Performance, Its Archive and Historicity

Abstract

‘Intercultural theatre’, which came to be known as a form of performance, especially during the postcolonial period, is one of those rare performance genres that has received an unprecedented amount of criticism worldwide and especially from postcolonial theatre scholars. This form, which invariably includes the work of ‘western’ theatre practitioners, borrows from theatrical, ritualistic or performative traditions that are usually not from their own continent (performances that borrow from traditions within the same continent although different cultures are not usually called ‘intercultural theatre’1). One of the main criticisms against this form has been its failure to comprehend or rather ignore the cultural and historical context to which the ‘source’ form belongs. ‘Intercultural theatre’ has been accused of appropriation or wrongfully taking away that which can also be called ‘stealing’. Rustom Bharucha, one of the critics of this form (this chapter will primarily engage with his critique), goes to the extent of saying that it emptied ‘source cultures’ like India of its cultural tradition while filling the ‘target culture’, which in this case to him is the ‘west’. This chapter tries to understand the dynamics of such ‘appropriation’, or ‘performance stealing’ if you will, by looking at two concepts vis-à-vis performance (a) the archive and (b) historicity. I am particularly interested in these two concepts because they have been understood as ‘housing’ for and providing ‘historical actuality’, respectively, to the ‘matter’ of life in general and in this case theatrical performance. In doing so, the chapter will also contemplate the ‘matter’ of performance. But to begin, I would like to quote within parenthesis an origin myth of theatrical performances according to Chapter XXII of the Natyasastra (NS) as translated by Adya Rangacharya. It serves as providing ‘purvaranga’ (Oxford reference website translates it as early staging before the commencement of the main drama) to thinking about the archive and historicity of performance in this chapter.