– In one of the interviews, speaking of dramaturgical adaptation, you give Yana Ross’ play “Three Sisters” as a very good example of it, in which the plot of Chekhov’s play is transferred to a modern context. Who do you think is a relevant developer? And do you try to be like that yourself?
– I would tend to change the word “relevant” to “gut”. It seems to me that to be relevant is to have a sense of what might happen. One of the characteristics of a good artist is a strong intuition not only in the context of artistic decisions, but also in social, political and cultural phenomena. The case of the play “Three Sisters” staged by Y. Ross in 2017 illustrates this very well. The creative process of the play took place three years after the annexation of Crimea. At that time, I was only in my twenties, and Yana spoke about visionary topics that no one around me understood. Although the facts are self-evident: the entire continent has allowed the annexation of a land as large as Crimea without any effort, and no one is reacting, it amazed me how blind our society is. But is intuition characterized only by intelligence? I don’t think so. It is also a mixture of emotional intelligence, dreams and visions.
– Bolaño’s short story “The Return” first fell into the hands of the play’s playwright Edgaras Gerasimovičis and only later to you. How is the selection of the material you will work with? How important is it that literature reflects some aspect of the modern world or can it be added later, invented?
– In the beginning, Edgar and I talked a lot about death, its unpredictability, our dogmatic and disrespectful approach to death. When we started preparing for the performance, rumors began to spread that the Israeli genocide had begun in the Gaza Strip. Much was not clear at the time, but as we can see now, it became a genocidal war that spread to other Arab states. In the foreboding of this expanding war, at the junction of complete disregard for life, as well as fear and not knowing how to talk about it, Edgar casually suggested reading Bolaño’s short story The Return. Later I also read the whole collection – Cursed Assassins. I would like to say that the birth of this play was motivated by political events, but it is much more than politics. This crazy attitude towards life, violence, hatred, the inability to find a dialogue, to reject one’s ego, principles and thoughts became the real impetus. And this leads to war and genocide. This performance and literature emerged in the context of these events that constrain us.
– In your previous theatrical experience “Vegetative State” you invite the audience to look at the world from the perspective of a plant, in your latest play “The Return” you question the established attitude towards death. Many would say that your performances are radical. In an interview before the premiere of “The Return”, you named radical transformation as one of the main ideas of the play. What is your relationship with radicalism?
– I use the word “radical” only to talk. What I present on the theater stage does not seem radical to me. Nothing in the modern world is radical anymore, because everything exists in our immediate or distant environment. After all, Bolaño [rašytojas iš Čilės, apsakymo „Sugrįžimas“, kuriuo remiasi spektaklis tuo pačiu pavadinimu autorius] has described it all. Even in this building, where we are now, you can find anything: a chained and tortured person in the basement, about whom LRT will probably write tomorrow, the most amazing act of love, the price of coffee in the cafe has just increased again, a political prostitute. Does being radical mean bringing to light some things that are uncomfortable for us (society)? My stage works do not seem radical. Perhaps they can be called radical in the context of Lithuanian theater, but what does that say about our theater? What ideas and topics should it cover? Why do we still think that heart-wrenching dramas about unfulfilled love and a lost daughter must be staged in the theater? It seems to me that theater has never been about that. It just happened for various political reasons.
– In the play “The Return” you talk about a radical transformation, the essential condition of which is the death of the character. Why do you have to die to understand something more?
– Bolaño offers death as a way out. But it seems to me that between the lines he is talking about the death of the ego. You overcome yourself and stop eating meat, you start helping people, you free yourself from the quagmire of alcoholism and other limiting habits or beliefs. But this requires one’s own death – the need to change. In order to change, you need to leave. And in order to leave, you have to die. I think Bolaño puts it all into a uniquely theatrical form and makes fun of himself with a smile.
I think it’s very important to talk about ego collapse. And they are trying to do this with the concepts of new sensitivity, empathy. All these ideas exist in different contexts, institutions and visions.
– You have been creating performances in state theaters and in the independent sector for four years now. How does your creative process change over time?
– I was lucky to have the opportunity to work with extremely different and interesting people in different institutions in various circumstances. With time, one’s own people and tools emerge to understand whether the creative dialogue will take place after all. More trust appeared, not only in dialogue, but also in a collective sense. The creative team of the show could be compared to a choir, all members of which must be trusted to perform the piece. And greater confidence allows me and others to relax.
Another thing that changed was that I felt responsible for public money. I began to realize that I do not work in the private sector, but am supported by the people around me. Therefore, in my work I have to rethink the surrounding reality and present it in an understandable way.
– Contemporary dance dancer and choreographer Ieva Navickaitė plays “Return”. How was it working with someone who is not a professional actor?
– Wonderful. We have a preconceived notion that it takes six years of acting studies for an actor to be able to create a multi-layered role in the theater. But the theater is for everyone. Ieva is a great performer coming from the modern dance world. However, this in no way restricts her from being an actress. With this very successful example, I would like to point out that it is very important to expand the boundaries of the concept of an artist. Gradually, it is already starting to happen: actors go to contemporary dance, social action projects, dancers come to the drama theater. This is how we move towards destroying our stagnant image of the theater and expanding its boundaries. I would very much like such questions, as you just asked, to simply disappear in the future in the context of Lithuanian contemporary theater.
– Because “The Return” is a conceptual stage piece that accommodates many contexts. The problem arises that not all viewers will understand the performance and you yourself mentioned that maybe they didn’t. So who is the audience of your performances?
– The performance cannot be intended for someone, because the theater is for everyone. Targeted audiences only encourage age discrimination and all other forms of exclusion in our already divided society. I would like to be able to establish a dialogue with various theatergoers.
– But is it important for you that the audience understands your performances?
– I want people to be curious. And understanding is born in the relationship of experience and curiosity over time.
I feel that people are becoming more open to art, but something is still holding them back. It seems to me that the theater as an institution is still too closed, but there are even more closed institutions. A great example here would be contemporary art institutions. In the past, my brother and I used to go to different centers or galleries from time to time, but he doesn’t like to go there. And this is not because the works of art are unattractive, but the very environment, atmosphere and presentation do not wait for him, become repulsive, as if “not for him”. And I am not talking about the content here at all, but about the institution’s strategy, which should be aimed at attracting the largest and most diverse audience.
– In 2022, on the website “Menų faktūra”, dedicated to discussing and archiving professional performing arts events, your analytical comment “Criticism to critics” appeared, drawing attention to the critics’ irresponsible statements in the public space about your performances. How do you feel about this open statement now? Do you think it has changed anything?
– It is very difficult for me to assess the change in the context of this issue. I don’t think one essay can make a difference, maybe draw attention. I think about how certain texts and thoughts affect me. When I read criticism, I take it as an opportunity for internal dialogue, I try to understand where those thoughts come from, how they are constructed.
From today’s perspective, Critique for Critique might look like this youthfully punk. But it is about the importance of a critical attitude. For example, my opinion on the issue of the State of Israel does not completely coincide with the position of our country. Due to the fact that Lithuania, together with Germany and America, speaks neutrally about sanctions against Israel. Meanwhile, it is obvious that crimes against humanity are being committed in that territory. We should be able to think critically regardless of the social and economic benefits provided by our partners. The people of Lithuania, who are not given the knowledge that one of the biggest genocides in the world is taking place, lose their right to see and understand. After all, many people do not even know, are not interested. But this is a matter of national policy, which, unfortunately, works well. It all boils down to the fact that contexts, institutions and the people who work in them should encourage citizens to think critically. So that we can build a dialogue and better understand the phenomena around us.
– Some of your works combine different media. Sometimes it seems that you are about to pick up and start doing something else, but you always come back to the theater. What makes theater interesting and important to you?
– It seems to me that I always return to the theater, because the theater can be anything. Theater is a synthesis of all possible art forms. Meeting all social, cultural, economic, political contexts. Being able to dive between all these possibilities and contexts is one of the most exciting activities for me. In the theatre, you can do reflections, tragedy, shoot movies, have performative acts, paint pictures, connect communities. Except for cinema, no other medium is as interdisciplinary.
The most important thing in theater is that everything is alive. And every meeting with the viewer is indivisible and unique.
window.fbAsyncInit = function() {
FB.init({
appId: ‘117218911630016’,
version: ‘v2.10’,
status: true,
cookie: false,
xfbml: true
});
};
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) {
return;
}
js = d.createElement(s);
js.id = id;
js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/lt_LT/sdk.js”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
#Young #theater #visionary #Naubertas #Jasinskas #modern #world #radical #anymore #Culture
