n
100 p
Self-representation
An archive of a theatre artist can be very colourful: photos,
video-footages, critiques, notes, drawings, grant applications,
financial settlements. A very common objective of self-archiving
is for representational purposes. Performing artists often need
to submit critiques, photos and video footages for grant
applications or as a proof to the subsidizer that they actually
made the project they got the money for. Grant applications
were being mentioned by every artist; without financial support
the artist usually cannot work. Furthermore, an interesting,
recurring theme of the interviews is the notion of 'archiving as
burden': archiving is something the artist doesn't have time or
affinity for, but still has to be done due to external pressures.
Contrarily to the stereotypical image of the 'messy' artist, they
have to represent themselves to the subsidizer as well-organized,
responsible persons who are able to handle the grant money.
The interviewees also acknowledge that an organized archive
would be beneficial not only for the documentation of their past
works, but also in the process of collecting materials for their new
projects. Common notion was that if the archive was more
organized, a given record could be retrieved much more easily.
Still, organizing comes often last, if it comes at all.
Naturally, every artist wants to be known for an audience,
which is why advertising is a very important representational
function of the archive. In the network culture the artists have to
promote themselves on different platforms: own websites,
blogs, Vimeo, online cultural forums. Self-presenting is often
also seen as a burden: while the artists are pressured to keep on
presenting snapshots of works that are actually still in progress.
Consequently, some artists can experience archiving as a
frustrating duty that is still essential for visibility, for the potential
success of the next project, and after all, for surviving.
Touchstone
Next to its evidential value, the record also functions for the
individuals as memory, or better said, as 'touchstones'.
Laura Millar asserts that records themselves are not memories
but they are rather touchstones upon which the memory can be
retrieved. A vivid example for a touchstone is the revival process
experienced by one of the interviewees: he was about to renew
one of his performances and therefore he was constantly
reviewing the video previously made of the given piece, in which
the audience sits on a bus going along the city and the actors
perform in the street. Watching the video-footage he tried to
remember his feelings and objections about the performance in
order to improve it for the next show. This respondent also has a
folder with his memory-pieces of the performance. During the
interview I asked him to take the folder and describe what it
contains and why. He took different pieces of papers, for
example a map, a note or a drawing and explained what was
used for which scene. The map must be reused, since it gives
the directions for the bus driver. The note was formed during the
rehearsal process and at one point he found it to be useful but
at the end it wasn't included in the actual performance. He still
kept it for himself because of emotional reasons.
It is also common practice by the artists to keep a journal
with ideas (a book title, a title of a performance et cetera) and
happenings (for example, during a rehearsal process).
This journal can be a simple lined notebook and used for the
rehearsals of one performance, but it also can be an agenda that
notes the happenings by date. Most of the artists claimed that
these notebooks are not useful for the posterity at all, since they
don't make sense for anyone else but for them. These records
can also be seen as touchstones upon which a sudden idea
quickly can be sketched down and later can be retrieved.
