As our piece has developed, we have to consider the space that we use. Obviously in site-specific performance, the space is crucial to the performance, and it can often revolve entirely around the space in question. As Joanne Gleave states; when describing the variety of terms coined with site-specific performance, “With all these different strands of site specific performance ‘site’ remains at the forefront of each term. It is this relationship with the site which is so unique to site-specific performance” (Gleave, 2011, 1) There is a distinct difference between “what is ‘of’the site and what is brought ‘to’ it.” (Turner, 2004, 374) It is this relationship that is so significant and can define and alter the piece.
When first encountering our site (the blue room), it was simple and very basic, offering little more than an old changing room, with some chairs, tables and a few mirrors being the contents of the room. Through our piece we explore blurring the lines of real and fictional appearance. Through our research of the history of the Drill Hall we have discovered that the former use of ‘the blue room’ was as the box office due to its location next to the original entrance. We had also learnt, through our research, that in 1963 the Rolling Stones had played in the Drill Hall, and we were heavily interested in this, so the obvious conclusion was to combine these factors and attempt to recreate the Drill Hall’s box office as if it were the night of the Rolling Stones performance in 1963.
As Fiona Wilkie states ” performance that moves “beyond the proscenium” concerns itself with exploring, and opening up to question, the appearance/reality relationship. Site specificity performs one version of this… It slips between recalled, referenced or represented spaces and physical place, the here and now of the spectator’s experience; often, in
fact, it slips quietly between the fictionalization and the physical exploration of what is ostensibly the same space.” (Wilkie, 2004, 28) Our piece will attempt to support this thesis as explained below.
We also knew that the night they performed was, in fact New Years Eve, so we thought about how this might change the space even more, considering decorations and potential confectionery that may have been sold. We used desks to recreate the counter we know was originally there and also intend to add a coat rack, which may have been used to collect coats. We will attempt to blur the line between present day and New Years Eve 1963, through the use of the room, in the ways I have already described. There will also be combination of sensory triggers, that will hopefully recreate the resemblance of 1963, with a popcorn maker, for smell and taste, glass bottles of coke for taste, music of the time for sound and possibly the smell of cigarettes and smoke, as smoking was extremely common at the time. Through all of these factors this will hopefully make the audience question the space, although they know that it is the present day, we will hopefully attempt to convince them that the room could be in 1963.
Works Cited
Wilkie, F. (2004) Out of Space The Negotiation of Space in Site-Specific Performance.PhD. University of Surrey School of Arts.
Gleave, J. (2011) The Reciprocal Process of the Site and the Subject in Devising in Site-Specific PerformanceMPhil(B). University of Birmingham.
Turner, Cathy (2004) “Palimpsest or Potential Space? Finding a Vocabulary for Site-Specific
Performance.” New Theatre Quarterly, 4:20, 373-390