“I believe I can fly” “I believe she could fall” Contemporary Circus Dramaturgy and the Perception of Risk

Traditional circus performances are fundamentally based on the establishment of a spectacular level; a diegetic level is not created; and the meaning level can only be deciphered post hoc. The Troupe Caroli of the Cirque Bouglione could be used as an example. It was broadcast on the television format “Les Pistes aux Étoiles” on March 9, 1969: Through the Babylonian structure, the use of cymbals, and drum rolls, the only level established is the spectacular level. Signs on the performative level are not chosen for their meaning but for their attractiveness. No diegetic level is established. Although the crowns, that are part of the costumes of the female acrobats are reminiscent of princesses, within this act they don’t serve to establish a fictional world but serve as well to underline the super-humanity and thus the spectacular level. Furthermore, no meaning level is established. The interpretation of traditional circus a means to demonstrate human dominance and superiority is deciphered only post-hoc. Only post hoc, traditional circus can be read as a symbol of anthropocentrism.

New circus performances are characterized by their alternation between the spectacular level and the diegetic level. I would like to use Cirque de Soleil’s Kooza as an example: When marketing KOOZA (a new circus performance), Cirque du Soleil does not follow the traditional programs. In the blurb, it is described in the following words: “KOOZA is an innovative journey viewed through the perspective of The Innocent, an endearing yet naïve clown looking for his place in the world. A mystery item is delivered to The Innocent one day when he is flying his kite. The self-discovery journey of The Innocent, who is miracuosly transferred to a bizarre but exotic world, is followed in KOOZA under the watchful eye of an enigmatic trickster with remarkable abilities.” The focus is not artistic achievement but the narrative unity of the piece, or the diegetic level. But what roles are played by the technical performances of the artists, the acrobatic interludes of the colorful mythical creature, and the group acrobatic act? In these cases, the use of circus techniques establishes the diegetic level. The artistic movements of the protagonist are a characteristic of the depicted character, the acrobats are part of the fantastic fictional world, into which we are invited by the mythical creature. The performances of the artists are not primarily attributed to the phenomenal bodies of the artists, but received as the abilities of the mythical creatures. This also explains the dominance of fantastic fictional world in the performances by Cirque du Soleil (Saltimbanco, Alegria, Mystere), into which the abilities of the artists fit without any problems.

In this context the aesthetic of risk is less visible.

There is one major objection regarding this modelling: The performance 'La Perle du Bengale‘ (1935 Cirque d’hiver) of Cirque Bouglione which tells the story of a British lady being kidnapped by a Hindu prince presents the same structure as what is considered as New Circus in this modelling. However, New Circus did not even exist. And yes: It is the aim of the modelling to differentiate between Traditional, New and Contemporary Circus based on their technique, not based on a historical timeline. Within this reasoning, 'La Perle du Bengale‘ would therefore be considered as New Circus. Why then using the notions traditional, new and contemporary circus? Why not spectacular, narrative, and postmodern circus? I for my part, always like to start my research and argumentation from the practice. And within the circus scene, we are using these notions while referring to the performances that function in a manner presented above. I therefore refrain from creating neologisms.

In contemporary circus performances, the presentation of spectacular risk is not the focus. However – and this is the main hypothesis of this lecture – the aesthetic of risk is still a fundamental element of meaning constitution. The decisive factor is no longer that the risk is staged, but the belief that circus is risky. The aesthetics of risk underscores the phenomenality of the performance. For this reason, the recipient simultaneously follows the artistic performance, the action surrounding the depicted fictional character and worries about the artist.

I would like to explain this thought by using a solo of the performance “Acrobates” by Stephane Ricordel and Oliver Meyrou as an example. The performance is based on a true story. The protagonist is Fabrice Champion, a trapeze artist who worked with the company Les Arts Sauts from France. His limbs were paralyzed after colliding with another trapeze artist, a crash that left the highly mobile artist a quadriplegic. Nevertheless, he began teaching in circus schools and developed a new form of acrobatics with his students Alexandre Fournier and Matias Pilet that creatively combines the abilities of his injured body with those of the two healthy artists. Fabrice died in November 2011. His two students created in collaboration with Stephane Ricordel and the documentary filmmaker Oliver Meyrou the (documentary) circus performance acrobats that deals with the collaboration of three acrobats, the announcement of Fabrice’s death and the continuation of the artistic work. The narrative strand is based on documentary film sequences by filmmaker Meyrou. The solo by artist Matias Pilet, which is the focus of the following short analysis, takes place in the second part of the performance and follows the proclamation of Fabrice’s death and the solo by Alexandre Fournier. The reaction of the character “Matias” to the news of the death is performed.

This act underlines the spectacular level through a focus on the aesthetic of risk via the topic of the overall performance, a focus on the fall and its impact on the ground, the dark lighting and the voiceover “Je peux plus” that transforms into the sound of a heartbeat. On a diegetic level, one sees “Matias,” who grieves the death of a friend. Due to the ambiguity of the extract, a second reading is possible: one also sees the character “Fabrice” and his immobility. The focus on this level is not the artist’s body but the represented character. On the meaning level, the act creates a metadiscours while questioning the definitions of being an acrobat.

In the contemporary circus, the performative, the spectacular, and the diegetic level are brought together to form an interdependent functional unit, the boundaries of which are blurred. The aesthetics of risk becomes the main principle of the textual process; it becomes a fundamental element in the constitution of meaning. In Acrobates, one sees at the same time the character “Matias” and the phenomenal body of Matias (Fischer-Lichte 2004, 132); one watches “Matias” and worries about the artist (human being) at the same time. This specific relation between narrativity, spectacularity and risk is what the performances that we consider as being contemporary have in common – I invite you to question or approve this hypothesis while watching the performances of the MAD Festival, such as La Spire by the Compagnie Rizome - Chloé Moglia, Glorious Bodies by Circumstances or Living by Be Flat.