Word and flesh: Framing the space in theatrical performances in churches

47 WORD AND FLESH: FRAMING THE SPACE IN THEATRICAL PERFORMANCES IN CHURCHES BRIDGET FOREMAN In a illage in he Yo kshi e Dales, in he u al No h o England, an elde ly woman en e s he chu ch. She is g ee ed a he doo and makes he way o he egula sea among a ga he ing o people, many o whom she has known o yea s. A man s eps up o he lec e n and begins o deli e a eulogy o Na haniel, a a me who has died suddenly in middle age. The chu ch building ills and echoes o he sound o he speake ’s wo ds as he sha es memo ies o Na haniel wi h his lis ene s, who si , silen ly a en i e. When he inishes speaking, ligh s come up behind him on he c amped in e io o a co age, amed in he wide space o he chu ch. The e is a pile o laund y, a able and chai s, an exi ups age. Because his is no , in ac , a une al, bu he pe o mance o a play. The cong ega ion is also an audience, he elde ly woman is bo h a wo shippe and a spec a o , he si e is a once a chu ch and a pe o mance space. This pape will expand upon he complexi ies implied by his con e gence o e en , meaning, si e, space – all somewha slippe y e ms – conside ing u he he ela ionship be ween space and ex , om he pe spec i e o he playw igh . Simeon’s Wa ch was commissioned om me as a w i e in 2016. The play ells he s o y o a con empo a y amily acing he expe ience o demen ia, bu i also d aws on he biblical s o y o Simeon, who appea s in Luke’s gospel as a 48 BRIDGET FOREMAN man o whom i has been p ophesied ha he will no die un il he has seen his sal a ion – ha is, he Ch is child. Simeon’s Wa ch p esen s h ee gene a ions o sheep- a me s: Simeon, who a he s a o he play is beginning o exhibi signs o demen ia, his daugh e , Leah, and g and-daugh e , Rina. As he amily w es les wi h he challenges and change p esen ed by Simeon’s illness, he mo es owa ds appa en ly inc easing inaccessibili y and dea h. Howe e , he ho izon o he piece o e s an al e na i e pe spec i e o hope and a e-conside a ion o he ways in which ela ionships and communica ion can be p ese ed o people expe iencing demen ia, and hei lo ed ones. I ou ed in he un-up o Ch is mas, playing o single pe o mances in communi y enues, which we e usually chu ches in u al a eas. While his was in pa de e mined by he modus ope andi o he commissioning hea e company, he e was also a d ama ic, a is ic equi emen o he play o si com o ably wi hin hose pe o mance spaces, and o speak in o he e nacula o he si e-gene ic loca ions. The commission demanded a piece ha could speak he languages, codes and signi ie s o bo h hea e and chu ch, and enable he audience o ecei e he play bilingually. This was in pa a challenge o he isual and ma e ial aspec s o p oduc ion, design and di ec ion, bu i also p esen ed a jux aposi ion ha needed o be exp essed wi hin he sc ip . The deba e a ound space and place in hea e is li ely and popula ed wi h di e gen e minology. The p oposi ion in Pe e B ook’s seminal wo k ha he e could be such a hing as an “emp y space” (B ook, 1969) has been a gued o e and e u ed, o example by Ch is Goode, who aligns himsel wi h John Cage’s asse ion ha “ he e is no such hing as an emp y space o an emp y ime” (Cage in Goode, 2015, Ch.1). B ook himsel de elops his ea lie a gumen by acknowledging ha his ques o disco e an “emp y” space in which o make hea e was a eac ion agains making and seeing wo k ha “has always been wi hin a con ex . The con ex is ei he geog aphical, cul u al o linguis ic, so ha we wo k wi hin a sys em” (B ook in Goode). Goode con ends ha B ook’s esponse in he “s aking ou o an emp y space” may be “blandly a ac i e”, 49 WORD AND FLESH bu “ he e is some hing e ible going on: because nobody li es he e” (Goode). This is an ins uc i e deba e in he conside a ion o unde s anding how he in e ac ion be ween a piece o pe o mance and he physical space in which i is pe o med can esul in hick and complex laye ing o meanings. When a piece o hea e no only si s wi hin a si e bu acc ues ha si e’s signi icance, i can engage he audience in an e ec i e and a ec i e con e sa ion. Goode has indica ed ha “ he expe ience o an audience may ha e much o do wi h he idea o a pa icula ‘place’, especially one hey know” (Goode). He goes on o e lec on he na u e and cha ac e o chu ches as ep esen ing a “space ha , iewed secula ly in o mal e ms a leas , could se e simply as a si e o communi y ga he ing, he ci cula ing o in o ma ion, he celeb a o y enac ion o li es sha ed”. Howe e , he concludes ha “ hei meaning is de ined in p ac ice no by hei appoin ed cus odians bu by hei use s, and no in abs ac ion bu in he enac ion o … ha useage” (Goode). I we iew his in B ook’s e ms, we can conclude ha a chu ch p esen s a con ex , and ep esen s a sys em. Expanded Scenog aphy and Si e-Gene ic Pe o mance While Ca hy Tu ne bemoans he ac ha “a chi ec u e is o en conside ed as hough we can sepa a e he meaning o buildings om hei habi a ion” (Tu ne , 2015, p.2), subsequen commen a ies ha e add essed his blind spo hough a discussion o expanded scenog aphy a ising om he inc easing use and unde s anding o ound space as si es o pe o mance. McKinney and Palme p opose ha “expanded scenog aphy u ilizes space no simply as a backd op bu as an ac i e pa o he p ocess o in i ing spec a o s o si ua e hemsel es wi h ega d o hei li ed expe ience” (McKinney & Palme , 2017, p.1). The li ed expe ience o a chu ch membe in ela ion o hei chu ch building mani es s i sel cul u ally, socially, spi i ually and p ac ically. I is a space ha has been a chi ec u ally concei ed, bu i is also a place o mee ing, o wo ship, o communi y, and o mul iple unc ions. In addi ion o hei s uc u al and symbolic a chi ec u e, chu ches a e clu e ed wi h he a he mo e p osaic 50 pa aphe nalia o unc ionali y: hea e s and speake s, mic ophones, s acks o addi ional chai s, hand-c a ed banne s, lowe a angemen s; a isually chao ic s o y o he li e li ed wi hin he space. In his con ex , he no ion o expanded scenog aphy as one ha , in McKinney and Palme ’s e ms, shapes “ he in e ace be ween he pe o mance and he audiences” (McKinney & Palme , 2017, p.6), c ea ing “a mode o encoun e and exchange… be ween bodies, objec s and en i onmen s” (McKinney & Palme , p.2) becomes angible, and p esen s us wi h h ee spaces, which I will discuss: he physical space, he concep ual space and he cong ega ional space. The Physical Space McKinney and Palme ’s obse a ion ha “The e is an inhe en no ion o pe o mance and e en in a chi ec u e” (McKinney & Palme , 2017, p.10) is eadily appa en in he physical space o chu ches, ha p o ides he se ing o i es, i uals and ga he ings ha a e no in hemsel es hea e bu a e ich in hea icali y. This is he case ega dless o he as ly di e ing s yles, ages and sizes o many chu ch buildings: hey sha e a common pu pose, meaning ha in addi ion o hei concep ual a ilia ion wi h pe o mance, chu ches also – in hei physical a chi ec u e – p o ide many o he ma e ial condi ions o pe o mance e en s whe e an audience will obse e an ac ion o some so . Bu i does no ollow ha chu ches a e he e o e app op ia e spaces o he s aging o almos any o m o hea ical pe o mance. The a chi ec u al and scenog aphic ounda ions o a piece o hea e ha is pe o med in a chu ch a e he gene ic and pa icula can as agains which any hea ical design will be seen, and hey demand ecogni ion o he addi ional laye s o pe cep ion ha will esul . Gay McAuley desc ibes space as “c ucial o unde s anding he na u e o he pe o mance e en and how meanings a e cons uc ed and communica ed” (McAuley, 1999, p.278). The se o Simeon’s Wa ch was compac : a aised pla o m on which a claus ophobically small domes ic se ing (opening up o a simple hillside in he second hal ) p o ided a ocused con ex BRIDGET FOREMAN 51 o he pe o mance, bu i sa – physically – wi hin he la ge space o he chu ch. Tha la ge space, which changed e e y nigh o he ou , old i s own s o y and spoke i s own physical language: o his o y, communi y, iconog aphy and unc ion, and was isible o he audience h oughou he pe o mance. Thus he play was p esen ed a e e y pe o mance wi hin wo ames: he ou e ame o he chu ch building, he inne ame o he hea ical se ing. In pe o mance, his allowed he audience’s expe ience o ake he o m o Linda Hu cheon and Siobhan O’Flynn’s ‘oscilla ion’ be ween di e en modes o engagemen and le els o imme sion (Hu cheon & O’Flynn, 2013). And he physical ela ionship be ween he wo ames exp essed a psychological expec a ion: ha he play being pe o med would si wi hin he cul u al, social and spi i ual aming wi h which he audience a i ed. Cli o d McLucas cha ac e ises his ma ix as s a ing wi h “ he hos and he ghos ” as an exp ession o (...) he ela ionship be ween place and e en . The hos si e is haun ed o a ime by a ghos ha he hea e-make s c ea e. Like all ghos s i is anspa en and he hos can be seen h ough he ghos . (McLucas in Kaye, 2000, p.168) In a chu ch, he space is bo h li ed and – by implica ion – his o ic: chu ches exude a connec ion o he pas , some h ough hei an iqui y, and hei semi- ixed ea u es o memo ial able s, books o ememb ance, and so on, and all h ough he signi icance o hei ole as media ing con ex s o li e i uals such as bap ism, ma iage and bu ial, as well as he weekly i e o people ga he ing oge he and sel -iden i ying as a communi y wi h a sense o i s own his o y. This cons i u es an exp ession o Mike Pea son’s “‘single s a um’: he idea ha all we e e see is he p esen , bu ha he p esen is i sel in il a ed by elics o he pas ” (Pea son, 2014), a desc ip ion ha also – in i s sugges ion ha he pas can make incu sions upon he p esen – goes o he hea o he expe ience o demen ia ha Simeon’s Wa ch explo es. So he laye ing, and simul aneous WORD AND FLESH 52 expe ience o pas and p esen , and he po osi y o he bounda y be ween he wo, a e exp essed as ac i e elemen s by bo h he play i sel and he si e o pe o mance. The Concep ual Space In conside ing he concep ual space ep esen ed by a chu ch, he mos asse i e ea u e is ha a chu ch building is no neu al o pe o me o spec a o : i is designed as a sac ed space, and e en when o he , mo e secula ac i i ies ake place wi hin i , hey a e se agains a backd op ha is pu posed – and used – o communal ac s o wo ship. A he e y leas , Pea son’s obse a ion ha “Religious buildings a e eigh ed wi h his o y, wi h es ablished ou ines o obse ance, wi h a mosphe es o pie y” (Pea son, 2010, p.64) begins o a icula e he pa icula cha ac e o he hos . I we conside a chu ch wi hin he amewo k o Elam’s spa ial codes ( he a chi ec u al, in e pe sonal, scenic and i ual, which combine o de ine d ama ic space – Elam, 1980), he ixed and semi- ixed a chi ec u al ea u es o he space i sel ell he s o ies o he Ch is ian ai h: al a s and c uci ixes e oke sac i ice, sanc ua ies speak o holiness, a chi ec u al g andeu imi a es he g andeu o hea en. Whe e e a pe o mance o Simeon’s Wa ch was pe o med, hese physical ea u es we e un ouched, so while he scenes o he play we e se in a co age, a pub, o a hillside, he insis en ly isible, ma e ial signi ie s o he spi i ual unc ion o which he aming chu ch building was pu posed emained while he pe o mance was g a ed on o i . The signi icance o his laye ing ex ended beyond he isual, howe e : i p o ided a lens h ough which he meaning o he play comes in o ocus; an implica ion ha he expe ience o he cha ac e s, and he subjec o he play, is no dis inc o sepa a e om a spi i ual unde s anding o li e, bu is held wi hin i . Key o he analysis o he powe o his e ec is he simple ac ha i could no ha e been achie ed in any pe o mance si e ha was no a place o wo ship. So he chu ch i sel ep esen s a u he ac i e elemen wi hin he dynamic o he play’s ecep ion; a pa icipa o in he collabo a ion be ween wha Rachel Hann has BRIDGET FOREMAN 53 desc ibed as he “human and non-human agen s ha ende a place as e en ul, a en i e” (Hann, 2019, p.4). The Cong ega ional Space The human agen s o ha ende ing de ine he cong ega ional space. A pe o mances o Simeon’s Wa ch, he audience was usually la gely comp ised o he cong ega ion o he chu ch ha was hos ing he pe o mance. As such, hey we e people who no only knew each o he bu who sha ed deep connec ions and a willingness o engage emo ionally wi h one ano he . Addi ionally, his audience b ough a web o expec a ions ha emb aced he hea ical, cul u al and spi i ual; wha Susan Benne desc ibes as “a ho izon o cul u al and ideological expec a ions” (Benne , 1997, p.98). They came p imed wi h ies o iendship, sha ed alues, ai h and communi y, and om hei pe spec i e as spec a o s, bo h he amilia space and he ela ionships be ween human and non-human elemen s had he po en ial o be e-concei ed h ough pa icipa ion in an ac o hea e. As a cong ega ion, amilia wi h pa icipa ion in se ices, hei mode o engagemen was habi ually ac i e a he han passi e. As an audience, hey comp ised a communi y o in e es , co-cons uc i e in he in e ace be ween hemsel es and he pe o mance. In such amilia su oundings, i may become di icul o he cong ega ion membe – o spec a o – o make a dis inc ion be ween he communal expe ience o pa icipa ion in an ac o wo ship, and ha o wa ching a hea ical pe o mance, meaning ha he mee ing poin o Sa ah G ochala’s li ed space and d ama ic space is si ua ed no solely in he non- human physical place o pe o mance, bu also in he human expe ience o he indi idual spec a o . So we can iew he audience in his con ex – bo h as a body and as indi iduals – as a o m o human a chi ec u e; a speci ic space, wi h a pa icula cha ac e , wi hin which he pe o mance is si ua ed and expe ienced, and one ha comple es McLucas’s “ ini y ha cons i u es he wo k” – o he hos , he ghos and “ he wi ness, i.e. he audience” (McLucas in Kaye, 2000, p.128). WORD AND FLESH 54 A chi ec u e and D ama u gy Re u ning o he concep o wo ames, Benne sees he audience’s esponse as a o ce ha b ings he ames oge he : (...) he ou e ame con ains all hose cul u al elemen s which c ea e and in o m he hea ical e en . The inne ame con ains he d ama ic p oduc ion in a pa icula playing space. The audience’s ole is ca ied ou wi hin hese wo ames and, pe haps mos impo an ly, a hei poin s o in e sec ion. I is he in e ac i e ela ions be ween audience and s age, spec a o and spec a o which… cause he inne and ou e ames o con e ge o he c ea ion o a pa icula expe ience. (Benne , 1997, p.139) The language he e – o ames, con e gence, space and in e sec ion – is s uc u al, sugges ing ha he en i e e en migh be iewed as a o m o a chi ec u e, o – as McLucas sugges s – a numbe o a chi ec u es ha a e o “di e en o de s o ma e ial, some concep ual, some spa ial” (McLucas, c.1993-94). This expansion o he de ini ion o ‘a chi ec u e’ has p omp ed Ca hy Tu ne o link i o he unde s anding o d ama u gy as a concep ha ela es ideas o s uc u e: “In each case, wha is being a icula ed is he ela ionship o di e se elemen s in a spa io- empo al s uc u e, a once concep ual, ma e ial/senso y and symbolic/ mime ic” (Tu ne , 2009, p.2). As he p oduc ion o Simeon’s Wa ch demons a es, his ela ionship o di e se elemen s can esul in a complex and dis inc i e e en , bo h h ough he in ended design o he piece as a whole – i s concep ual and ideological ounda ions – and h ough he less clea ly-de ined de ails p esen ed by he indi idual chu ches whe e he play was pe o med. The pe o mance ac ed as a ca alys o spec a o s o e- ame hei ela ionship wi h amilia chu ch buildings, wi h hei own na a i es connec ing wi h ha o he play, e oking Do een Massey’s desc ip ion o place as being “un inished business” ha is “wo en oge he ou o ongoing s o ies” (Massey, 2005, p.131). BRIDGET FOREMAN 55 Space and Tex Bu his accoun o he symbio ic ela ionship be ween space, pe o mance and audience can be u he ex apola ed – o conside he ela ionship be ween space and ex h ough he genesis and cons uc ion o he play i sel . F om he ou se , he commission equi ed a play ha was concei ed s uc u ally and hema ically in esponse o he spaces o pe o mance. The ela ionship o audience o si e became a key ac o wi hin he w i ing o he play, and hese elemen s in u n de ined spaces ha he ex was w i en ou o and in o. The s a o he play demons a es his, delibe a ely d awing upon he po ency o he in e sec ion be ween he ou e and inne ames, acknowledging ha he spec a o s may – a leas in pa – iden i y hemsel es p ima ily as a cong ega ion a he han an audience. The opening scene, se in a chu ch, in which Simeon gi es he eulogy a his son-in-law’s une al, appea s a i s o be loca ed wi hin he ou e ame o he chu ch space, be o e d awing he us in o he inne domes ic ame, whe e he d ama ic ac ion o he play is loca ed. I p o ides a b idge o he spec a o o c oss om hei own wo ld in o he wo ld o he play. In he c ossing o ha b idge, hey a e ans o med om cong ega ion o audience. In w i ing o a hea ical pe o mance in a chapel, Pea son sugges s ha “ex an p ac ices sugges a d ama u gical s uc u e, as pe o mance adop s he p ac icali ies o he chapel” (Pea son, 2010, p.63). The opening o Simeon’s Wa ch gi es spec a o s a amilia en y poin , whe e hey a e di ec ly add essed in a chu ch se ing – cas by Simeon as he amily and iends ga he ed o mou n Na haniel. As Simeon’s speech ends, and he ocus mo es o his g and-daugh e , he audience is d awn ully in o he li es o he play’s cha ac e s, en e ing a mo e ully hea ical dimension, and a wo ld ha , while amilia , is dis inc om hei own. Conside ed as a whole, he a c o he play akes on a pa icula esonance when iewed agains i s se ing in a chu ch. Whe e – in a di e en pe o mance con ex – Simeon’s jou ney h ough he play migh be ega ded as a p og ess owa ds inc easing con usion and dea h, in a chu ch he space becomes – as Gay WORD AND FLESH