Spatial Representation TADEUS KANTOR AND THEATRE OF FOUND REALITY

Spatial Representation: Tadeusz Kantor's Theatre of Found Reality
Author(s): Michal Kobialka

Source: Theatre Journal, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Oct., 1992), pp. 329-356
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3208552 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 23:39
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Theatre Journal.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Tadeusz Kantor's
Spatial Representation:
Theatreof Found Reality1
Michal Kobialka
is an imageofOBJECT
MaybeABSTRACTION in a different which
universe
exists,andwhichcanonlybe sensedthroughart.
Tadeusz Kantor,TheMilanoLessons
The changes thatoccurredin the perceptionof timeand space in the visual arts
in thetwentiethcenturyquestionedthetraditional conceptof"representation," spe-
cificallyrepresentationdefinedas the transferof an object from"real" space to
"illusionary"space. Techniquesof,forexample,collage,montage,emballage,hap-
pening,and pasticheallowed the artiststo take any numberof elementsfrompre-
existingworks,forms,messages,and to integratethemintoan originalcomposition
manifestingrupturesof threefoldsort. Firstof all, the new work of art was now
believedtobe "real"in itself,a "reality"thatexistedin a parallelformationtophysical
Second,
reality.2 the processes ofgrafting-achieved via an of
introduction nonlinear
temporality and destabilized spatiality-brought to the fore new relationshipsbe-
tween objects,theirforms,and theirfunctionsin this"other"reality.3 Third,these
1Thisessayis inpartsan abbreviatedversionofmystudyofTadeuszKantor'sTodayisMyBirthday

whichwillappearin itsentirety in TadeuszKantor's A Journey
Theatre: OtherSpace(Berkeley:
Through
University ofCaliforniaPress)in 1993.
2
See, forexample,TheArtofPerformance, eds. GregoryBattcock and RobertNickas(New York:
E. P. Dutton,1984),Rose Lee Goldberg, Art(New York:HarryN. Abrams,1988),Allan
Performance
Kaprow,Assemblage, Environments (New York:HarryN. Abrams,1966),and Michael
& Happenings
Kirby,Happenings (New York:E. P. Dutton,1966)and TheArtofTime(New York:E. P. Dutton,
1969).
3For a moredetailedanalysisoftheprocessofgrafting artsofthetwentieth
in theavant-garde
century seemyarticle, TimeandSpace/Timespace
"TheatreofCelebration/Disruption: inKandinsky's
TheatreExperiments," Annual44 (1989-90):71-96.
Theatre
Michal Kobialkais a McKnight-LandProfessor of Minnesota.His

of Theatreat the University
inJournalof DramaticTheory and Criticism,Theatre
havebeenpublished
articlesand reviews
TheatreJournal,Performing
The DramaReview,
HistoryStudies,MedievalPerspectives,
Arts Journal, Theatre Annual, Theatre Nordic Studies, Yearbook of Interdisciplinary
Studies in the Fine Arts,Slavic and East European Journal,and Sovietand East-European
Peformance.He has presented paperson medieval,contemporary and theatre
Europeantheatre,
historiographyat variousregional,national, and international His
conferences. book Tadeusz
Kantor's Theatre: A JourneyThrough Other Spaces willbepublishedbyThe University of
CaliforniaPressin 1993.
Theatre
Journal Press
44 (1992)329-356c 1992byTheJohnsHopkinsUniversity

330 / MichalKobialka
processesof grafting
emphasizedthe subjectivity
ofperceptionand of theinterplay
betweenthesubjectand theobjector betweenartisticexpressionand theexperience
of the everydayworld.4
Yet anotherforcethat splinteredthe traditionalidea of representation was the
changebrought about by the collapse of the GrandTheories and theirstrategiesof
of
legitimation the processesof transference. Whereas the aesthetic of rep-
principles
in thefineartswereunequivocallyalteredbyEinstein'sand Heisenberg's
resentation
questioningsof the Newtonian/Euclidean universe,5the experience
ofrepresentation
was depreciatedby "the textureof the textswhichlink[ed]'onto Auschwitz.'"6
What does it mean to speak or represent'AfterAuschwitz?'The answer to this
question has been theorizedby many scholars. For example, in his 1962 essay,
"Commitment," TheodorAdornopronouncedthefamousdictumthat"to writelyric
poetryafterAuschwitz[was] barbarous."7Whilediscussingtheproblemofsuffering
in literature,AdornopositsAuschwitzas a dialecticalmodel; a model beingat once
theimpressionand thecritiqueof thehistoricalmomentum.8 This model,however,
impliesboth an epistemologicaland ontologicalparadox. On the one hand, it is
barbarictowritepoetryafterAuschwitz,butliterature mustresistthisverdict,because
"the abundance of suffering It must do so in the process
toleratesno forgetting."9
of redefiningor reevaluatingall the phrases, both secular and theological,which
have now lost theirrightto exist,unless it is sanctionedthatmurderhas become
partoftheheritageofa culturewhichlegitimizedgenocide.On theotherhand, how
can suffering be representedin artthatis createdforthe consumptionofbourgeois
societies,"withoutwhichtherecould have been no Auschwitz?"10 How can Schoen-
berg's"SurvivorofWarsaw"be played,asks Adorno,sincethoseforwhomthepiece
was composed are dead and those who are listeningto it should eitherbe dead or
elicitenjoymentoutoftheartistic representationofpain. The way outofthisimpasse,
according to Adorno, is to createautonomous works, thatis, workswhichare not
governedby the external order of things,but by their inherentstructure.Their
inherentstructure itselfconstitutestheknowledgeoftheworkofart.It doesn'thave
to persuadetheaudiencesthatitcontainsanymeaningthatshouldbe givento them
by an externalsystemof representation. On the contrary, the verystructureof the
work of art freezes"historicalrelationswhich nowhereseem ready to melt [and]
oblige[s]the mindto go whereit need not degradeitself.""1
4See, forexample, GregoryL. Ulmer,"The Object

of Post-Criticism,"TheAnti-Aesthetic:Essayson
Postmodern Culture,ed. Hal Foster(Seattle: Bay Press, 1983), 83-110.
SSee Linda DalrympleHenderson,
TheFourthDimensionand Non-Euclidean Geometry in ModernArt
(Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress, 1983); Stephen Kern, TheCultureofTimeand Space: 1880-
1918 (Cambridge,MA: Harvard UniversityPress, 1983); Natalie Crohn Schmitt,Actorsand Onlookers:
Theaterand the Twentieth-Century ScientificView of Nature(Evanston, IL: NorthwesternUniversity
Press, 1990).
6 J.F.Lyotard,"Discussion, or Phrasing 'afterAuschwitz,'" The Lyotard Reader,ed. Andrew Ben-
jamin (Oxford:Basil Blackwell, 1989), 360-92, 365.
7 Theodor Adorno, "Commitment,"The EssentialFrankfurt Reader,eds. Andrew Arato and Eike
Gebhardt(Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1978), 300-18.
8 Ibid., 312.
9Ibidem.
0oIbid.,313.
11Ibid.,318.

KANTOR'STHEATREOF FOUND REALITY / 331
ForJ.F.Lyotard,Adorno's "AfterAuschwitz"opened up a historicalarea of post-

modernityby authorizingthe perceptionof Auschwitzas the "cleavage introduced
intoWesternthought."'2 His 1980essay, "Discussion,or PhrasingafterAuschwitz,"
draws attentionto the phrases that "link onto" Auschwitz,"the threshold.'3Ac-
cordingto Lyotard,the phrases, such as "we," "die," and "I decree it," lost their
power as immobilizingnormativestatements,because of the destructionof the le-
gitimateand legitimating authority.For example,"we" presupposes authorityand
authorizationsurfacingin codes, courtrulings,laws, and decrees.In "AfterAusch-
witz,"theconstruction ofa "we" is no longerevident,however.Its enunciationand
formationmustbe problematizedin orderto markthe distinction betweenthe ad-
dressor(theSS) and theaddressee (theprisoner),as well as betweenthepre-Ausch-
witz"we" and thepost-Auschwitz "we." Itmustbe done so, because thetwophrases,
theirtemporaldistinction notwithstanding, have no commonapplicationormeaning
anymore.That is to say, what one phrase represents,the otherdoes not; what the
SS knew would remainunknownto theprisoner.To acceptthisdifferend, as Lyotard
positsit,is to acknowledgetheabyssthatexistsbetweenthepre-and post-Auschwitz
sensibility;theabyss thatwillneverbe bridgedbecause theconflict betweenthetwo
realitiescannot equitablybe resolvedforthe lack of a rule or judgmentapplicable
to both arguments.
Finally,these changes in both the aesthetictenetsand the experienceof repre-

sentationhave also alteredtheway we talkaboutitspracticeofformation.As Michel
Foucaultobservedin "Of OtherSpaces:"
[t]hespacein whichwe live,whichdrawsus toourselves, inwhichtheerosionofour

lives,or timeand ourhistory occurs,thespacethatclawsand gnawsat us, is also,in
a heterogenous
itself, space.In otherwords,we do notlivein a kindofa void,inside
ofwhichwe couldplaceindividual beingsand things.
Wedo notliveinsidea voidthat
couldbe colouredwithdiverseshadesof light,we liveinsidea set of relations that
delineates siteswhichareirreducible
to oneanotherand absolutely
notsuperimposable
on one another.'4
The last sentenceepitomizesthe above-enunciatedshiftfromseeingrepresentation

in termsoftransference fromone siteto anotherand towardsthespaces it occupies.
BernardTschumi'sfunctional,fragmented, and destabilizedfolliesat the Parc de la
Villettein Paris,Daniel Libeskind'ssilentand radicaldesignsfortheJewishMuseum
in Berlin,or Eisenman'sstatementthat"I want somethingthatchangesman's very
occupationof space, notjust the surfaceof thatspace""' provideample examplesof
this transformation. Noteworthyis the factthatthis transformation has exerteda
tremendousimpactnot only on how,why,and whatwe acknowledgein our most
immediateenvironment,thatis, in architectural designs,forexample,but also on
how,why,and whatwe view on stage.As thetheatrical experiments ofTadeusz Kantor
unequivocallyshowed, thematterofrepresentation ceased to be positedin absolute
12Lyotard,366.
13ForLyotard,Auschwitz can onlyfunctionas a thresholdbecause "how can Auschwitz,something
which is thoughtfromthe outside, a referentplaced only 'near itself' (an sich) 'forus' (furuns), be
interiorized,suppressed as an unmediated position or presupposition, and show itselfto itself,
know itselfin the identity(be it ephemeral) of a foritself(fursich)?"Ibid., 365.
14 Michel Foucault, "Of Other Space," Diacritics
(Spring 1986): 22-27, 23.
isPeterEisenman, "En TerrorFirma:In TrailsofGrotextes,"Deconstruction, eds. Papadakis, Cooke,
and Benjamin (London: Academy Editions, 1989), 152-53.

space or in a void changed by time (Newton, Kant, Bergson),and startedto be

definedby space and its attributes, in humanterms,by a modeofthinking or a set of
ideological,political,social, and auditoryrelationswithinthatspace.
Tadeusz Kantor(1915-1990),a Polishvisualartistand theatredirector,is recognized
as one of the twentiethcentury'smostinfluentialtheatreartists.His unique work
withthe Cricot2 companyand his theoriesof theatrehave been a majorinfluence
on non-traditional theatreforms.On the basis of his productions,paintings,and
theoreticalwritings, whichwillreflect
I willsuggesta strategy Kantor'sand hisactors'
practice of constitution and of
re-constitution space and representationin theatre.
In particular,I willfocuson Kantor'streatment ofrepresentation,definedas "found
reality,"an autonomousspatialfoldthatexistsin a space ofvariabledimensionality,
in Todayis My Birthday, thelastproductionbeforehis deathin December,1990.This
strategyhas been promptedby Kantor's1944productionofWyspiatiski'sTheReturn
ofOdysseusand his frequentreferencesto space, which,as he observedin "Lesson
3" of TheMilanoLessons,"is not a passive receptaclein whichobjectsand formsare
posited. Space itselfis an object[ofcreation];and the main one.""6
In the 1990essay, "Od poczgtkuw moimcredo .. ." ["FromtheBeginningin my
Credo was .. ."], Kantorassertedthatartwas forhim an answer to, ratherthana
representation of,reality.17Like Adorno'sautonomousworkof art,Kantor'sexper-
imentschallengedclassical representation by creatingtheatrewhich produced its
own space and its own commentary, neitherof whichwas bound by externalcat-
egoriesor conventions.The 1944 Krak6wproductionof TheReturnofOdysseus,for
example,did nottakeplace in a theatrebuilding(nearlyall theatreswere destroyed
bywar),norwas itannouncedpublicly,sincePolishculturalactivitieswereexpressly
forbiddenby the Nazis. Instead,the play was stagedin a bombed room. Although
the politicalcircumstancesfullyjustifiedthe selectionof a theatrespace, Kantor's
choiceofthatparticularsitemeritsfurther explanation.WorldWarII was perceived
by Kantor as a threshold interrupting the continuous accumulationof "legitimized"
knowledge about a human being and his or her actions. The carnage of the war
made the pre-1939perceptionof realityno longerpossible: "In timesof madness
createdby man, Death and itsfrightening troupes,whichrefusedto be shackledby
Reason and Human Senses, burstintoand mergedwiththe sphereof life."'8This
new perception,when expressedin art,had to questionand expose the gaps in the
traditionwhichdefineda workofartin termsofrepresentation affirming thelifeof
theexternalorderofthings.Kantorrejectedthatorderand its systemsof power,as
well as theirrightto continueto mould and to be depictedvia imitation,illusion,
and fictionin a work of art. Instead, he focused on thatotherrealitywhich was
almostobliteratedby war, a destroyedroom;thatis, illegitimate "raw" realitythat
was not and could have no longerbeen alteredby thepre-existing artisticmodes of
representation. A "real" (a
object destroyed room) took the place of an "artistic"
object(a theatre building).
The substitution ofthe"real"objectforthe"artistic"objectwas nota manifestation
oftheexperiments conductedin thefineartsin the1920s.UnlikeDuchamp's "ready
mades," commonmanufactured products,forexample,whose functionwas to chal-
16
Tadeusz Kantor,"Lesson 3," TheMilanoLessons(unpublished manuscript,1986),n.p. (translation
mine).
17 Kantor,
"Od poczqtku w moim credo . ," Teatr7 (July1990): 5-6, 5 (translationmine).
18Kantor,"Ulisses" (unpublished manuscript,1944), 3 (translationmine).

lenge audiences' perceptionsabout art,Kantor'sobjectsmanifested"[t]he angerof

a human beingbeing trappedby otherhuman beasts. We onlyhad the strengthto
grabthe nearestthing,THE REAL OBJECT,and call it theworkof art."19
As a corollary,a wheel smearedwithmud, a rottenboard, a chair,a gun barrel,
a loudspeaker,dustyparcels,lost the traditionalfunctionsassigned to themin life/
war and emergedinstead withinthe networkof relationscreatedin and by the
performance space. The objectwrenchedfromwarrealityand theatrical conventions
exemplified Kantor's desire to retainwhat had been silenced in the processoftransfer
fromthe real space to the theatrespace, as well as in the process of appropriation
of the theatresiteby thewar realityand itsweapons erasingboththebody and the
gesture.As a corollary,the Odysseus who returnedto thisspace was not themyth-
ological Odysseus, but his contemporary double, a Germansoldier.Only such an
Odysseus could have returned to a space created by thewar and engage withother
objects in the of and
practice constituting reconstituting his and theiridentity."I am
Odysseus, I have returned from Troy,"20 said a bent figureseated on a gun barrel.
He alone survivedto enterthespace ofhistoryand tellthetale of deathand human
suffering.
In the post-warperiod,Kantorstayedfaithful to the Odysseus experience.Con-
sequently,his theatreproductionswere stagedin the so-calledplaces of the lowest
rank,galleries,warehouses,gyms,and alteredtheatres,whichcouldnotbe emplaced
or erased by stagnanttheatricalconventions.It was withinthe boundariesof such
spaces thatKantorpresentedhisexperiments withtheautonomous(1956/61), informel
(1961), zero (1963), happening (1967), and impossible(1967/73)theatres.21 Each of
themquestioned the boundariesof traditionalrepresentation by pointingout that
theatreoughtto be treatedas an autonomousspace, ratherthana place oftransfer,
whereinthe visionof the ever presentartistis executed.22 Whereasthe productions
from1944until1973demonstratedKantor'streatment of representation in termsof
therelationship betweenphysicalrealityand illusion,TheDead Class(1975),Wielopole,
Wielopole (1980),LettheArtistsDie (1985),I ShallNeverReturn(1988),and Todayis My
Birthday (1990)acquiredtheformofpersonalcommentaries; commentaries intended
to transgressall physicaland mentalboundariesand to expressthe mostintimate
thoughtprocessesthatoccurin theartist'sprivatespace and his or herimagination,
orin thetheatreexploringthespatialdimensionsofmemory/history. Itwas visualized
on stageas toposuchronia (a place with no time),heterotopia (a place which is a counter
site to real space), virtualspace(a place which is constitutedby the overlappingof
therealspace and heterotopia),and self-consistent space(a space whichdoes nothave
a counter-site, but existsforitself).23
19 Kantor,"Lesson 1," TheMilano Lessons,n.p. (translationmine)

20 Kantor,"PartyturasztukiStanislawa WyspianiskiegoPowr6tOdysa. Teatr Podziemny 1944" (un-
published manuscript.,n.d.), 2.
21
See Kantor's essays on the autonomous, zero, happening, and impossible theatresin TheDrama
Review30 (Fall 1986): 98-192.
22
It should be noted here that Kantor was always present on stage during the performancesof
the Cricot 2 Company. During a performance,he would frequentlyinterferewith the action de-
veloping on stage, thatis, change, forexample, the position or gesturesof the actors,or reposition
the objects located in the acting area.
23 Forfurther discussion ofspace and memoryin Kantor'stheatresee myarticles"Tadeusz Kantor's
LabyrinthsofMemory,"Sovietand EastEuropeanPerformance 11 (Spring1991): 19-41,and "La memoire
de Tadeusz Kantor: creationdans l'espace virtuel,"Kantor,l'artistea la findu XXe sikcle,ed. Georges
Banu (Paris: Actes Sud-Papiers, 1990), 78-91.

In TodayisMyBirthday, thestage,a simplewooden platform, was filledwithobjects

and people fromKantor'spast artisticescapades. Up center,therewas a big picture
frame,behindwhich,a fewfeetaway, stood a backdropwiththe doors (see Figure
1). On both sides of the frame,two similarframeswithbackdropsand doors were
positionedstagerightand left.The framestagerightwas occupiedbyKantor'sdouble,
the "Self-portrait,"a man in a black suit,white shirt,and a long black scarf,who
sat on a chairwithhis back to the audience (see Figure2). The framestage leftwas
empty(see Figure3). An emballage,human figureswrapped in sacks, was on the
floorbetween the threeframes.Down lefttherewas Kantor'schairwhere he was
supposed to sit (see Figure4), which,now, afterhis death would stayunoccupied
duringthe performance, a table with an old lamp, a mouldingbook, an old pho-
tograph, a loose piece paper, and iron-bedwith "The Shadow of the Proprietor
of
oftheInn ofImagination/Memory" on it. An old stovewitha chimneyand a wash-
bowl withdishes were down right.
Thesilenceon stagewas interrupted byKantor's voicefrom Again,I am

a loud-speaker:
on stage.I willprobably
neverfully explainthisphenomenon either
toyouortomyself.
Tobeprecise, I amnotonstage,butatthethreshold.Infrontofme,thereistheaudience-
you,LadiesandGentlemen--that is,accordingtomyvocabulary, REALITY.Behindme,
thereis thestage,thatis, ILLUSION,FICTION.I do notleantowardeitherofthetwo
sides.I turnmyheadin one direction, thenin theotherdirection.
A splendidresume
ofmytheory.24
While the monologuewas read, a figureresemblingVelazquez's InfantaMargarita

in a blacklace dress enteredthe framepositionedstage left.At the same time,the
wordsofthemonologueactivateda frozensilhouettewithintheframeofthepicture
entitled"The Self-Portrait"(see Figure2). Facingtowardthe "back" of the canvas,
thedouble, the Otheroverthere"on the otherside," mimickedand commentedon
the Selfwho was speaking.The Other,however,could not containhimselfand fell
life
out of the dimensionof the canvas. Once on stage,he began to live a different
createdout of the fragmented and rupturedsentences of the recorded monologue.
"It is the momentof the transgressionof the borderlinebetweenthe world of IL-
LUSION and the world of REALITY,whichusuallyhappens in the opposite direc-
tion." Once out of the frame,the double was supposed to stareat Kantorand to
In the production,the
imitatehis gesturesaccordingto the laws of reversibility.25
24 All the
quotations referringto Todayis My Birthdaycome fromKantor's unpublished notes to
the production.
25
In one of his essays, Kantor discussed the transgressionbetween the world of illusion and the
world of realitywith the help of the concept of reflection:"I want to restoreto the word reflection
its essential meaning. . . . I am walking forward.There is a mirrorin frontof me; the invisible
boundary of a mirrorwhich marks the beginningof an extensionof realityand the time of poetry.
I am walking forward.Someone, who is another'I,' is walkingup to me. In a moment,we will pass
each other or bump into each other. I am thinkingabout this moment with growing uneasiness.
However, it does not escape my perceptionthat I am not walking forwardbut in the directionof
the depth where I starteda moment ago. I am walking forwardback. And then I realize that the
other person, the I-Over-There,is not walking forwardbut in the directionof the depth which I
leftbehind. I liftmy hat with my righthand. The raised hand is on the right-handside of my body.
He, the Other I, makes the same motion. Even though he does it on the same side of the body, he
uses his left hand. I tell him to use his righthand as I did. He obeys. I have noticed that this
correctionof reversibilitygives the rightimpression of REFLECTION." See Kantor, "Reflection,"
The Drama Review30 (1986): 174-76, 175-76.

Z ::
.. .. .... .... ...
..... . . . .
(drawingby Tadeusz Kantor)

Todayis My Birthday
;;:: ::;smog
,01::::;::::
(Photo: Flore Wolland)

Todayis My Birthday

::::::::::~?
:~::_I:
?::;:::::_
ii:iilii::iiii::iiilii::iiiii:tiii:;ii::
::::?:::::
'::':::::':'
I : ii
:::.::.- ::::::_
:::;??:::?:::
::::::::?
Todayis My Birthday

KANTOR'S THEATRE OF FOUND REALITY / 337
(Photo: Bruno Wagner)

Todayis My Birthday
Double only touched the back of Kantor's chair beforehe repeated the opening
monologue.
The opening sequence encapsulatedspatial transformation in Kantor's theatre.
WhereasTheDeadClass,Wielopole, Wielopole,Let theArtists
Die, and I ShallNeverReturn
placed theimpassablebarrier between the actors and the audience and betweenthe
space of the performance and the space of the auditorium,26 Todayis My Birthday
erased thisbarrierby locatingKantor/his empty chairand his voice at the threshold
between the space of Reality and the of
space Illusion/Memory. Kantor/his empty
chairwas the focalpointwhere his(story)/memory gathereditselftogetherin order
tobe explained,in a varietyofmodes,on bothsides ofthethreshold.In an important
sense, Kantorreturnedto and provideda metaphysicaland a visual image forone
of his statementsfromhis 1986 TheMilanoLessons:
Wecanuse thispainting[Malevich's "A BlackSquareon a WhiteGround"]tomakethis
paradoxical there
statement: is no difference and object
betweenabstraction ...
MaybeABSTRACTION is an imageofOBJECT
whichexistsand
universe
in a different
whichcanonlybe sensedthrough art.27
26In The Dead

Class, the ropes separated the performancespace fromthe space of the audience.
Even thoughtherewas no physicalbarrierin Wielopole,Wielopole, LettheArtistsDie, and I ShallNever
Return,the performancespace, referredto by Kantor as "the Room," "the Room/Cemetery,"and
"theInn ofMemory,"in theseproductionswas thecounter-sitetoreal space where Kantor'smemories
were executed by his actors.
27 Kantor,"Lesson 2," TheMilano Lessons,n.p. (translationmine).

To paraphraseKantor,his presencein thepassagewaytransformed the space intoa

seriesof spaces containedwithinand withoutone another.Consider,forexample,
the presenceof threeframes.Theycould no longerbe analyzedin termsof uncon-
ditionedopeningfortransfer, thatis, a prosceniumframe.Rather,theywere multi-
dimensionalsurfacesengagedin the processof representing the unpresentablein a
heterogeneousspace. We coulduse "The on stagetomakea paradoxical
Self-Portrait"
statement:thereis no differencebetweenillusionand reality.Maybe illusionis an
universewhichexistsand whichcan be sensed through
imageofrealityin a different
art,here,the holderof discourse.
This profoundthoughtfoundits physicalshape not onlyin the use of "The Self-
but also in the representation
portrait," of a theatrespace as a site of the Room/Inn
of Memory/Imagination. In his notes to Wielopole,
Wielopole,Kantorobservedthat
wasa further
... thisnewproduction development andmemory
oftheideaofrecollection
to definethe spatialdimension
whichfirstsurfacedin TheDead Class. .... It is difficult
ofmemory.
Here[onstage],thisis a roomofmychildhood
withall itsinhabitants.
overandoveragainandwhichis destroyed
Thisis theroomwhichI keepreconstructing
overand overagain.28
As theexperienceofTheSilentNightsuggested,however,thisRoom/Inn ofMemory/
Imaginationceased to be perceivedas a separatespace (toposuchronia,heterotopia,
the desiresoftheSelf,
alteredin orderto fulfill
virtualspace) whichwas stylistically
Kantor,projectingand alteringthe images "on the otherside." Now, it was an
unadornedspace containing
[t]he i m p r i n t s
impresseddeeply
in theimmemorialpast.
Themostimportant thingis toacceptthem.
Then,nottobe afraidofdiscovering
theirimage,whichis getting
simplerand simpler,
whichdepartsfromall sacredconventions,
moralcodes,
andidealizingprocedures.29
The Room/Innof Imagination/Memory was filledwith objectsand people who
kept emerging,disappearing, and re-emerging in different shapes or which per-
formedvarying functions in Kantor's lifeas a visual a
artist: mouldingbook from
the"EmballageManifesto" and The Dead Class;a stove with a chimneyfromTheSilent
a
Night; series of his paintingsfrom the different stages of Kantor'sartisticjourney;
a familyphotographand a familyportraitfromWielopole, Wielopole; recentpaint-
his
ings, "I am Leaving thisPainting"and "InfantaMargaritaCame to my Room One
Night;"a CleaningwomanfromTheDead Class,LettheArtistsDie, and I ShallNever
Return; a humanEmballage;thecustodian,Pedel, fromTheDeadClass;a figurewhich
28
Kantor,"The Room. Maybe a New Phase," TheDrama Review30 (1986): 170.
29Kantor,"The Silent Night" (unpublished manuscript,1990), n.p. (translationmine).

assumed a postureof Doctor Klein in this production,but was alreadypresentin

The Water-Hen, and I Shall NeverReturn;the
The Dead Class, Wielopole,Wielopole,
soldiers,the generals,the politicians,and dignitariesas well as theirmonuments
and machinesofpower fromWielopole, LettheArtistsDie, and I ShallNever
Wielopole,
Return;the grave diggersand theircrosses fromWielopole, Wielopole, Let theArtists
Die, and I ShallNeverReturn;a familytablefromWielopole, Wielopole.In otherwords:
Fromthedimrecesses,
as iffromtheabyssofHell,
therestartedtoemerge
people,whohad dieda longtimeago,
and memories ofevents,
which,as ifin a dream,
had no explanation,
no beginning,no end,
no cause,oreffect.
Theywouldemerge
and wouldkeepreturning stubbornly
as ifwaitingformypermissiontoletthementer.
I gavethemmyconsent.30
The Room/Innof Memory/Imagination was not thus a spatialcollage or pastiche
produced eitherby the of
Theory [Film]Negatives31 or by the self-reflexivity
of the
space foldingback upon itself.32
Rather,the Room/Inn of Memory/Imagination was
a multi-dimensionalreality which had been found,ratherthan created,by theholder
ofdiscourse.Earlier,in I ShallNeverReturn, Kantortalkedabouttheidea ofthe"found
reality,"suggestingin "The Real 'I' " the emergenceof a new spatial formationof
memorythatraisedquestionsaboutthesovereignty ofthe 'I' in thecreativeprocess,
30 Ibid.,n.p.
31
While working on Let theArtistsDie (1985), Kantor created a concept of memorythat was an
extensionof the Room/Innof Memory.As his Theoryof the [Film]Negatives suggested, the events
and characterson stage brought forthdifferentmemories. These "memories" could not however
be presentedin a linearfashion,because such a representationof the process would not correspond
to the process taking place in the mind. As a corollary,the memories on stage seemed to be
interimposed.Ifthe memorieswere the framesof a film-negative stackedtogetherone atop another,
the audience would only see one frame.Since the negatives are transparent,this one framewould
containthe elementsof all otherframes.For example, the space in Act I resembledboth a childhood
room and a cemetery.A bed, a night table, a door, and chairs shared the space with cemetery
crosses. There was no division between them. See Kantor definitionof negatives in "Guide to the
Performanceof Let theArtistsDie" (Krak6w: Cricoteka,1985), n.p.
32 In I ShallNeverReturn(1988), Kantorwho, as always was physicallypresenton stage, participated
forthe firsttime in the events unfoldingin the performancespace. That is to say, the actors were
not solely externalizingKantor's memories,but, more importantly,were engaged in the exchange
withhim. Kantor,thus, no longerprojectedhis images onto the stage; he was creatingthemtogether
with other actors withinthe boundaries of the performancespace. While workingon I Shall Never
Return,Kantor observed that: "I have always stood by the door and ... waited.... In a moment,
I shall enter with my 'luggage' a shabby and suspicious INN. I am here to attend a meetingwith
apparitions or people. To say that I have been CREATING them formany, many years would be
an overstatement.I gave them life,but theyalso gave me theirs.They kept wonderingwith me for
a long timeand graduallyleftme at various crossroadsand stops. Now we are to meet here. Perhaps
forthe last time. . . . They will come to this INN as forthe LAST JUDGMENT to give evidence to
our fateand our hopes at the ruins of our Infernoand Heaven, our end of the century."See Kantor,
"ProgramNotes to I Shall NeverReturn"(Milano: Cappelletti & Riscassi, 1988), n.p.

the redoublingof spaces, and the relationshipbetweenthe Selfand the Other.33 In

is
Today My Birthday, however, Kantor disclosed the of
practice superseding the
sovereigntyof the Self. Having positionedhimselfin the space of the threshold
createdbytheoverlappingofthespace oftheSelfand thespace oftheOther,Kantor
redefinedthestatusoftheholderofdiscourseby exposinghimselfto theexperience
of the immaterialmatter(memories).This mattercould not be alteredby the Self,
because such a processwould be theprocessofan artisticappropriationcontraryto
Kantor'sdesire expressedin The SilentNight.The objectsand people in the room
did notexisttherebecause theyhad been recalledfromtherecessesofmemory;they
were therebecause theyhad always been there. In the past, theirvisibilitywas
restrictedto thetracesofmemoryorto theimprints whichKantorstylistically altered.
Now, on the otherhand, having positionedhimselfin the space of the threshold
createdby the overlappingof the space of the audience/auditorium and the space
of the actors/stage, Kantoror, more appropriately,his absence (the "presence of
absence") existedsimultaneouslyin the world of illusionand the worldof Reality.
In the contextof TheMilanoLessonsremark,however,it is impossibleto suggest
whichoftheseworldswas real and whichwas illusionaryforhim. Is the Room real
and the auditoriumillusion?Or, is the Room illusion,and the auditoriumreal?
Possibly,such are the consequences of being positionedat the threshold.Kantor
made us realizethathe was the openingintotwo different universeswhichexisted
forhim in a parallel formationand which could only be accessed throughhim.
Indubitably,Kantor'sdeath and his immaterialpresencein the performance makes
us acutelyaware of the ebullientdetailsof the theorynow turnedintopraxis.
The threepictureframeslocated in the Room/Innof Memory/Imagination were
thewindows intothe multi-dimensional space of the autonomous universeexisting
behind the frames.The two-dimensional space of "The Self-Portrait" was activated
by Kantor'svoice positionedat the threshold.Duringthe courseof the production,
the image behind the frameof the paintingacquired both its own independent
existenceand itsmultipledimensionality. The Other,thedouble,thetwin,thefrozen
image of the Self, emerged in the space of the room of the "found reality"and
engaged in an intricateinterplay between itselfand the Self(now,a recordedvoice):
Kantor'svoice opened the sequence. The "Self-portrait," first,imitatedKantor,and
then,read the monologue. Kantor's voice interrupted and, finally,took over: "Let
me tellyou about the event that has happened to me. It happened one Saturday."
The narrativeof the storybroughtin yet another"imprintimpresseddeeply in
theimmemorialpast." The doors in theback of thecanvas behindthecentralframe
opened and thePoorGirlwitha mail-bagentered.She wentacrossthespace between
the door and the frame,and walked over into the space of the room (the found
space). She approached the framestage leftand pushed out and took the place of
theInfantain herblacklace dress (see Figure5). The relationshipbetweenthe Poor
Girland the Infantawas illuminatedby Kantor's1962essay "InfantaMargarita:"
33
In "The Real 'I,' " Kantor asserted: "The momenthas finallyarrivedin my artisticlife,which I
begin to consider as my resume. ... When I wanted to be a child, someone else was s child, not
the real I. When I wanted to die, someone else was dying forme. He was 'playing' the part of me
dying. . .. When with persistence,longing, and stubbornly,I kept returningto the memories of
my School Class, it was not I, but the others (the actors) who returnedto school desks, returned,
'performed,'and pretended." Kantor, "The Real 'I,' " Performing ArtsJournal38 (May, 1991): 37-42,
39 (translationmine).

;:N:
L;
t:
'iiiii4 imii,
ii. .......
........ ... ?i::`:
l::
Todayis My Birthday

S. . Velazquez's Infantas
likerelics,
or holyvirgins
withthe artificial heads of the dead
and humanhair,
are dressedin real ornatecoats.
S. . wearingthese statelygarments,
showingwell-practiced gestures
and tomb'sabyss in the eyes,
theyare defenseless,
humiliated,
and shamelesslyexhibittheircompleteindifference
to the public.
The facadesof death
enclosedin paper boxes...
second version
S. . the canvas, whichhas the abilityto createthe necessary
illusion,is poorlycoveredwithpaint....
* . a grey,second-ratecanvas
*
. a portraititselfconsistsof two separatepartswhichwere
laterjoined togetherwithironhinges.
The paintingcan be foldedlike a suitcase.
It seems thatnobodycared thatInfantalooks as ifbrokeninto
two halves.
S. . Maybe, it was done forpractical
and
reasonsin orderto make easier the transport
the showingof Infanta,the curiosityof the Wandering
Panopticum....
An old postman'smail-bagwas a substituteforInfanta'sfamousdress
which,like a chasuble,was spread over the framemade of whalebones.
It was believedto be an adequate imitation.34
In Todayis My Birthday,both Infantas existed in the space of the room/foundreality.

Infanta (version I) represented a work of art which, forKantor, was a closed system
positioned within its own reality and historicity(the time of Velazquez). Infanta
(version II) was Kantor's own creation. The two Infantas disclosed theircharacteristics
via the tensions created between them, by drawing attention to their incompatible
systems of representation, and through other characters who attempted to resolve
the conflictbetween them. For example, the "Self-portrait"defended the Infanta
(version I) when she was forced out fromher frameby the Poor Girl. The priest tried
to seduce the Poor Girl/Infanta(version II). Jaremacriticized the traditionalfeatures
of the Infanta (version I). The Poor Girl/Infanta(version II) provided a commentary
on the war events that had burst into the room. The Infanta (version I) disappeared
from the room/foundrealitywhen war erupted. The Poor Girl/Infanta(version II),
ratherthan Kantor, was supposed to close Todayis My Birthday:
The "anniversary"
is just about to end.
Everybodyis gradually
leavingthe stage.
Thereare only
the war monumentslefton stage and
the Poor Girl
who can onlyfindthe words
to say:
3 Kantor,"Infantki,"(unpublished manuscript,1962), n.p. (translationmine).

Todayis MyBirthday
(Photo:BrunoWagner)
"Everythingis so sad."
Thenshe also leaves.
Byplacingtheeventswithinand withouttheboundariesofthespace oftheframes

ofthepainting,Kantorreversedthetraditional laws oftheprocessofrepresentation.
Metaphorically speaking,thespace in-betweentheframeand thebackdropwiththe
doors was the space where Kantor's pieces had been performedsince 1975. The
framecreateda safe barrierbetween the auditoriumand the room/innof memory
forthe explorationofhis intimateworld.The birthdayceremonyin Act I tookplace
in the space in-between,constitutedhereby an overlapbetweenthe events/people
enteringfrombehindthedoors and the "Self-portrait" who enteredfrom"outside,"
thatis, fromtheroom/found The
reality. Poor Girl'sfirst
appearancewas accompanied
by the entranceof Kantor'sdead familymembers, theMother, theFather,thePriest,
and UncleStasio,who acquiredlifeonce withinthespace ofthecentralframe."Today
is your Birthday.This is the reason why I came. It is youranniversarytoday.You
are 75. But thereis no table,"she said to "Kantor."A Cleaning-womanshowed up
unexpectedlyand broughtin a wooden board whichshe placed on trestlesbehind
the framewhere,now, the familywas seated (see Figure6). She repeatedthe Poor
Girl'slines,firstto theemptychairand thentothe"Self-portrait." The doublejumped
out of his frameand approached the photographon the table. It was his birthday
photograph.In orderto completean image representedby it,the double joined the
group behind the frame--the"Self-portrait" enteredand participatedin the stage
actionbehind the framethe way Kantorhad done in the 1988I ShallNeverReturn.
Suddenly,the recordedvoice of the parishpriestfromWielopole,PriestSmetana,
who had delivereda speech duringthe celebrationof Kantor'sseventiethbirthday
in Wielopole,was heard. The Priest-actor listenedto thevoice of thereal Priestand

Todayis My Birthday
(Photo: Bruno Wagner)
repeatedsome of the phrases. The Cleaning-womanpromptedthe missingwords.

Accordingto Kantor'snotes to the production:
The REALNESS of the voice,
the voice of the real Priest?metana,a parish-priest in Wielopole(he is stillalive) is
mixedwith
the ILLUSION of the character.
The real PriestSmetanais "played" by an illusionary,not-truePriestSmetana.
Whatis more,he is "played" inside of a paintingand not on stage...
But the act of the illusionaryPriestSmetanais REAL to a greatextent.The illusionary
Priestlistensto the voice of the real Priestand triesto repeathis words to the guest at
the table. He does not repeatword afterword,but uses his own words to conveythe
meaning.On top of that,he does not hear well.
The birthday celebration resumed. The Mother and Father kept interminably re-
peatingthegesturesregisteredon thefamilyphotograph.Everyso often,the "Self-
portrait"brokeout of a frozenpostureto providea commentary.
Many othereventswere also performedin thisspace betweenthe frameand the
backdrop with the "Doors of Death." The Father's identitycrisis in Act I was acted
out here (see Figure7). So were the entranceof Pedel in Act I, the stillphotograph
of DoctorKlein and the human Emballagein Act II, the appearance of Jaremaand
35
Maria Jarema(1908-58), a sculptorand a painter,was one of the leading artistsof the pre- and
post-warvisual avant-gardein Poland. TogetherwithKantor,she was one of the foundingmembers
of the Cricot 2 Theatre in 1956. She performedin and designed costumes forthe 1956 production
the firstproductionof Cricot2. Jonasz Stern (1904-
of Stanislaw Ignacy Witkiewicz'sThe Cuttlefish,
88), a painterof Jewishdescent, was one of the leaders and chroniclersof the historyof the Polish

Sternin Act III,35the invasionsof the monumentsand machinesof power and war
in Act IV and, finally,the executionof an artist,here,the "Self-portrait."
The charactersor events,however,were not containedwithinthe boundariesof
the frame.Once theycrossedthe thresholdbetweenthe space of the paintingand
theroom/found reality,theybegan to existin a different space. Theirtransgression
was depictedin Kantor'spaintingsfromthe 1988 exhibitin Krak6w.The titles,"I
have had Enough. I am LeavingthisPainting,""I am Carryinga Paintingon which
it is PaintedthatI am Carryinga Painting,"and "A Soldieris Carryinga Painting
on which it is Painted that he is Carryinga Paintingwith his Dead Comrades"
exemplify theseprocessesoftransgression fromthe worldofillusionintotheworld
of reality."I have had Enough. I am Leaving thisPainting,"forexample,depictsa
greyingfigureofa man (Kantor)walkingin thedirectionoftheleftedge oftheframe.
His head is turnedto the right.He is staringat a whitechairpositionedat the right
edge of the frame.It seems, however,thatthe rightedge of the framehas cut the
chairintoone halfvisiblein the paintingand the otherhalfinvisibleand outsideof
it. The figureof a man is also cut in two by the edge of the frame.Three-fourths of
his body are withinthe boundariesof the two-dimensional the
canvas; one-fourth,
leftleg of the man who is just about to leave the space, is outside of the painting
(see Figure8). Todayis My Birthday, like thepainting,erased the impassablebarrier
thathad firstbeen establishedin 1975by placingschool benchesin the cornerof a
performance space separatedfromthe audience by two ropes.
Not only did Todayis My Birthday erase the demarcationline betweenthe "real"
and the imaginaryspace and confusethe traditionaldiscoursesabout the represen-
tationof realityin art, but it also broughtinto focus the consequences of these
processes. As Kantorpointed out in TheMilanoLessons:"'The space of life,'and
everythingthatis containedin this phrase, existsparallelto this otherspace, the
space ofart.The two ofthemconverge,overlap,and coalesce sharingtheirfateand
destiny.'"36
This statementfound its stage equivalentin the 1988 I ShallNeverReturn.The
closingminutesoftheproductionwhen Kantor,theSelf,approachedand embraced
his mannequin,the Other,completedthe mergerbetweenwhat was traditionally
perceivedas the binaryopposition,thatis, the oppositionbetweenconsciousand
unconscious,knownand unknown,visibleand un-visible,realand unreal,Erosand
Thanatos.In Todayis My Birthday, ActV, the threeRussian soldierspulled the "Self-
portrait" out ofhis frame,his space ofart,and thrusthimintothe"Death Chamber"
(the central frame). The floor betweenthe frameand the backdropwiththe doors
were raisedin such a manneras to resemblethe gatesleadingto an open grave(see
Figure9). The artist/the"Self-portrait"/Meyerholdwas beatenand humiliatedby the
soldiers.Jaremaand Sternappearedon stageand pushedtheframesofthis"painting"
closerand closerto the audience. Having done so, Jaremapicked up a letterfrom
thefloor-Meyerhold'sletterto Molotov,his lastcryforfreedom,his art,his dignity,
and his life.The mutilated"Self-portrait"/Meyerhold was lefton thefloor.Whenthe
avant-garde in the twentiethcentury.As one of the founders of the firstand second "Krak6w
Group," he, togetherwith Jaremawas a link between the Krak6w avant-gardeof the 1930s and a
new generationof post-warpainters.
36 Kantor, "Lesson 12," The Drama Reviezv
35 (Winter1991): 148-68, 164-65.

:
S ..........
? ,
?
; ;
I Have Had Enough.I Am LeavingThisPainting(by Tadeusz Kantor)

KANTOR'S THEATRE OF FOUND REALITY / 347
..........i-
y t-::_:;

Todayis My Birthday
leftthe stage, the vortexcreatedby his absence was overwhelming.

"Self-portrait"
The chairwithinhis frame,thechairat thetable,and thecentralframewere empty.
A split second was needed to recognizethe image, but the emotionraised by it
stayedmuch longer. .. in memory.
The Cleaning-womanand the Shadow pushed the framewith the gates of the
"ChamberofDeath" back intoitsbackdrop.Therewas no longera gap betweenthe
frameand thebackdropwiththedoors. This performance space thathad been used
by Kantor and his 2
Cricot Company since TheDead Classcould no longerexist.There
was no longera secure framewithinwhichto hide. The gap ceased to functionas
a performance it was appropriatethatit be pushed aside to reveal
space; therefore,
differentdoors: "Importantevents stand behind the doors; it is enough to open
them.'"37
The discoursesthatemergedand reemergedin TodayisMy Birthday evoke Gustave
Courbet's "The Painter'sStudio." The paintingshows an artistin frontof a huge
canvas. A naked woman is standingbehind him. She is holdinga draperywhich
coverspartsof her body. The painteris surroundedby his friendsand critics.The
group is enclosed by walls coveredwith the paintingsdone by the artist.Todayis
My Birthday depicts Kantor'smulti-dimensional "found reality,"whose fragments
had, in the past, been given different
names--thememorymachine,the room of
memory/imagination, the room/cemetery storeroom,and the inn of memory,all of
whichwere presentedon stage. The spatialrepresentationofKantor'smemorieson
37 Kantor,"Room,"TheDramaReview
30 (1986):171.

stagewas echoed in his canvases. Bothartforms,theatreand painting,were inter-

twinedin a networkof relationships.As in Courbet's "The Painter'sStudio," the
paintingshaped the stagingof eventsand the stagingshaped thepainting.
The charactersappearingfrombehindthedoorsin Kantor'slastproductionwere,
similarly,multiplerepresentations. In Todayis My Birthday, Kantor,the holderof
discourse,would have sat in a chairpositionedat thethresholdbetweenrealityand
illusion,surroundedby the charactersfromhis past-the membersof his family
("the Dear AbsentOnes"), otherartistsand critics(Meyerhold,Jarema,and Stern),
his art(thehumanemballage,themouldingbook, etc.),lifeand history(politicians,
dignitaries,soldiers),charactersfromthe past productions,the inhabitantsof the
room,his Self-portrait, his Shadow, and his Poor Girl.The finalscene was to repre-
sent the closure and the opening embraced by Kantor's famous "Furtheron,
nothing.. ,""38pronouncedby the "Self-portrait." The Poor Girl,coveringherself
witha huge mail-bag,was to defendthe space of Kantor'sPoor Room of Memory/
Imaginationagainsttheinvasionofignorantauthoritiesofdelimitation. As in Cour-
bet's "The Painter'sStudio,"the artistwould have sat beforethisand the collective
canvasesofhis lifetime's labour.He would have been engagedin thediscourseabout
representation producesitsown space and challengeshumanbeing'soccupation
that
the discourseabout the directionas well as
of space, notjust its surfaceof transfer;
the textureof spatialfoldsthatexistin the space of the overlapbetweenthe three-
dimensionalworldof the body and multi-dimensional worldof the thought.
MY ROOM
Tadeusz Kantor
The followingare a fewadditional

explanationsand comments:
engulfedwithinthisgnawingturbulenceof
reflections,feelings,doubts,and hopes,
I need to set mypast in order,
I need to reviewmyideas in the contextof here and now,
I need to put old ideas aside intothe chestof memory-
simply,I need to clearthe fieldof action
formy new production.
My roomon stageand
theplot
The actiontakesplace on stage.

A real action.Let us assume so.
I have decided to move in and live on stage-
I have here mybed, my table,my chair,and, of course,mypaintings.
I have oftenimaginedmyroomin a theatre,
inside of the theatre,
8 Kantor,"Moja tw6rczog-Moja podr6t" (unpublished manuscript,1988), 5a (translationmine).

KANTOR'S THEATREOF FOUND REALITY / 349
on stage, ratherthan in a hotel.

So, my-as I call it-Poor Room of Imagination
is placed on stage.
I have to arrangeit.
It should not look like a stage room.
I will assemble on stage,in thisroomof mine,all the objects
as thoughI reallydecided to livehere.
A bed, a table,a chair,
doors (important),
an oven witha chimney,and
"canvases" on easels.
A ROOM
Mine.
Private.
The onlyplace
in this w o r 1 d,
the worldruledby the ruthlesslaws of
collectivism,
banality,
and society;
the onlyplace
in thisworld,
where the individual,
policed by society,
can hide,
be a masterof his fateand destiny.
[It is] A Poor place,
whose existenceis constantlyenganderedby
the "publicmechanisms"[ofpower]
This is the reason why
this "sacred place"
this"HOME of mine"
is exposed on stage to the public?
These statementsare not emptyphrases or metaphors.

They are TRUTH.
My lifeand my destiny
have always identifiedthemselveswith
myworksof art.A Workof Art.
They have always realized themselvesin mywork.
They have always foundtheirsolutionsin it.
My HOME has always been and is
myWork.
A Painting,a production,a theatre,a stage.
My "credo:"
The onlycompletetruthin artis

a representation of one's own life,

a disclosureof all its detailswithoutshame,
a discoveryof one's F A T E
and D E S T I N Y.
I have oftenexplainedthatthereasons fortheseprocesses
are groundedneitherin exhibitionism nor in narcissism,
but in the desireto strengthen
the "individuallife,"
in orderto help it escape the imminentdeath
and the destruction by inhuman "c o 1 1 e c t i v i s m."
This can be done by adding
one littleword, "m y,"
to the "individuallife."
The boundarybetween
the stage and the auditorium
is thevictoryline,
not to be crossedover,
not to be conquered.
This worldof collective
and publiclife
has been irreversibly stopped
at thisMaginotline.
1990
C 1991Michal AndrzejKobialka
A PAINTING
Tadeusz Kantor
BeforeI made a decisionto

place myPoor Room of Imagination
on stage,
I placed a paintingthere;
an idea borncontraryto all myprinciples.
In addition,the paintingwas standingon an easel.
The paintingwould be representedby a frame.
The presenceof the easel would be markedat the bottomand at the top [of
the frame];
the space withinthe framewould be empty;
its depthwould be filledby the actors
and the room-proprietor's imagination.
I am lookingat a piece of paper withthisidea on it-
... August,Thursday,1989-
at the notes-
A painteris in his studio,
thereis onlya frameof his painting...
a painting. .. and what to do withreality,the realitywitha capitalR?

I will need to change my attitudetowardreality... -

and at the drawing-
a paintingshowinga hanging,
in frontof it, thereis a painter,who is energetically
manipulatinga long
brusharound the
hanged body,
the painter'sbed is in the corner.
At the bottomthe page, thereis
a sequence of scenes and situations--
situationsthathauntedme
situationsthatcould easilybe createdon stage
withthe help of a mechanismsuch as a painting:
execution,war,
genocide,
war victims,
whores,brothels,masters,
ministers,generals,
policemen,spies ... .-
and one more short
but tellingnote--
noone has ever done thisbefore ...
The "p a i n t i n g" continued.
If I place on stage myhome,

my LittleRoom of Imagination-
I am doing thisforthe firsttime--
ifI place on stage the painter'sroom,
I have to show his paintingstoo.
At the beginning,I had my doubtsabout thisidea.
I am againstillusion;
however,mineis not the limitedmind
of an orthodoxperson.
I know onlytoo well thattheatrecannotexist
withoutillusion.
I acceptillusion,
because by acceptingits existence,
I can keep destroyingit interminably.
Each and everyact of destructionin art
is always ... positive!
I would like here to make a
correctionof some of my ideas,
whichI had fullypresentedin my
essay "TheatricalSpace."
It was the 1970s.
A correctionwas necessary,
because the natureand the matterof a performance
had been altered.

At thattimeI wrote:
"... Afterthe war, I encountered
Surrealism."
I feltthatmy rootswere firmly grounded
in Surrealism.
Therewas a reason why I spentmy formative yearsin Krakow,
in thisPolish Necropolis
and the Polish capitalof Symbolism.
However,fromthe verybeginning,somethingessential
separatedme fromthatartistictrend.
Fromthe verybeginning,I was suspiciousabout
illusion,
thisprincipleelement
whichwould give birthto
the surrealistic"m a r v e 1"
(le marveilleux).
Fromthe verybeginning,I was close
to R E A L I T Y.
1944,
TheReturnofOdysseus.
I announcedproudlythatReality,
the realityof life,
should be
the matterof the workof art.
I gave it the name of
the POO 0 R RE A L I T Y.
Later,I named it
the F O U N D R E A L I T Y
(realitetrouvee).
Dada-which had createdthisterm-
had been forgotten by thattime.
But, while graduallydiscoveringits past history,
I foundmyselfmoreattractedto it thanto Surrealism.
This is the reason why I labelled my 1944discoverywith
a termthatwas acceptedby history.
In thatmemorableyearof 1944,
I pronouncedanotherimportantword:
real p 1 a c e.
Theatricalplace;
however,not the officialplace
reservedforthe presentationof a drama,
but a place whichwas wrenchedfromthe realityof life,
a place whichbelongedto life'spractice
and to the everyday.
It is here thatmy correctioncan be seen.
The FICTION of dramaenters
life's("found")place
duringsome mysticalact.

A GrandEntreeof the Theatreof Death.

It was thisbanal Realityof life--
whose qualitieswere limitedby life's
practicaland utilitarianfunctions--
whichallowed us to see any act of probingit
withanythingthatwas not a partof it
as a transgression
thatwas so alien and unbelievablethatit
could be perceivedas
THE IMPRINT OF AN ACTIVITY FROM THE "OTHER WORLD,"
fromthe otherside!
(I believe thatan artisticactivity,
whichcan neitherbe fullyexplained
nor agree withthe logic of life,
is an imprintof the activityfrom"the otherside"
[del'au-dela].)
... The Fictionof drama entersthe Realityof life...
Withthe passing of time,thisdictumwas changed
because drama (dramaticfiction)was no longerused
in my theatre.
Actionand stage personae
were bornon stage
duringthe "creativeprocess,"
duringthe rehearsals.
While workingof Wielopole, Wielopole
I made a correction.
I wrotethen: ". . . it mustbe a
MEMORY Room
whichI keep reconstructing over and over again and whichis destroyedover
and over
again;
a roomwhichis pulsating.
The space of Realitymustbe expanded in orderforit to embrace
such non-physicalterritories as
MEMORY.
One needs to place an equationmarkbetweenMemoryand Reality.
This means thatone needs to create
a real structureof m e m o r y,
of its activities.
This structurewill be constitutedby the ACTION of
recallingmemories.
The actionof memory."
Those fewnotionsfromthe past,

like commandments,are stillprotecting
my act of creation.
The "Found Reality,"

the "real (found)place,"

became in timenothingmorethana convention,

lost its power to oppose FICTION,
all because of imitationand due to a gradual
acceptanceby the audience.
Radical actionswere pushed aside intodifferent
territories.
Whatwas leftwere the REALITY postulate
and the adjectivePOOR (reality).
Today,I will add anotherelement:

toconstruct
withoutillustrativeILLUSION.
A kindof a construction siteor a storage-room
of objectswhichare its inherentparts.
Such a siteis presentedin

mycurrentproduction,
Todayis myBirthday.
On stage (sic!),
I am puttingtogether(CONSTRUCTING) myhome,
myPOOR roomof imagination.
The methodof
placing
a c t i o n s and s i t u a t i o n s,
whichare shockinglyand scandalouslyout of place,
has acquirieda particularsignificance.
For example,in I ShallNeverReturn,
the fateof the mostimportantmattersof lifeand art
was decided in the inn-
in the c 1 a s h betweentwo alien systems
whichwould neverexplainor complementeach other.
The action,whichwas neithersupported
nor "illustrated"by the environment,
became sharpand shriekingly
r e a 1.
If suddenlywe stopped makinga distinction between

f i c t i o n and 1 i f e,
we would be placed at the thresholdof schizophrenia.
The people fromthe worldof f i c t i o n
entermyroom.
I would meetthemat the stairway,
at the streetcorner;
theydo not differfromus,
but theybehave in a strangeway;
theyavoid me;
theypretendthattheyare preoccupiedwithsomething;
theyrunaway.
Fictionpenetratesmy real life.

And again:
in Todayis myBirthday,
thisCLASH
betweentwo a 1 i e n systems
is an act of VIOLENCE.
My Poor Room
is invaded by the "ORGANS" or war-
a tank,a gun-barrel,a "squad car;"
mypoor roomis turnedinto a
battle-field.
It is morethanjust "out of place."
There is also a different

qualityof this"clash"
void of any logic:
"... the mob is pushingforward..."
No commentary ...
The functioning of ILLUSION

and IMITATION
in a theatricalprocess and activity
became acceptedto such a degree
thattheywere no longerquestioned.
REPRESENTATION:
in the era of all-embracing avant-gardes,
I rejectedthisnotion,
I called it names--
"reproduction,""pretense,"etc.
Of course,what was rejectedwas the "representation"
employedin conventionaltheatres,
definedby the whole baggage or systemof
lif e's narrative
plot development,
life's c a u s e s and e f f e c t s,
life'spurpose.
Fromthe verybeginning,I made use of
procedureswhichextirpated
life's c a u s e s and e f f e c t s
fromsituations, figures,
objects,
actions.
Whatwas leftwas r e a 1 n e s s itself.
"Representing"as such lost its reason forbeing.
The epithet:
p r e t e n ce,
its pejorativemeaningwas
consciouslyand unequivocally
expressedvia PLAYING in my theatre.
Such a proceduresuccessfullydestroyed
illusion

supportedby the psychologyof life.

[Playingthus]functionedwithinthe space of NOTHINGNESS.
The notionof "nothingness"was very
importantin my work.
This typeof r e p r e s e n t a t i o n,
this "p r e t e n s e,"
thisplayingwithinthe space of n o t h i n g n e s s,
are veryeffective during
the processof recalling
m e m o r i e s,
of functioning of m e m o r y,
duringwhichwe are facedwith
derivativephenomena,
repetitiveacts,
bereftof concreteand solid grounding.
This is exactlywhat happens in
Todayis myBirthday.
(This is also what happened in past productions.)
The existenceof the PAINTING and its interior
in thisproductioncreateillusionof the SECOND DEGREE,
in the presenceof whichmy Poor Room
on stage
(whichcan be seen as illusionary)
becomes r e a 1 i t y.
In Todayis myBirthday,
a thresholdbetween
the worldof ILLUSION
and our worldof REALITY
is crossedover.
This has alreadybeen discussed.
I want to emphasize thatthis
of thisproduction.
methodof actionis an importantcharacteristic
And one moreobservation:

in the processof fallingout fromthe worldof illusion
and fallingintothe real world
elements,illusions,people
provokethe DISINTEGRATION OF ILLUSION ITSELF.
1990
? 1991MichalAndrzejKobialka


Spatial Representation TADEUS KANTOR AND THEATRE OF FOUND REALITY

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spatial Representation TADEUS KANTOR AND THEATRE OF FOUND REALITY

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spatial Representation: Tadeusz Kantor's Theatre of Found Reality

Author(s): Michal Kobialka

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

1Thisessayis inpartsan abbreviatedversionofmystudyofTadeuszKantor'sTodayisMyBirthday

Michal Kobialkais a McKnight-LandProfessor of Minnesota.His

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

4See, forexample, GregoryL. Ulmer,"The Object

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

ForJ.F.Lyotard,Adorno's "AfterAuschwitz"opened up a historicalarea of post-

Finally,these changes in both the aesthetictenetsand the experienceof repre-

[t]hespacein whichwe live,whichdrawsus toourselves, inwhichtheerosionofour

The last sentenceepitomizesthe above-enunciatedshiftfromseeingrepresentation

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

space or in a void changed by time (Newton, Kant, Bergson),and startedto be

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

lenge audiences' perceptionsabout art,Kantor'sobjectsmanifested"[t]he angerof

19 Kantor,"Lesson 1," TheMilano Lessons,n.p. (translationmine)

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

In TodayisMyBirthday, thestage,a simplewooden platform, was filledwithobjects

Thesilenceon stagewas interrupted byKantor's voicefrom Again,I am

While the monologuewas read, a figureresemblingVelazquez's InfantaMargarita

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

.. .. .... .... ...

(drawingby Tadeusz Kantor)

(Photo: Flore Wolland)

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

(Photo: Bruno Wagner)

26In The Dead

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

To paraphraseKantor,his presencein thepassagewaytransformed the space intoa

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

assumed a postureof Doctor Klein in this production,but was alreadypresentin

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

the redoublingof spaces, and the relationshipbetweenthe Selfand the Other.33 In

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

In Todayis My Birthday,both Infantas existed in the space of the room/foundreality.

3 Kantor,"Infantki,"(unpublished manuscript,1962), n.p. (translationmine).

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

Byplacingtheeventswithinand withouttheboundariesofthespace oftheframes

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

repeatedsome of the phrases. The Cleaning-womanpromptedthe missingwords.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

I Have Had Enough.I Am LeavingThisPainting(by Tadeusz Kantor)

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

(Photo: Flore Wolland)

leftthe stage, the vortexcreatedby his absence was overwhelming.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

stagewas echoed in his canvases. Bothartforms,theatreand painting,were inter-

The followingare a fewadditional

The actiontakesplace on stage.

8 Kantor,"Moja tw6rczog-Moja podr6t" (unpublished manuscript,1988), 5a (translationmine).

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

on stage, ratherthan in a hotel.

These statementsare not emptyphrases or metaphors.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

a representation of one's own life,

BeforeI made a decisionto

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.78 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:39:07 PM

I will need to change my attitudetowardreality... -

The "p a i n t i n g" continued.

If I place on stage myhome,