Dialogue and Performativity: Using Performance Studies to ...€¦ · Web viewUsing the tools of Performance Studies to analyze how calculated violence is employed in a media ...

Draft version only. Please do not cite without prior permission from the author.

Dialogue and Performativity: Using Performance Studies to Evaluate Dialogic Norm Construction

Cami R. RoweLancaster UniversityDepartment of Politics and International [email protected]

Millennium 2010 Annual ConferenceLondon School of Economics & Political Science

AbstractThis paper conceives of dialogue as an element of human performance, and attempts to initiate a discussion of the usefulness of Performance Studies theories for analysing the construction of social norms. This is intended to contribute to existing conversations in the field of IR concerning aesthetics and the applicability of art methodologies to the study of international relations. It also aims to uncover the rich overlapping territory between Performance Studies and Constructivist International Relations with the intention of instigating new conversations between these two disciplines. Performance Studies, as an interdisciplinary “non-discipline”, makes use of theoretical insights from sociology, anthropology, neuroscience and more, with the express aim of understanding meaning production and reception. It is therefore inherently suited to analyses of the circulation and competition of ideas among actors and public audiences. Through a performative lens, even minor political roles are shown to be potentially pivotal in the creation of values and identities. Performance Studies, I suggest, contributes a useful analytical framework for understanding the potential success and longevity of ideas on both domestic and international stages.

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to propose the usefulness of Performance Studies to analyses of

International Relations, and specifically studies rooted in a constructivist approach to

global phenomena. My suggestion is that Performance Studies can help to critically

explore why and how ideas change, by providing information about the interpretive

context in which meaning is processed and understood. Performance Studies scholars

1

mailto:[email protected]


concern themselves with the frameworks and devices surrounding performed actions, and

can therefore offer insight into the social environment within which ideas are contested

and constructed. Aspects of tone, characterisation, spatial arrangements and the like all

heavily influence group interpretation. While these performative structures do not

necessarily dictate a specific mode of interpretation by audiences, they lay the

foundational atmosphere that predisposes the public toward particular avenues of

reception and response.

Furthermore, performance-informed approaches understand that international relations

are negotiated within a matrix of performed interactions. The shared understandings that

lie at the heart of international actions and reactions are developed and conveyed through

performance. To speak or interact with the intent of being viewed implies performance,

and as such political actions are always performative. Issues of identity, social hierarchy,

group interactions, public events and exchanges of power and obligation are all key

concerns of Performance Studies theorists, and are likewise central to constructivist

interpretations of international phenomena. Significantly, Performance Studies

understands that social negotiation of norms underlies many common ‘everyday’

performances, and it is therefore an ideal means of furthering our understanding of the

development and evolution of norms and ideas in politics.

In furtherance of these assertions the main effort of this paper will be to elucidate the

nature of the field of Performance Studies and offer a number of key concepts for the

consideration of constructivist IR scholars. This will entail a discussion of the evolution

2


of Performance Studies as an academic discipline, followed by a brief introduction to the

notion of dialogue in a Performance Studies context. I will then explore some of the

overlapping issue areas of Performance Studies and constructivism, including notions of

identity and the range of influential actors that can be considered in norm construction

processes. The intent here is to provide some common ground that may form the basis of

further conversations between the two fields.

What Is Performance Studies?

References to “Performance Studies” in IR circles tend to be initially interpreted as an

allusion to the use of theatrical performances to interpret, analyse and occasionally

intervene in international phenomena. Performance Studies is often thought of as a field

that concerns itself with blended art-and-politics projects, such as the use of theatre as an

intervening tool in international conflict and resolution, or the interpretation of political

circumstances through the lens of locally produced plays and performances. Indeed there

is much in common between such works and Performance Studies, with a great deal of

rich common ground yet to be explored. However, Performance Studies as an academic

field stretches far beyond this, existing instead as a set of theories and methodologies

concerned with the collective significance of performed actions at multiple levels of

society. Whereas other uses of art and theatre in International Relations tend to focus on

the creative products themselves, Performance Studies removes the focus from staged

dramas and plays in favour of extrapolating their theoretical foundations and analytical

frameworks to apply to a wider range of social phenomena. In Performance Studies, it is

not Brecht’s Mother Courage or Osborne’s Look Back in Anger that are the primary

3


objects of study, but rather the techniques and devices that Brecht and Osborne developed

and utilized for those productions – and more importantly, what those techniques tell us

about group interpretation and meaning-making.

Furthermore, while most mentions of drama and performance conjure up notions of

actors, audiences, stages and the trappings of commercial productions either traditional or

avant garde, Performance Studies understands drama in a broader sense. As Peter Brook

famously stated, “A man walks across an empty space whilst someone else is watching

him, and that is all that is needed for an act of theatre to be engaged” (Brook 1968, 11).

In this sense, performance implies simply any action that is conducted with the intention

of being to some degree witnessed by another – put another way, “showing doing”

(Schechner 2002, 28). The indisputable pioneer of Performance Studies, Richard

Schechner, states that

Performance is a very inclusive notion of action; theatre is only one node on a continuum

that reaches from ritualisation in animal behaviour (including humans) through

performances in everyday life – greetings, displays of emotion, family scenes, and so on

– to rites, ceremonies and performances: large-scale theatrical performances (Schechner

1977, 1).

Indeed, Schechner’s ritual-theatre continuum has become a key concept in the

Performance Studies canon, redefining value-laden notions of efficacy and entertainment

by locating both concepts and the overlapping territory in between within the same

performative framework (Schechner 1988, 120).

4


One of the major challenges that Performance Studies has faced is in defining itself as an

academic discipline. Because its objects of study are so wide ranging, and the

methodological choices vary to such a degree, it overlaps extensively with other fields.

The problem is further complicated, as Tracy C. Davis notes, by the tendency of

academics from other disciplines to use performance and ‘performativity’ as an

explanatory metaphor, without regard to the rich theoretical history of the subject or any

in depth intent to explore the many facets of what constitutes performance (Davis 2008,

2). Importantly, Performance Studies theorists use the concept of performance not in a

metaphorical way, but in the foundational belief that all social relationships and group

beliefs are contested and negotiated through performance – physical and verbal

interactions that follow certain behavioural parameters and result in a range of likely

outcomes for participants and viewers. In this sense, performance is not simply about

social constructions of identity or being, but about the interactive processes of exchange

and evolution that shape collective ideas. Performativity can be explored beyond its

application as a simple explanation and description, and by drawing on theories of actor

production and audience reception we can bring a level of understanding and analysis to

social interactions that would otherwise remain obscured.

Much of the impetus for the development of Performance Studies as a scholarly field

grew out of already established trends in the art world, particularly attempts to integrate

non-‘theatrical’ aspects of life and culture into staged performances. In the alternative

productions of the avant-garde, practitioners such as Vesvelod Meyerhold, Antonin

Artuad, Jerzy Grotowski, Peter Schumann, Peter Brook and others sought to forge theatre

5


with life, providing an alternative experience for both actors and audiences which would

stimulate a transformative process for both individuals and the collective group.

Although methods and specific intent varied, the common theme here was the desire to

effect some kind of social change through performative structures or devices.

Deliberately breaking down boundaries between art and other aspects of social life was a

calculated political act.

The Vietnam era was particularly key to the trajectory of politicized and integrated art,

and the related development of Performance Studies. This period saw the escalation of

self-consciously performative tactics among political activists. While not necessarily a

new phenomenon, the extent to which antiwar organizations turned to artistic theories

gleaned from the worlds of art and theatre was unprecedented. For example, Peter

Schumann was a visual and dance artist specializing in puppetry who dabbled in political

commentary. In the heightened political climate of Greenwich Village in the mid 1960s,

his work was drafted into the antiwar movement by non-artist activists (Brecht 1988).

Schumann’s Bread and Puppet Theatre quickly became the instantly recognizable flag

bearer of most major anti-Vietnam War demonstrations, and his naive puppetry

techniques were adopted by the political left as a mascot for actions stretching into the

present day. Coupled with an increasing reliance on the impact of televised images, the

existence of these self-consciously performative groups in the political arena predisposed

future political actions to a formal concern for aesthetics. Where theatre and art were

embracing alternative (mostly critical) types of performance, political action was re-

conceiving itself as innately theatrical. This opened the door for Performance Studies

6


analyses of political actions, ranging from marches through capitol cities to mass civil

disobedience actions to the tossing away of war medals by disaffected Vietnam veterans.

In the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks, the tendency toward examining

mostly subversive political actions expanded from a concentration on leftist protests to

include the subject of terrorism itself. John Bell, one of the chief directors of the Bread

and Puppet Theatre and a leading Performance Studies scholar, made a call for serious

Performance Studies accounts of terrorist violence in 2004. He strongly opposed those

critics who alleged that combining performance terminology and aesthetic philosophies

to the sociological understanding of terrorism amounted to disrespectful frivolity or

unnecessary validation by overlaying violence with the terminologies of high art. Bell

steadfastly asserted that terrorist violence falls within the category of “twice-behaved

behaviour”,1 and as such insights can be drawn from other modes of performance to help

us understand the function of violence and the issues surrounding both its implementation

and prevention (Bell 2004). He maintained that:

Using the tools of Performance Studies to analyze how calculated violence is employed

in a media-saturated society is not an insult to the memories of those who died, but an

essential means of understanding the undeniably symbolic level at which global conflict

is now being played out. It is clear that such vivid terms as “Axis of Evil”, “Homeland

Security”, and “Weapons of Mass Destruction” have been put into play with full

cognizance of their semiotic value, and we will only understand the actual implications of

1 Twice-behaved behaviour is a term coined by Richard Schechner to designate actions that fall under the category of performance. For Schechner, most social customs and norms are learned socially and repeated, rendering everything from gender traits to social graces ‘twice-behaved behaviour’. For more on this see Between Theatre and Anthropology (Schechner 1985).

7


these concepts and the actions connected to them – performatives all – if we are able to

comprehend them on an equally sophisticated level of analysis (Bell 2004, 57)

In this way, Bell opened the way for critical Performance Studies analyses of both

terrorism and state and public responses to terrorism. This has resulted in an increase in

the number of Performance Studies projects that take politics as a central concern, and

perhaps has laid the groundwork for more productive collaborations between

Performance and Politics scholars.

Contextualising Dialogue

The next point to consider is the role that dialogue plays in Performance Studies theories.

Although it is difficult to arrive at a singular definition of the term, for the purpose of this

paper I would like to outline some of the key points that are common to most

Performance Studies references to dialogue. These include the notions of exchange,

viewership and negotiation/evolution.

To start with, many Performance Theorists conceive of dialogue as fundamentally a form

of exchange, in which two or more entities interact performatively in a responsive

manner. This extends the definition of dialogue from a primarily verbal activity to one

that encompasses all the ranges of human action. It also implies a degree of obligation on

the part of those involved, in the sense that actions must be perceived and responded to –

no participant can escape the framework of performance which encompasses the event,

even where that which is performed is non-activity. Dialogue is therefore a central

component of all performance, the first sophistication of the “empty space” analogy

8


outlined by Peter Brook above. In the case of dialogue, not only is someone watching but

that someone is an implied participant with an obligation to be similarly perceived.

This raises the second point that is key to all Performance Studies scholars – dialogue is

always couched in a context of viewership. Indeed, rather than placing an emphasis on

the exchange that occurs between the primary actors of any given dialogue, Performance

Studies focuses more on the interaction that occurs between the central participants and

those viewing or otherwise perceiving that interaction. This is not to imply that viewers

are or must remain inactive non-participants, but simply highlights the issues of

interpretation that arise from a position of removed viewership rather than privileged

participant. This point is key to the usefulness of Performance Theory to studies of

politics, as will be seen below.

Finally, I would like to point out the way that Performance Studies also emphasises the

process of negotiation and evolution that occurs when dialogue takes place. In many

interpretations, performed actions are the instigators of social transformation, particularly

when enacted under specific structural rules or with a transgressive intent to interrupt the

status quo. This environment of transformation can be found in events including wars,

political elections and unexpected performances of civil disobedience. When events like

this occur, the normal constraints on social interaction are altered or suspended in some

manner, and openings for change are created. Through the performed negotiation of

these events, the status quo will either be temporarily suspended or in some cases,

permanently altered (Schechner 1988). Some political actions are therefore already

9


enacted with the intent of this kind of social change, as when a new Prime Minister is

elected or when a peace treaty is signed. However, it is also important to point out that

ordinary, everyday dialogue can also evolve toward this level of eruption through specific

actions. When actors operate in such a way as to volubly disrupt the expectations

surrounding a given dialogic event, they create the possibility of crisis that can have a

long term impact on social norms. In this vein, Performance Studies stresses the way that

dialogue is saturated with the possibility of instituting social change.

Bringing Performance Studies to Constructivist Concerns

The remainder of this paper will focus on demonstrating the way that Performance

Studies can directly supplement constructivist approaches to International Relations. I

will conduct this exploration by first discussing a sampling of Performance Theories

relating to individual and group identity, a key concern for constructivists. I will then

review Performance Studies conceptions of valid actors, which has significant

implications for the role of the domestic sphere and individuals in the process of norm

construction. I will conclude with a brief discussion of the way that Performance Studies

intersects with other aspects of the constructivist research agenda, and offer some areas

where further research would be fruitful.

Identity

To start with, an obvious area of overlap between Constructivism and Performance

Studies is the concern with the social construction of identity. For Performance theorists,

personal characterisations are seen as essential in understanding the way that identity can

1


function microcosmically and impact collective sentiments and ideals. As a starting

point, Performance Studies theorists have paid great attention to the way that individual

personae are complicit in social interactions at all levels. Many have cited the writings of

sociologist Robert E. Park in which he details the way that personhood is about the

wearing of various masks. Park wrote that it is through the donning of various social

masks that we come to know both ourselves and others, and that throughout an

individual’s life these masks are employed with a greater or lesser degree of conscious

deliberation for varying social functions (Park 1950, 249). For scholars steeped in an

awareness of the nuances of influence behind theatrical masks in staged performance, the

notion of everyday social masks and identity formation invited application of theatre-

derived theories.

This study of identity has taken several turns: some theorists have focused on the way

that individual identity is shaped by society in a performative way. For example, Erving

Goffman conducted one of the first studies of performative identity in 1959, exploring the

way that everyday actions and typical social roles consist of learned and repeated

behaviours. He noticed that most behaviours are made up of patterns or routines

replicated from the behaviour of others (Bial 2004, 59). Importantly, Goffman described

two types of identity performance, which he termed “cynical” and “sincere”. In the latter,

individuals wholly believe in the parts they are playing, displaying learned traits and

characteristics with full integrity, unconscious of the constructed origins of the various

aspects of identity. In these aspects,

1


The individual can be fully taken in by his own act; he can be sincerely convinced that

the impression of reality which he stages is the real reality (Goffman 1959, 28).

On the other hand, Goffman describes “cynical” performers, those that are conscious of

the artifice involved in self-characterisation, and that frequently make use of this fact to

deliberately influence their reception by others. This is not to say that cynical performers

always do so out of self-interest, as this behaviour may be equally motivated by a desire

to mislead others for their own good or for the good of the community. This

phenomenon is obviously not restricted to the waging of statecraft or governance, and can

be seen in Goffman’s examples of placebo-prescribing doctors, myth-perpetuating

parents and reassuring salespeople (Goffman 1959).

Although Goffman’s cynical and sincere performers are an apt metaphor, it would be

more accurate to state that degrees of cynicism and sincerity vary in any given individual

in relation to the particular identity trait under consideration. For example, genders may

be performed with utmost sincerity despite their performative nature, while other aspects

of character such as class or intellect may be deployed for specific ends in a conscious

and deliberate way. In any given dialogue, participants employ a range of sincerity

throughout.

Added to this is the fact that, as Goffman states, observers of other people are in a mode

of reception which entails a high degree of belief in the parts other people play (Goffman

1959, 31). For the most part, people are trained to believe in the presentation of self

offered by other individuals, and while it is possible for a degree of scepticism to be

1


deployed in relation to others, this is generally only in effect in relation to particular sets

of actions or precise aspects of character and identity. Some classes of individuals may

encourage a greater degree of scepticism on the part of “audiences”, and this includes

politicians and anyone engaging in public dialogue for overt persuasive effect.

Goffman also outlined the way that individuals move from cynicism to sincerity and back

again through various social processes (Goffman 1959, 31). This has great implications

for studies of dialogue between political actors. Foremost, it implies an ability for

individual identities to be impacted either temporarily or permanently through interaction

with others. When actors engage in dialogue, either as a primary participant or a

peripheral observer, the identities they don can shift as a consequence of the performative

processes they are engaged in. Frequently, identities that are deployed in a cynical effect

for the benefit of others can become ingrained in the consciousness of the actor and

therefore move more toward sincerity. By contrast, it is also possible for overt

performances of characteristics to create a level of critical awareness in an actor that then

alters their attitude to that character. Crucially, these phenomena would not occur

without the framework of performative dialogue, wherein actions are reactions are reliant

upon fellow actors and a context of viewership.

While Erving Goffman began the enthusiasm for Performance Studies accounts of

individual identity processes, other theorists have concentrated on the way that the

performance of these individual identities feeds back into collective norm construction

and is used as a set of theatrical signals that delimit appropriate ranges of action and

1


emotion for “audiences”, which here can be defined as the general membership of a given

collective.

Cultural historian and film critic Neal Gabler is one author who has contributed to this

aspect of the Performance Studies canon. Gabler makes the case that individual identities

are now at the centre of American culture, saturating everything from popular

entertainment to depictions of major news events. He calls these “lifies”, his term for the

ever-present vignettes of individuals that absorb and entertain the general public. More

than just a new trend in entertainment, Gabler argues that “lifies” function as teaching

and regulating devices for the American public in particular due to the extreme level of

media saturation in everyday life. This has great implications for the use of individual

lives and identities for persuasive political effect. Furthermore, Gabler believes that this

increase in popular representations of individual lives, from reality television to celebrity

exposés, to short-lived tabloid scandals, creates an environment in which entertainment is

convoluted with news and information dissemination. This leads to a public regard for

political dialogue which is altered by the habits derived from this entertainment-media

saturation:

We escape from life by escaping into the neat narrative formulas in which most

entertainments are packaged. Still, with movies there was always the assumption that the

escape was temporary. At the end of the film one had to leave the theater and reenter the

maelstrom of real life. When life itself is an entertainment medium however, this process

is obviously altered (Gabler 2004, 77).

1


Significantly, Gabler is linking identity processes with the potentially disturbing trend of

reading life itself as a kind of narrative entertainment. He notes that there seems to be a

trend for using life to escape from life – by interpreting the social masks of others with an

attitude of detachment derived from expected narrative closures and inconsequentiality,

the public views the plight of others, is momentarily absorbed, and ultimately relieved of

their anxieties (Gabler 2004). The advent of online blogs and daily social networking

sound bites increases this phenomenon. The effect is to increase the transience and

triviality of publicly viewed actions, while simultaneously demanding an ever-increasing

level of drama in order to elicit attention from audiences oversaturated with opportunities

for escapism.

Along similar lines, Schechner makes a distinction which he terms make-belief vs. make-

believe; the former made up of performances that tacitly teach, inform and construct

everyday norms and reality – particularly those dealing with identity and social roles such

as gender, race, class, etc – and the latter being the more recognizable and overt type of

role playing engaged in by children or individuals consciously choosing to behave “as if”

they were someone or something else. He cites the American President as an individual

frequently engaged in make-belief, but importantly he describes the complicity of the

public in this process. Since nearly all Americans are aware of the scripted nature of

presidential “performances”, they too must actively suspend disbelief to the level of

relegating performative devices to the invisible and unnoticeable. In this way they

become those essential viewers of dialogue that enable the suspended performative nature

of politics.

1


Schechner goes on to describe the way that an increase in media saturation and

accessibility has resulted in a multiplication of the number of individuals who can claim

enough status to actively shape make-belief narratives. For example, there are increasing

numbers of experts, commentators or interested parties displayed on network news, in

internet web logs, and through various print media. Each of these individuals engages in

the same kind of scripted (whether by self or others) performance which adds to the

make-belief drama of the mass public (Schechner 2002). Essentially, the number of

credible participants in the dialogue is increasing appreciably. However, with this

increase in availability of the media comes an increasingly cynical public mode of

response:

With so many kinds of performances on view, people are sophisticated and suspicious

deconstructors of the theatrical techniques employed to lure them (Schechner 2002, 35).

This underscores the necessity of applying Performance Studies to political actions (or

performances) in order to understand the evolving potential of such enactments among an

increasingly savvy mass audience.

When contemplating the impact of dialogue on the construction of political ideas, these

aspects of identity can supplement our understanding by elucidating the way that

individuals influence the wider public and vice versa. Performance Studies

interpretations could clearly engage with constructivist concerns regarding the degree of

sincerity of political actors, and the implications of this on the development of foreign

1


policy. Performance Studies not only presupposes a level of make-believe among

political actors, it also underscores the complicity of all actors in this process. As a

result, theories of global interactions could be sophisticated with an in-depth regard for

the performative indicators that surround the donning of certain identities and the

outward perception of these.

The Importance of Actors

Performance Studies also has a great deal to offer in regard to who or what constitutes a

valid participant in political dialogues. To conceive of international relations in a

performative context demands an acceptance of the notion that small groups or

individuals frequently have a serious and lasting impact on larger social processes. In the

same way that mainstream theatre audiences may give their attention to a small band of

players on a commercial stage, we can understand political norms as deriving from the

viewership of dialogues by global society. Further, because Performance Studies

removes the dividing footlights from conceptions of staged action, we can conceive of the

audience as potential participants who may intervene in or contribute to the dialogue

taking place in the centre stage area of international politics. As Gabler and Schechner

have pointed out, the rise of ‘lifies’ predisposes society to a greater level of attention paid

to short-lived individual biographies. Importantly, this frequently comes about through

the nomination of such characters by elite political figures. The use of life-stories by

politicians seeking to influence identity-driven norms and policies actually lays the

foundation for intertextual resistances to those norms by entities that can don the identity

mask of the nominated persona. We have seen this in recent years with the number of

1


individuals who come forward and become figureheads for political movements, ranging

from the grieving mothers of dead soldiers to plumbers with ideas about domestic

policies. The performative devices employed by such characters are central to the impact

they will have on established norms. Effectively, an awareness of this process of

nominated performance implies a much greater level of authority for individuals in the

context of international relations. Positions of authority are not reserved solely for

appointed officials or institutions of power, but may be claimed by any member of global

society through strategic performative tactics.

For the purposes of combining Performance Studies with IR, it is also important to note

that Performance Studies frequently places an emphasis on the everyday, or on

pervasively repeated act-ions within a given community:

Performances mark identities, bend time, reshape and adorn the body, and tell stories.

Performances – of art, rituals, or everyday life – are made of “twice-behaved behaviors,”

“restored behaviors,” performed actions that people train to do, that they practice and

rehearse. That training and effort go into making conscious art is clear. But everyday

life also involves years of training, of learning appropriate bits of behavior, of finding out

how to adjust and perform one’s life in relation to social and personal circumstances

(Schechner 2002, 24).

This is important firstly because this statement clearly begins to overlap with similar

definitions of politics – definitions that understand politics as a basic brand of human

interaction, an anthropological necessity and one that is evident at all levels of society. It

may be said that politics is a brand of “showing doing” with some degree of political

intent behind both the act and (potentially) the witnessing. This of course extends our

1


definition of the political to so-called everyday interactions, those that happen on streets

or in homes, between family members, friends, or schoolchildren, and places this on

equal footing with the kind of politics that happen between world leaders, in large

auditoriums equipped with microphones and podiums, translated and re-broadcast around

the world to countless other audiences. This being the case, a Performance Studies-

informed analysis emphasizes the political potential of marginalized or non-mainstream

actors. By reinforcing the link between elite and domestic and emphasizing their basic

functional similarity, Performance Studies supplements those political theories that place

equal value on non-elite participants and subjugated social classes. For Performance

Studies practitioners, the statement that the personal is political simply celebrates the

evident.

This position engages well with the efforts of scholars who seek to seriously account for

the role of the domestic realm in the construction of social norms. A number of recent

studies have detailed the importance of the general public in the interpretation and

perpetuation of political norms (Seabrooke 2007; Sjostedt 2007). However, studies of

this nature frequently fall short of their intended aims by amalgamating public response

into a singular entity that fails to account for marginality or diversity. Performance

Studies approaches can remedy this by highlighting the role of diverse and multiple areas

of the “public”. This can range from a focus on the political significance of interpersonal

interactions to the analysis of multiple modes of reception induced by various dramatic

tactics.

1


Along similar lines, Performance Studies contributes an awareness of the construction

and re-construction of social roles and relationships through the medium of performed

actions. As Erving Goffman has noted, social roles become defined through repeated

performance of characterizations to the same audience on more than one occasion. It is

through this repetition – and rehearsal – of proscribed social characteristics, duties and

norms that social relationships are solidified (Goffman 1959, 15). Both actor and

audience repeat the experience of a particular social relationship and in this way

hierarchies of power and sanctification of norms may occur. For example, soldiers are

repeatedly presented (and simultaneously present themselves) for public audiences

through parades, memorial services, marches and the like. Through the performative

devices employed, the trope of Soldierness takes hold and becomes solidified in regard to

public interpretations of proscribed behaviors and norms of the US military. This is very

similar to work done by Judith Butler and others regarding the performance of gender

through social conditioning and repetition. What Performance Studies can add here is an

understanding of particular performative devices which shape transformations of both

public interpretation and actor embodiment, so that a space may be opened for dissenting

individuals to alter and evolve said social roles rather than simply re-present them. This

notion can also be extended beyond the realm of the individual to encompass the roles

performed by states and global institutions, further clarifying the process of identity

formation and promulgation among elite actors. In this sense, Performance Studies can

make significant contributions to constructivist approaches that seek to engage with the

social power hierarchies that lie at the heart of norm creation, and would be particularly

2


useful to the kind of feminist-constructivism advocated by Birgit Locher and Elisabeth

Prugl (2001).

Conclusion

In the brief account above I have attempted to outline some of the ways that Performance

Studies may prove effective for scholars concerned with the power of ideas in the context

of International Relations. I have offered a summary of the field and noted some of the

key thinkers and issue areas in which Performance Studies scholars are engaged. I then

provided some of the chief points which I feel could become common ground for

scholars from both performance and IR backgrounds. Specifically, I described the way

that issues of identity in Performance theory are ideally suited to the concerns of many

constructivist scholars, and I demonstrated the usefulness of performance-informed

notions of ‘actors’ to the study of international politics.

In conclusion, it is my belief that Performance Studies can supplement constructivist

approaches to International Relations in a highly productive manner. This stems largely

from the ability of this field to consider actions and intents conveyed not only through

verbal language but through a whole range of performative organs – voice, physicality,

movement, characterization, etc. Where discourse analysis and rhetorical theories

analyse shared grammars and overarching linguistic rules, Performance Studies broadens

the lexical framework to include non-verbal and even non-personal communicative

devices. Furthermore, Performance Studies places the emphasis not on actions and

2


reactions or dialogue and replies, but on what happens between the two… in other words,

Performance Studies is, at its core, about relationship.

To treat any object, work or product “as” performance means to investigate what the

object does, how it interacts with other objects or beings, and how it relates to other

objects or beings. Performances exist only as actions, interactions and relationships

(Schechner 2002, 25).

It also provides beneficial insight into performative affect, the mood and tone with which

actions are conveyed and the effect this has on viewers. For example, theatre

practitioners have provided us with incisive studies on the impact of violence, humour,

empathy and the body which can provide significant information about the effect of

political actions on the mass public. By considering not only the outer layer of

appearance of dialogue, such as language and visual composition, Performance Studies

captures the impact of many of the surrounding trappings of international politics,

otherwise overlooked by theorists. It is hoped that this paper will provide the foundation

for ongoing fruitful conversations between Performance Studies and IR scholars.

2


Bibliography

Bell, Catherine. 2004. "Performance" and Other Analogies. In The Performance Studies Reader, ed. Bial, Henry, 98-106. New York: Routledge.

Bell, John. 2004. Performance Studies in an Age of Terror. In The Performance Studies Reader, ed. Bial, Henry, 56-58. New York: Routledge.

Bial, Henry, ed. 2004. The Performance Studies Reader. New York: Routledge.

Brecht, Stephen. 1988. Bread and Puppet Theatre Vol. I. New York: Methuen.

Butler, Judith. 2004. Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. New York: Verso.

Carlson, Marvin. 1996. Performance: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge.

———. 2004. What is Performance?. In The Performance Studies Reader, ed. Bial, Henry, 70-75. New York: Routledge.

Cohen-Cruz, Jan. 1998. Radical Street Performance. New York: Routledge.

Davis, Tracy C. 2008. Introduction: the pirouette, detour, revolution, deflection, deviation, tack and yaw of the performative turn. In The Cambridge Companion to Performance Studies, ed. Davis, Tracy C, 1-10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Elam, Keir. 1984. The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. London: Methuen.

Fierke, K.M. and Jorgensen, K.E., eds. 2001. Constructing International Relations. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.

Finnemore, Martha and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization, no. 52 (Autumn): 887-917.

Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Gabler, Neal. 2004. Life the Movie. In The Performance Studies Reader, ed. Bial, Henry, 76-77. New York: Routledge.

Geertz, Clifford. 2004. Blurred Genres: The Refiguration of Social Thought. In The Performance Studies Reader, ed. Bial, Henry. New York: Routledge.

Goff, Patricia and Kevin C. Dunn. 2004. Identity and Global Politics. New York: Palgrave.

Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City NY: Anchor Books.

2


Guillaume, Xavier. 2002. Foreign Policy and the Politics of Alterity: A Dialogical Understanding of International Relations. Millennium 31, no. 1: 1-26.

Hancock, Jan. 2007. Human Rights and US Foreign Policy. New York: Routledge.

Hodges, Adam. 2007. The Narrative Construction of Identity: The adequation of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden in the War on Terror. In Discourse, War and Terrorism, ed. Hodges, Adam and Chad Nilep, 67-88. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Hopf, Ted. 2002. Social Construction of International Politics. Identities and Foreign Policies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Innes, Christopher. 1993. Avant Garde Theatre: 1893-1993. London: Routledge.

Jackson, Robert and Georg Sorensen. 2006. Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jestrovic, Silvija. 2000. Theatricalizing Politics / Politicizing Theatre. Canadian Theatre Review, no. 103 (Summer): 42-47.

Katzenstein, Peter. 1996. Cultural Norms and National Security. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Kaye, Nick. 1994. Postmodernism and Performance. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Locher, Birgit and Elisabeth Prugl. 2001. Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing Middle Ground. International Studies Quarterly 45, no. 1 (March): 111-129.

Maguire, Tom. 2004. Performing Stereotypes at Home and Abroad. In Political Performances: Theory and Practice, ed. Susan C. Haedicke, Deirdre Heddon, Avraham Oz and E.J. Westlake, 165-176. New York: Rodopi.

Neumann, Iver B. 2003. International Relations as Emergent Bakhtinian Dialogue. International Studies Quarterly 5, no. 1 (March): 137-140.

Park, Robert E. 1950. Race and Culture. Glencoe IL: The Free Press.

Pin-Fat, Veronique and Maria Stern. 2005. The Scripting of Private Jessica Lynch: Biopolitics, Gender and the 'Feminization' of the US Military. Alternatives 30 : 25-53.

Pollock, Dana. 2005. Remembering: Oral History Performance. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

Reus-Smit, Christian. 2001. Human Rights and the Social Construction of Sovereignty. Review of International Studies. 27: 519-38.

Sartre, Jean Paul. 1954. Introduction. In Genet: The Maids and Deathwatch, ed. Bernard Frechtman. New York: Grove Press.

2


Schechner, Richard. 1977. Essays on Performance Theory 1970-1976. New York: Drama Books Specialists.

———. 1985. Between Theatre and Anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

———. 1988. Performance Theory. London: Routledge.

———. 2002. Performance Studies: An Introduction. London: Routledge.

———. 2004. Carnival (Theory) After Bakhtin. In Carnival: Culture in Action, ed. Riggio, Milla Cozart, 3-12. New York: Routledge.

Seabrooke, Leonard. 2007. The Everyday Social Sources of Economic Crises: From “Great Frustrations” to “Great Revelations” in Interwar Britain. International Studies Quarterly 51, no. 4 (December): 795-810.

Sjosted, Roxanna. 2007. The Discursive Origins of a Doctrine. Foreign Policy Analysis 3, no. 3 (July): 233-254.

Sylvester, Christine. 2002. Feminist International Relations: An Unfinished Journey. New York: Routledge.

———. 2003. Dramaturgies of Violence in International Relations. Borderlands E-Journal. 2, no. 2 (October).

Turner, Victor. 1974. Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Willett, John. 1968. The Theatre of Bertolt Brecht. New York: WW Norton.

2

Dialogue and Performativity: Using Performance Studies to ...€¦ · Web viewUsing the tools of Performance Studies to analyze how calculated violence is employed in a media ...

Documents