformerandthemselves.Writing aboutaperformance by AngelikaFesta,in which shehangsin a gallerycocoonedin white cloth,Peggy Phelanwrites:

32

Journal of DramaticTheory and Criticism

As I r'vatchFesta'sexhaustionand pain, I feel cannibalistic,

arvful,guilty.'sick.'Butaftera rvhileanothermorecomplicated responseemerges.Thereis sornethingahnostobscenelyarroganl in Festa'sinvitationtothisdisplay.It is manifestin the'imitative' aspectof her allusionsto Christ'sresurrectionand his bloody feet,andlatentlypresentin the enduranceshedemandsof both

herspectatorandhersell.2l

In the 1975performanceof Lips r,tfThomas.Abramovii drank wine tiom a glass,broketheglasswith herhand,cutafive-pointedstarin herstomach,whipped herself,and thenlay down on a ice crosswhile a spaceheatersuspendedabove causedher to bleedevenmore.While the original promptedaudiencemembers to imploreher to stop,to approachher,coverher,anddragher off the cross,thus endingtheperformanceattwo hours,thistirneAbramovii tooksevenhours,piecing out thetortureinto shorterphasessothattherewaslesschancetheaudiencervould fearfor her life or try to interverre.Severalaudiencememberscalledout for herto stop,butnobodyinterruptedtheproceedingsto forciblypreventtheself-abuse.The presenceof Guggenheimsecurity,aconditionmentionedby somecommentatorsas significantlyalteringthepieceasit wasoriginally intended,madetheeventtamer in the sensethattherewasno needfor suchanacutedegreeof spectatoralertness asin theoriginal- andthustherewasno opporlunityfor thekind of collaboration thatrequired(or soit seemed)savingAbramovid'slife in theoriginal.This rescue operationrvasalsolaudedasan exampleof true participationby SteveDixon in hisrecenthistoryof mediaandperformance,anotherreminderof theauthenticity revival. In his blog, David Byrne likensthe experienceof watchingLips of Thomas to an anthropologist'ssurveillanceof "a scarificationor a puberty ritual in the outbackor in thehighlanclsof PapuaNer.vGuinea."rrIn graspingtheritualaspect, heneverthelessmissestheaudience'sprimarymotive:empathy,anda feelingthat canbedescribedastheobligationto witness. "A metronometickedaway,"writes MarlaCarlson,oneof thefervto leportAbramovii's tears:"When thefirstcut was complete,Abramovidblottedit with a whitecloth.Slippingherfeetinto bootsthat rvaitednearby,putting on a military cap, and picking up a heavy woodenstaff, shestoodandcried, her belly heaving,tearsstreamingdown her cheeksasshe, andwe, listenedto a Russiantblk song."Carlsonstatesthat,althoughsheherself

"watchedthe cutting

points,no movement.littlewhispering.On thethirdcut,someonecalleciout. 'you

don't haveto do it again.'Obviouslyothersweremoredisturbedby it thanI, and many turnedaway from the flagellation."The ideaof leavingwas squelchedby the senseof responsibilityto theevent,somethingDavidByrne's audiencehas

the spacebecamevery quiet at those

Sprins2008

1?

probablyneverfelt, at leastwith suchintensity.There was a feeling that, since

Abramovi6's pu{posewasto gift theaudiencewith her sacrifice,no

goodconscienceleave."I talkedto otherpeoplewho felt, asI did, that lve owed

it to her to stay."23Carlsonstayedfor the full sevenhours.

oneshouldin

Ephemerality as Legacy

A common responseto Abramovii's re-perfbrmance cycle, and to the idea

of re-performancein general,has been to suggestthat it contradicts phelan's

much-debateddictum of 1993:"Performance's only life is in thepresent.',24This

statement,whichreflectsPhelan'slargerargumentabouttheephemeralityandnon-

reproducibilityofperformance,is,in part,anextensionofthe 1960sstandagainst representation,includingdocumentation.Abramovii speaksfor agenerationwhen shestatesthat,in the l960s,"we decidedthatwe',vouldn'tmakeanydocumentation of our work. It would only existafterwardby word of mouth."2sThe authenticity of the performanceeventwas predicatedon its "dematerialization," to useLucy Lippard'sterm,26suchthat.asa result,thereis little evidencesavefor some (often

purposelyunartful) black-and-whitephotos- photosthatfareratherpoorly in these daysof vivid imaging,at leastasrealisticrepresentations.In 1999,JonErickson suggestedthattheseblack-and-rvhiteperformancephotoshavea veneerof "mere

utility."27My senseisthatrhemeaningof black-and-whitephorographyis changing astechnologychanges,andthat,while monochromefilm wasoncelessexpensive

andhadaclassicor standardlook,it is moreandmorebecomingaminoritypractice thatconnotestheartisticintentionsofthe photographer.Thusit is possibleto view theperformance documentsfrom the 1960sin two ways: both as it might have

beenviewedin the 1960sandafterasutilitarian,unfussy.literal- and,with today's eyes' asinadequate.outmoded.andaffected,evenartsy. Today'sever-inrproving

technologies rapidly producethe inadequacyof the old-their

representation, asa supplementtoor replacementof realevents.At thesametime,

though, the enhancernentsof new technologiesproducethe old status asartifactsof the 1960s.a lost time.

inadequacyas

photos'authentic

This senseof their inadequacyhas, today,brought many artists,including

Abramovii, arounclto

their baching.Abramovii

about documentation. Unlikemanyof

professional importance of documentationearlyon-her mother,theDirectorof the

Museum of Art andRevolutionin Belgrade,wasaconscientiousdocumentanan. As

sressingtheimportanceof documentingwork,especiallyin

statesthat,atacertainpoint, shesimply changedhermind

hercontemporarles,shewasconsciousof

the

a result, shehasmoreof a recordof her earlywork thanothersdo who werealso

working duringthe 1960s.Yetshefelt compelledonly recentlyto work

documentary modes.Severalyearsprior shehadbegunshowirrg TheBiography,

apiece comprisedof shortenedversionsof hermostimportantpastperformances. "You seemy whole life. The performanceis condensed,asthoughtheyarevideo

directlyin

34

Journal of DramaticTheor)'and Criticism

clips." It's a greatest-hitstype re-performanceevent that initiatedAbrarnovi6's foraysinto somethingmorelike theatre.anassociationsheernbraces:"I playthese in the contextof opera,becauseoperais the mostartificial place.In the '70s we hatedtheaterbecauseof its artificiality.Performancewasdifferent."28

SevenEasyPiecesrvasalsotheatricalized,althoughnot becauseanyof it had beenshortened,asin TheBiography,which reprisedeachearlypiecein threeor four minutes.Thetheatricalityof SevenEasyPieceswasin tl.repredictabilityof each piece'stiming(ahvayssevenhours),thepresenceof museumpersonnelwhoushered the audiencein andout,andthe useofdeluxe, super-sizedvideoprojectionsthat, on eachnight, showedbits from previouseveningsbehindher asshepedbrmed. As part of a documentarybeing rnadeby 1960savant-gardefilmmaker Babette Mangolte,all the eveningswerealsorigorouslycapturedfrom severalangles.ln light of thesedevelopments,it is clearthat,whatevertherewasleft in Abramovi6 of the I 960stastefbr epherneralprocedureshasdissipated.Thecontentof herwork continuestobeephemerality-thepresenceof theperformersharingtimeandacute experiencewith anaudience-but the forn-rhasbecomemoreexpansive. I arguethatthesechangesin Abramovii's approachto herwork andits future aresymptomaticof a greatershift in therelationshipto representationon thepart of the avant-garde,if not a largergroup.Althou-ehAbramovii claimsto havehad arathersuddenchangeof heartwith regardto documentingandtheatricalizingher work,herchangeofheartdidnotoccurin isolation.Notonlyhaveotherartistsbegun to considerthefutureoftheir work, but therehasbeena generalrisein interestin theissueof performancedocumentationamongacademics.Most provocatively,Phil Auslander's"The Performativityof PerformanceDocumentation"arguesfor the primacy of documentationitself:"the act of documentinBan eventasaperjbrmance is vuhatcortstitutesit as.srclr."2eThisdeconstructionfollowstheDerrideanformula for undermininggivenbeliefs,in this casea belief aboutcauseandeffect^ln his essay,the temporalityof the performancedocumentin relation to the event is strategicallyreversed,suchthat the ideaof the perfbnnanceasa causaleventis

undermined.This argumentis useful as a way of destabilizingwhat Auslander refersto in his book Liveness (1999) astft.,performancestudiesideologyof the live.Auslanderis,ofcourse,extendinghisrefutationofPhelan'spresence-centered

argument,butit alsoseemsclearthatheis participatingin abroaderpreoccupation

with the pastand its preservation.One might alsolegitirnatelyrvonderrvhy this argument,andwhy now?

Oneanswerto thesequestionscanbefoundby noticingthatthisnew interest

in preservingperlbrmanceis occurringin relationto 1960sartsspecificallyrather thanto the mediumqua medtum.At themoment,no oneis particularlyconcerned with the preservationof early Dadapertbrmanceor with the (admittedlyberter- documented)performancesof the 1980s.Auslander,too,takeshisexamplesfrorn the late 1960sandearly-to-rnidl9?0s:ChrisBurden,YvesKlein, Vito Acconci.

Soring 2008

3s

while it might alsobepersuasivelyarguedthattheappearanceof thisquestionof

documentationhastodomot'ewith aninterestin trackingtheeffectsof technology's ever-increasingability to recordandthusprescrvesoundandimage,this singular focuson theartistsof a particularperiodmustalsobeaccountedfor. Another,relatedanswerto the questionof w/r-ynow is directly relatedto the

aging of the 1960sgeneration.At somepoint in thelate 1990s,thepreservarion ofa generationallegacybeganto be a priolity, creatinga needfor theredefinition of the relationshipbetweeneventand its documentation-and, by implication,

of authenticityitself.From this perspective,Phelan'scelebrationof the ethics of disappearanceseemsa llnal articulationof a positionthat hasfinally become untenablefor thegenerationthatpioneeredit. with theriseof ayoungergeneration thathashadno exposureto thatfoundationalrvork.thegenerationthatpioneered the ideaof ephemeralityasauthenticityis havingto recognizeits limits. putting asidetheideathatwe areliving attheendof historyol in apr.lst-historicalmoment, thegenerationthatpromotedtheseideasabouttheephemeralityandfinalityof our timesis beingcompelledto recognizethe future.For the babyboom generarion, theriseof themillennialscanonly bereadasevidencethata futureexistsin which

the boom will not figure, exceptin representation.

Deconstruction'sNostalgia

I havereferredto the "theory generation."as if thosewho cameof a-eeafter

the first waveof the Baby Boom (roughly,in the 1970s), ,lvere a generarionunto themselves.However,this is a misnomer.Generationsareusuallyunderstoodin twenty-to-thirtyyearcycles,approximatelythe sarrreamountof time thatit takes

for oneindividualor family romatureandreproduce.A distinctionshouldbema<Je between thisbiologicalunclerstandingof generationalidentityanda grouprvhose

identity is basedon a shareclexperienceof major events,often traumaticones.I follow sociologistBryan S.Turnerin calling this lasttypeof groupa "cohort."3o The generationin academiaandthe artswho I've referredto asthe "theory

generation" is thus really a cohort ratherthan a whole generation.As a result, their identification rvith the first boclmercolrort.the so-called"Generationof

'68"'

is mixed. Today they identify as a generation,thoughcluringthe yearsof

their coming-of-age. their cohort identity rvasthe stronger.During the l9g0s and 1990s. thesesubversiveyoung intellectuars took on the receivedideasof

the "hippies." ln the effbrt to clistinguishitself',the groupmadeits mark through negation, by deconstructingthe authenticitypromotecl by their direct eldersas a means of liberation.Today,however,the first and secondcohoftsof the boom

seem to be coming togetherso that it is becorningharderto clistinguishbetrveen them intellectually. So closein their experienceof the eventsof the 1960s(one

group in its teens,theotherin itstwenties),thesecohortsarecurrentlycoheripgin their senseof themselvesasa largergeneration. with theriseof themillenniais,

36

Journal of DramaticTheorLand Criticism

the generationalidentity of the boom hasbecomemore important.At the same time or asa resultof thisdevelopment,thediff'erencebetweenauthenticityandits

deconstructionis alsofading. ThisfadingcanbeseeninAuslander'sLiveness,in whichthedeconstructionhe

deploysagainstperformanceauthenticityappearsto containnostalgiafor thevery thing it deconstructs.Auslanderinterpretsthe authenticityof live perfbrmanceas

a qualityproducedthroughaprocessofauthentic'ationthatchangesastechnology changes.Yet his discussionof this processdoesnot quite achievethe kind of

objective,value-freeposition that the phrase"processof authentication"would imply. (That developmentmust wait for the deconstructionof the authenticity of event advancedin his later essay,"The Performativity of Performance

Documentation,"which is arctuallya reconstructionof authenticity.)In thisearlier thinking-throughof the meaningof the live, Auslzrnderdisplaysambivalence torvardsauthenticity,particularlywith regardto its expressionin rock music. His ambivalenceis,in part,theproductofhis age:hecannotquiteleavebehindthevalue placedon theunprocessedsoundsofhis youth.This is not a failureon hispart,but

a reflectionof thegenerationaldynamicsat work in the returnof authenticity. Livenessbeginswith adiscussionof performanceart,andwith adeconstruction of theideathatpresenceisconstitutionalfor pertbrmance.Nostalgiaappearsonlyin chaptersof thebookthattakeon theideolo,syof thelive specificto thefieldof rock music.Thefirstsectiondispenseseasilywith theideologyof authenticitythat,ashe argues,conceptuallyundergirdsthefieldof performancestudies.Auslander'sclear rejectionof Phelan'spositionin Unmarked-as rvellashisaffinityfor technological reproduction-clearly simplifiedthisdeconstructionof therecoilfrom technology, especiallytelevision,on the parl ofperformanceartistsandscholars.The second sectkrnof thebookis morearnbivalentandconrplicated,partlybecauseAuslander, althougha rock fan, seemsuncomfortablervithexplicitly allying himselfwith its authenticity.This is trueevenasheredefinesauthenticityasproducedthroughan on-goingrelationof imitation("remediation")betweenlive rockperfbrmanceand its broadcastor recording.It seemsthat.evenrvhenauthenticityis understoodas effect,it retainsthemoralizingtaint of naivet6. Auslanderwill admitto beingparanoidratherthannostalgic.While heisquick to deconstructthe notionof purepresencethatPhelanseemsto be promoting,he

nevetthelessis in accordrvith her suspicionof mediationas a potentialform of manipulation.He admitsbeingparanoidaboutthemachinationsof thepower behind mediato simulatetheauthentic.Auslanderpointsto MTV's Unpluggedandalsoto theMilli Vanilli scandal(in 1990theduohadtheirGrammyawardtakenarvaywhen their lip-synchingwaspublicized)asevidencesupportingJeanBauclrillarcl'sdark propheciesabouttheirnminentencroachmentof simulationonthereal.TheFrench philosopher-prophetwho foundfame,notin hisown countrybut in theU.S.culture of simulationaboutwhich he so often wrote,declaredin Simulatiorrs (1983) 414

Sorins 2008

71

elsewherethattherealwasunc'lerthreatof totalassimilationby thecopy.Auslander, writing morethanfifteenyearslater,extendsBaudrillard'sparanoidviewpointto

the point of no reference."lt would seemthat the developmentthat Baudrillard treatsas a fait accompll is actually in the processof occurring." In his astute

analysisof the ideologicalunderpinningsof the Milli Vanilli scandal,Auslander concludesthat sirnulationitself may rvell be cooptedasa sellingstrategyby the powers-that-be.He suggeststhatthe legalcaseagainsttheduo andtherescinding of the Grammymay havebeenonly a simulationof a confrontationbetweenthe guardiansof authenticityandtheduo,authenticity'ssimulators.Thisconfrontation,

hypedin the media,was actuallya form of reality effectthat ultimatelysupports Power-theporverof mediain aspecificsense,asthetelevisionindustry'slegalright to controlbroadcasts.andthepowerof mediain a generalsense.asthatwhichcan conceivablycontrolpeopleandthingsthroughtheirrepresentation.Compounding thesepowersintotheabstraction"agency of capital,"Auslanderexplains:"[I]t may

bethatthe implosionof the oppositionbetweenlive andmediatisedperformance

in popularmusic

of capitalto consolidateandextendits powerby recuperatingsimulationitselfas oneof itsstrategies."3l This understandingof Powerasa dark motivebehindappearancesis pafi and parcelof authenticity'sidealizationof anauthenticspaceof non-mediation.Power thuspersoniliedgivesmediathemenacingproporlionsof anunspecifiedevilthat is

atoncethe sameasandgreaterthanthe corporatemanagersof recordcompanies or eventhe companiesthemselves.It is the intentionaland united force of The System,the old andfamiliar monolithof the 1960sLeft. The problemwith the notionof The Systemis thatit needsro be continually

resurrected in order for a deconsttuctionlike Auslander'sto make sense.It has always seemedto me ironicthatdeconstruction,asgenerallypracticedin theU.S.

academy, rarelyturnsa critical eyeto its own essentializingperceptionof power. while Denida's philosophical deconstructionstake a mystical perspective,the more common,derivativetype of analysisis rationallyorientedin its revelation

of the"construction of reality."Auslander'sLivenessis anexampleof thisrational type of analysis,which,althoughextremelywell researchedandargued,stiil seems

to require theresunectionof the ideaof an overriding power. SinceAuslanderis also makingan argumentthat authenticityis a quality thatchanges,especiallyin relation to technologicalinnovation,it is hardto imaginethatpower,too,doesn't change (splinter,falter,diversify).

Yet it would be unfair to judge the whole book as groundedin moralizing paranoia. For themostpart.it maintainsanobjectivetonethatcarefullypal-sesout the construction of livenessasa historicallychangingcategory.This fascinating account of theshiftingstatus-relatior.rshipsbetweenmediaopensthebookbeyond the structurallyorientedanalysisof the manipulationsof power.Also, pointing

wasactuallya simulationof implosioncreatedby anagency

38

Journal of DramaticTheor)'and Criticism

out that youngergenerationsare lessnostalgicfbr live perfbrmanceand more accommodatingtowards mediatedexperience,Auslandermakesroom for the suggestionthat his own viervson simulationare generati()nallydeterminedand

historicallyspecific.Hedescribesthefr"rturein tennsof themoralityof authenticity, asthreatenedby the insidiouscreepof mediacultureandits effecton the youllg:

"when

fbrce,itsexpansionintoandvoidingof therealmsof thesocialandthepoliticalmay be complete."ttBut he alsoref'ersto the "nervparadigm"thatis darvning,led by

theyoungestgeneration,lvhoserelationshipto mediationis.he says,anxietyfree. Almosteverychapterof Livenessconcludeswith somefornlof speculationabout

thesekids,whoAuslanderdescribesin oneplaceasthechildrenof first-generation Claptonfans,in otherwords,of boomers.Doomedto inauthenticityin theeyesof

theirparentalgeneration(assumingAuslander'sviervis widespread.whichI clo), thosechildrenaboutwhom he spokein 1999,norvin high schoolandcollege,are alsotheoneswho rvill fill the shoesof theboomerswhentheyretire.

generationassumes 'polver,'theregimeof simulationmaybein full

Conclusion:Authenticity in an Expanded Field "Now andthenit is possibleto observethe morallife in processof revising itself,"wroteLionelTrillingin Sinceritt'tuulAuthentit'irlt 1970).-r'rTrilling'sbook is aboutthe appearanceof sincerityin eighteenth-centuryFrenchliteratureand philosophy,andthen,in hisorvntime,authenticity'sdevelopmentout of sincerity. Thecurrentdevelopn.rentsin our morallife. broughton by thepressuresof legacy aswell astechnologicaladvancementsandotherclranges,havebeenreferredtohere asa revivalor returnto authenticity.However, "re-performance"moreaccurately

conveysthesensein rvhichauthenticityiscomingback,asaperfotmativerepetition ratherthan asa merereprodrrction.Accordingto Trilling, the authenticityof the 1960swas an intensificationof sincerity'sstraightfbrwardmorality. I suggest thatthe authenticitycurrentlybeingre-performeclis not a furtherpurificationof representation,but a nostalgicand theatricalrepresentationof representational purity thatappealssomewhatdifferentlyto two generationalaudiences. Thefirstis,of course,thesameboorrrergroupthatwatchesMTV's Unplugged for atasteof theold authentic.acousticsound.Like theMTV show,re-perforrnance reassertsthe era of performancewhen live perfbrmancewas placed in clear oppositionto media.Yet, becausethe primary mediumof re-perfbrmanceis the humanbody-an objectwhosepresencecannot(yet?)be fully simulatedby any prostheticor imagingtechnology-the form is not readassimulationbut as resurrection.JoannaBurtonwroteof Lipsof Thomas.Abramovi6'sre-performance of her orvn earlierperformance,that in its hologramefTectshefelt shesaw the youngerAbramovi6superimposedontheolder.Herdescriptionof thiseffectmade it out to bequitepoignant.Of course,Abramovii hadagedoverthirty yearssince the original perfomtance.Her self-reploduction\vasthusboth a repetitionand a

Snring 2008

39

remnant or souvenir-a metonymicobject nradeall the n.rorepoignantbecause, unlike photographsand digitized music tracks,it is finite and will eventually disappear. Abramovid madeherselfinto an authenticsouvenirof her own past,

and thedocumentaryphotographstakenof theperfomancesrverealsosouvenirs, not only of Abramovi6'spastbut, consideringher re-peformanceselections,of the pastof a wholegeneration.

The secondaudienceof re-perfbrmanceis the rising millennial group, for whom thesouvenirhasnopathos.Forthemillennials(alsosometimescalled"echo boomers"), the re-performancesarelessonsin a practiceof aestheticpurity from

a memberof their parents'generation.In this regardit is noter,vorthythat,in the interest of herown legacyaswell asin nurturingthenextgeneration(whichamounts

tothesame),Abramovi6hasrecentlyquit teachingin orderto startagroupdevoted to endurancework. Called The IndependentPerfonnanceGroup, the group's memberswill bethestudentswhohavestayedwith herfor severalyears.Onemight well wonderif thisgroupwill remaindevotedto re-performingthe worksof their

teacheror if theyrvill initiatenew formsbasedon her work, usheringin aneraof renewedauthenticity.Onemight wonder,aswell, what thatrenewedauthenticity

wouldlook like-and

to herteaching.After all, thepassageof aestheticauthenticityfrom onegeneration

to thenextcanonly befraughtin a world in which representationsaremultiplying andbecomingmorerealistic,andin which representationaldevicesarebecoming smalleqmoreporverful,ubiquitous,anddiverse.Representationsthatclearlyand lessclearlyrepresentotherrepresentationsarealsocreatingeverfinerdistinctions

that will acquirevaluesas yet unassigned.Undoubtedlythe authenticityof the futurewill be interpreteclandrecontextualizedin waysthatrenderit strangeand

evenillegible to thosewho launchedtheir careersunderthe bannerof the literal, thenonreproducible,andtheplain.

if Abramovii wouldevenrecognizeit ashavinganyrelation

Notes

l. Philip Auslander,Liveness:Perlbrmance in tt Mediatiz.et!Culture (London: Routledge,

|999).

2. Peggy Phelan,IJnnttrked:ThePolitit:styfPcrformant:e(London: Routledge,1993).

3. Roselee Goldberg, PerJbrma(New York: Perfbrma,

,1. MarinaAbramovi(.,7Ea.syPieces(Milan: Edizioni Charta,2007) 18.

5. One exceptiont()the silencais by performanceartistJosephKeckler,whosecontributionto

2007) 12.

the _,

"someone"

to,maybe,givingherselfa ttver transplant on thestage."2I Nov.200-5,I6 Jan2008<http://culturebot.wordpress.com l2005ll1l2l I marrna-Abramov i(-at-the-guggenheim/>.

endure!wethoughtthatshemightreallyoutdoherself,uppingtheanre

onlineperfornrance mlgazine Culturelxttis a hilalioLrsreporton SevenEust, Pietes.Hewritesthat

in the audienceprotestedthat "[slhe's

Marina fiiggin'Abramovii.

.

.

.

I wannaseeher

6. NancySpector,"MarinaAbramovif."

7.

PatriceP:rvis. "staging

GuggenheimMuseumrvebsitel3 Sep.2007.<http://wrvw.

guggenheimcollection.org/site/artist work md_lA-2.html >.

. Anderson. Theuter -\6.3 (2005):1.1.

Calamity: Mise-en-Scdneand Performanceat Avignon," tr. Joel

8. RobertaSnrith,"Tulning Back the Clock to the Days of CrotchlessPantsand a Deceased

Rabbit," New York'limeson the Web.l7 Nov. 2005. ll

Jan.2008<http://nvtimes.com>.

40

Journal of Dramatic Theorv and Criticism

9. RichardSchechner,EnvironmentalThe(tter.rev.ed. (1973; New York: Applause,1994)40.

10.TheresaSmalec,"NotWhatltSeems:ThePoliticsofRe-PerformingVitoAcconci'sSeedbed

(1972)," Postmodern Culture \l .I (2006). Project Masz. University of Notre Dame. l5 Feb. 2008 <http://muse.jhu.edu.lib-proxy.nd.edu>.

11. SomeofthesetranscriptsappearinAbramovii'sbook,TEasyPieces.rvhereitisexplained

that"[e]very nightbeforeeachperformancestarted,seventiny microphonesweredistributedto some

membersof the public. T'hernicrophonespicked up difl-erentconversationsas the main audience remajnedunaware" (68).

12. JohannaBurton, "RepeatPerformance: JohannaBurton on Marina Abramovii's Seven

EasyPieces,"Artforun International44.5 (Jan.2006): 55, Universityof Notre Dame. I 5 Feb.2008 <http://shakespeare.gale{roup.com>.

13. Smalec."Not What It Seems."

14. Smalec."Not What It Seems."

15. Smith, "Turning Back the Clock."

16. KarenRosenberg,"Provocateur:MarinaAbramovii,"New York,5Dec.2005, l2Dec. 2007

<http://nymag.com/nymetro/arts/artl15228I>.

17. Rosenberg, "Provocateur."

I 8. LaurieAnderson, "Marina Abramovii." intervierv,Bon$ 84 (Summer2003),Feb. 16,2008 <http://rvww.bombsite.com/issuesI84I articlesl256l>.

I9. Anderson. "Marina Abramovi6."

20. Abramovi6,7 EusyPieces118.

21. Phelan.Unmarked161.

22. DavidByme,"2.25.07:

Marina Abramovii," 25 Feb.2007,Journal, 1l Jan.2008 <http://

joumal.davidbyrne.coml200T lo2l 22507 _marina_ab.html>.

23. Marla Carlson, "Marina Abramovii Repeats: Pain,Ar, andTheater."Dec.2005, Hunter

On-LineTheaterReview,l I Jan.2007 <http://www.hotreview.org/articles/marinaabram.htm>.

24.

Phelan.Unmarked146.

25.

Abramovii. TEusyPieces16.

26.

Lucy Lippard, Six Years: The DenaterialiTcttbn ctf the Art Objeu From 1966 to 1972

(Berkeley: U. of CalifbrniaP. 1973).

27. JonErickson,"ColdbergVariations:PerforrningDistinctions."PAJ:AJournalofPerformance

andArt 21.3 (1999): 98.

28. JanetA. Kaplan,"DeeperandDeeper:Interviewwith MarinaAbramovi6,,"Art Journal 58.2

(Summer1999):6-21, l5 Feb.2008<http://findarticles.com>.

29. Auslander,"The Performativityof PerformaDceDocumentation,"PAJ28.3 (2006)5.

30. Bryan S.TurnerandJuneEdmunds,eds.,Garicnttional Consciousness,Narratile, ttndPolitics

(Oxford: Rorvman& Littlelield,2002).

31. Auslander.LivenessllO.

32. lfi.

33. Lionel Trilling. Sincerity and Authenticit.r-(Cambridge: Harvard U P, 1912).