Offstage Intimacy:Best Practices for Navigating the Intimacy of Costuming Elaine DiFalco Daugherty (bio), Deborah Hertzberg (bio), and Darrell Wagner (bio) The relatively new specialization of intimacy direction comes out of the desire to maintain physical and emotional safety for all performers. In the era of #MeToo and Time's Up, intimacy direction guidelines are continuing to develop through burgeoning groups, organizations, and individual practitioners. Collectively, as authors we are costume designers, intimacy choreographers, directors, actors, puppeteers, and recent graduates of the MFA program at the University of Idaho. Predominantly, however, we are educators in university theatre departments and see the need to review our processes in light of this work and the importance of these conversations in our daily interactions with students and colleagues. In this note from the field, we discuss the reframing of some foundational ideas behind intimacy choreography and propose ways to apply them practically to the costuming field. While these guidelines may have initially been developed to govern and shape the interactions between actors and directors, they can (and should) be applied in a parallel manner to any interactions that include an aspect of intimate contact—in this case, to assist actors and costumers in creating offstage partnerships in the same manner that they are being created for onstage interactions. We will also offer specific examples of best-practice protocols in the various phases of the costuming process to assist in the transition from a culture of assumed consent to one in which consent is explicitly asked for and received before action is taken. The two main organizations initiating the work to educate, train, and develop best practices have been Intimacy Directors International (IDI) and Theatrical Intimacy Education (TIE). Intimacy work centers on several foundational principles that are common to all practitioners, although the language used to describe those principles may vary. One of the clearest structures of these principles is by IDI, which has established what it refers to as "The Pillars": consent, context, communication, choreography, and closure (Richardson et al.).1 These pillars stand upon the belief in body autonomy, "the right to self-governance over one's own body without external influence or coercion" ("Bodily Autonomy"). This means that you are the only person who has the right to decide how to use your body, for what purpose, and in what manner. As such, a person has the right to give, withhold, or withdraw consent to complete and/or receive a physical action from any other person working on a production. While these principles are designed to guide onstage performance work, they can also be adapted to inform the way actors and costumers interact throughout the inescapably intimate processes of taking measurements, navigating fittings, and choreographing backstage costume changes. Consent is certainly at the very center of this work. As we advocate for body autonomy, we encourage asking for permission to touch and be touched rather than assuming that someone's presence in a situation implies consent. Context refers to understanding the purpose of what we are creating. For example, a stage direction may simply indicate that two characters kiss; however, we are charged with determining the story of the kiss—who initiates, who gives or takes control, how long it lasts and at what intensity, and so on. The discussion of context allows the work to focus on active specific storytelling rather than simply a meeting of lips. Necessity dictates that communication function as an umbrella concept, as it must be present simultaneously with each of the other pillars in order for them to function. If there is no clear, specific [End Page 211] communication, the entire system breaks down. Choreography is developed so that all intimate action is specific and repeatable. Actors are given a series of physical actions done in the same sequence, with an agreed-upon level and type of contact between parties; this specificity allows for greater knowledge, trust, and safety for those involved. Additionally, when the character's actions happen the same way every time, it becomes easier to classify it as "work" and further clarify the dividing line between character and actor. Closure is the final step in the process, and it comes in any...
Read full abstract