kris verdonck - locations of dramaturgy

7/22/2019 Kris Verdonck - Locations of Dramaturgy

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kris-verdonck-locations-of-dramaturgy 1/9

This article was downloaded by: [The University Of Melbourne Libraries]On: 25 June 2012, At: 10:37Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Performance Research: A Journal of the Performing ArtPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rprs20

Locations of Dramaturgy – Kris VerdonckPeter Eckersall

Available online: 25 Jun 2012

To cite this article: Peter Eckersall (2012): Locations of Dramaturgy – Kris Verdonck, Performance Research: A Journal of the

Performing Arts, 17:3, 68-75

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13528165.2012.696864

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyoexpressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses shouldbe independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with or arising out of the use of this material.

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13528165.2012.696864

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rprs20



68 PERFORMANCE RESEARCH 17·3 : pp .68-75

ht tp : / /dx .doi .org/10.1080/13528165.2012.696864

To nd this life in objects returns us to life, toexperiences of life arriving from inside us andoutside us, in all of its surprise, its energy ofconict. (Gross 2011: 165)

Drawing on his interests in visual arts andtheatre studies, Kris Verdonck creates art

works using spatially transforming elementssuch as light, haze, water and projections. His works combine elements of installation andperformance art and utilize high-denition video and machinic objects. They break with established genres of performance yet they invoke theatre as a primary sourceof inspiration and insight. As I will argue,Verdonck explores ideas of theatre as a way offraming a sensible encounter that combines

physical properties and metaphorical aspects.Even with the presence of high technology, heseems to want to recuperate an almost classicaland formal idea of theatre wherein the capacityto show things to an audience is powerfullyevoked through a demonstrable framing

of the notion of theatrical space. Verdonckcreates situations where acts of watching andexperiencing his performances are embodiedand self-reexive, where a memory of theatre(in contrast to Camillio’s ‘theatre of memory’)as a primary experience is always evoked. Atthe same time, his ‘theatre’ often questions the very idea of liveness and is presented in variousstages of redundancy and reinvention: to actis useless, but to act is to go on, to paraphraseSamuel Beckett, whose texts are sometimesadapted in Verdonck’s performances. Coheringhis work is the notion of ‘gures’: forms and

objects manipulated in the artistic processand ‘acting’ (‘ figuur ’ from the Dutch can betranslated to mean a ‘character’ or ‘personage’) while also having a conceptual focus on thechanging purview of gures in the context ofexpressive media.

I argue that this encounter is productivelyseen as dramaturgical in the sense thatVerdonck uses, and subverts the vocabulary ofperformance-making in expressive ways. Thus,I aim to focus on the question of dramaturgyin Verdonck’s work and think about the waysthat his dramaturgy refashions ideas of theatre.

In an exploration of two contrasting art worksmade by Verdonck in 2011, aided by an extendedconsideration of the idea of the gure, I aimto show how Verdonck’s work is proposing anexperimental dramaturgy and a memory oftheatre as a transforming medium.

Locations of Dramaturgy – Kris Verdonck P E T E R E C K E R S A L L

■ Eckersall (right)

and colleague

prepare to visit Exote.

Photo: Sara Jansen.

I SSN 1352-8165 p r in t /1469-9990 on l ine

© 2012 TAYLOR & FRANCIS



E X O T E

A recent study lists more than 100 invasivealien species that currently threaten the nativebiodiversity of Belgium and the surroundinglandscape (Belgian Biodiversity Group 2011).After consulting with specialists and gainingthe appropriate permissions, Verdonck selectedseveral invasive fauna and ora to incubatein a verdant garden installation called Exote (2011). The garden itself was arranged in a largeroom made to look like a conservatorium.Visitors wishing to enter had to wear protectiveclothing of the kind seen in science laboratories,

including white coats, protective boots andgloves. While making for an obligatory costumefor audiences viewing the installation, thepurpose of the clothing was serious: to preventthe further spread of the invasive species intothe outside world whereby participants wouldbecome unwitting carriers of prohibited stamenor seeds. Compounding this metaphor, I alsoheard a rumour of there being hidden strands ofpoison ivy and possible bird strikes in the room– not accurate, but nevertheless a creepy ‘Dayof the Trifds’ image that exaggerated the senseof danger. In this sense, white coats and other

accoutrements point to the monstrous and vengeful forces of nature rebelling against thehopelessly ill-prepared and destructive spirit ofhumankind – a standby for the Gaia Principleand other strands of ecological criticism. Thedramaturge Marianne van Kerkhoven who works

with Verdonck on many of his projects wrotein a presentation note: ‘EXOTE’s aim is not toposition itself within the scientic debate onbiological invasions, but to be a metaphor toreect on our interactions with the environment within which we live’ (van Kerkhoven 2011:33). As the installation grew and transformed(it was a new work in Verdonck’s retrospectiveshow Exhibition #1, held from the beginningof May to mid-August 2011 at Z33 House ofContemporary Art in Belgium), plants andanimals exhibited a Darwinian habitus withsome prominent invasive species taking over

the installation and others becoming extinctand rotting: ‘a sort of mono-world overgrown with just a few species’ evolved (van Kerkhoven2011: 33). Indeed, to return to van Kerkhoven,this is a prescient metaphor for contemporarytimes. Exote’s ecological paradigm reects onissues such as migration, global capitalism andhuman evolution.

Wearing protective gear into the space ofperformance is beguilingly reexive. As one visitor wrote:

Once you’re inside [the installation], it’s easy

to forget that these are ‘invasive alien species.’Take the green parakeets. In 1975, there were

only roughly 50 of them when the manager of anamusement park decided to release them in the

wild. Thousands … can now be found in Brusselsparks and suburbs. (Regine 2011)

■ Exote. Photo: Kristof

Vrancken

E C K E R S A L L : LO C A T I O N S O F D R A M A T U R G Y – K R I S V E R D O N C K



70

Exote was overpowering with the strong smellsof growth and decay of the living species andtheir habitats of murky ponds and bambooforests entering the nostrils and the clammyair likewise creating a disturbing atmosphere.Entering through the white sterile dressingroom into the controlled space of the exhibit,one confronted a messy version of nature wherein (at least after two months, whenI viewed the work in July) the dysfunctionalecosystem struggled to stay alive.

Participation in Exote makes a strange gardeninto a performative encounter and a living

theatre into a biosphere. The liveness of thespace is transforming and the audience enteringmerely plays into this social drama taking therole of yet another potentially alien species andtaxonomical order. The work poses questionsabout real-world ecological and geopoliticalproblems while also offering an idea ofparticipatory performance that is literally andguratively showing dialectical and at the sametime apocalyptic tendencies. This sense ofdialogue played out in the social dramaturgyof placing audiences in relation to the objectsin the performance is an ongoing interest for

Verdonck and appears in different guises inmany of his other works as well.

To take an example of one of Verdonck’s early works, In (2003) shows human bodies suspendedin large water-lled tanks as if they have beenmysteriously transported there from their

daily life into an embalming uid-like stasis.Audiences confront the fully dressed humanforms that are like scientic specimens froma museum, or giant versions of taxonomy jarsfrom a school biology class of fty years ago.The skin of each of the performers is pallidand clean; the water seems to magnify eachanimal feature of the body with the result thatsmall hairs and blemishes and folds in the skinand clothing seem to take on an aura of hyper-reality. The most striking and uncanny aspectof the work is that the eyes of the performersremain open and unblinking. In documentary

footage of In, viewers seem to be wondering ifthe bodies are alive. Kurt Vanhoutte’s analysisof In suggests that the work’s ‘theatrical settinginvites the audience to scrutinize the objects …at the same time, enacting the power of a gazethat reverses’ (Vanhoutte 2010: 475–6). Thereis an exchange in which there is a tangible andunsettling sense of the objects looking back atthe viewer. The resulting ‘cognitive mapping’ ofspace creates a profound sense of ambivalence,Vanhoutte argues (2010: 478–9). The objects –called ‘gures’ by Verdonck – are scrutinized bythe viewer and then return the gaze in various

uncanny ways.In Exote, similar questions about biology

and species habitat are raised. The gaze is alsoreversed as a result of the ways that Verdonckdisplays the garden in a confronting relationshipto the viewer. Keeping in mind that the threat of

■ Exote. Photo: Kristof

Vrancken

PERFORMANCE RESEARCH 17·3 : ON TECHNOLOGY & MEMORY



being exposed to the hazardous surroundings isintrinsic to the work, participation by audiencemembers is therefore regulated by this fact. Theact of dressing and the containment devicesof large plastic curtains through which theaudience gains entry reinforce this narrative.This is a reminder that we accept variousregimes of quarantine and enforce border zonesin everyday life. But what implications arethere for a quarantined theatre–a necessaryact of restraint to avoid infection perhaps,or a homeopathic warning of the impendingdanger of art? It seems that in Exote Verdonckhas staged an Artaudian idea of infection andalso a dialectical encounter with contemporaryconstructions of power as evidenced in the

gradual progression of the ecological dystopiathat unfolds. Themes of protection, risk, harm,territorial freedom and aggressive invasion areall visible while they are at the same time self-evidently alive and creating their own motionand life-force; ironically an immanent senseof possibility and end times is simultaneouslyenacted as a durational event lasting the threeand half-month lifecycle of the exhibition.Vanhoutte’s use of the term ‘theatre’ todescribe the installation of In is also relevant.A botanical garden of rogue species inside an artgallery is a theatrical gesture giving rise to the

notion of seeing and being seen as an activelyinvasive encounter.

Exote’s discomfort for the viewer is an aspectof Verdonck’s interest in ideas of alienation andthe uncanny. As he notes in a recent interview:

The core theme of my work is ‘Unheimlichkeit’ or

alienation. This arises by creating an environment

which has a direct inuence on the players. It

is a situation that is strange and unpleasant.…

In EXOTE, I’m continuing on with the common

thread of my earlier work. But the physical

inuence of the created environment now

concerns not the performers, but the viewers

instead. (Verdonck and Van Kerkhoven 2011: 11)

Exote shows characteristics of Verdonck’sapproach to making art in stark relief– including his creation of apocalypticimages and auratic gures requiring our

participation and entering the body as possiblyunwelcome interventions.

We can now examine how Verdonck connectsthese ideas through a reconsideration ofperformance as a medium of gures – anobject-based theatre that has expressly movedperformance into a vast interdisciplinary eld wherein human participation is transformed in various disrupting ways.

O N T H E I D E A O F T H E F I G U R E

It is not surprising to nd out that sources ofinspiration for Verdonck include Heinrich vonKleist’s celebrated essay ‘On the MarionetteTheatre’, written in 1810, one year before Kleist

ended his own life at the young age of thirty-four(Conversation 2011). Composed as a dialoguebetween Kleist and a ballet master, the essayaddresses the theme of consciousness and thecomplex, divided nature of human existence.Using the gure of the marionette, Kleist’sessay discusses the problem of representingthe fullness of human experience in art. Headvocates using technological apparatus suchas puppets that are able to show emotion anddepict human sensations with veracity. Themarionette is an object – or gure in Verdonck’sterms – that lacks a performer’s ego; it is not

divided or conicted. It is both an abstractionand a biomechanical representation of humanform, the combination of which is powerfullyaffective. But how does this technology showthe veracity of human experience? For Kleist, itis about freeing-up expressive possibilities inperformance: the marionette transcends gravity,is utilitarian and ultimately more expressivethan the capabilities of the human actor – thatare limited by physiology, eshy weight, ego,nerves and a biomechanically limited capacity toexist in time and space. His essay considers therelationship between human and non-human

actors, noting that the soul – a wondrous stateof expressive self-awareness and an importantfactor in the aesthetics of Romantic art – liesnot in rational thought but in the potential foraction; a potential that can be better expressed inthe gure-object of the marionette.




72

Kenneth Gross’s comments on Kleist’s essayin his book Puppet: An essay on uncanny life (2011) point to some of the wider implicationsfor considering artistic abstraction in this way. Gross’s work explores puppet-objects as

a means of unifying creative expression. He isinterested in joining the conceptual elements of

performance such as idea and imagination withthe material objects and actions of making anartwork. Thus, he writes:

The soul lies in the motion it has as a materialobject and not a living body, and it is this to whichthe puppeteer must give himself to, to which hemust lend his own living soul, desire and bodilymotion. (Gross 2011: 63)

In a similar vein, Verdonck’s work is ‘object’-based in ways that can be compared to AntoninArtaud’s mechanic idea of performance, orthe use of objects in Sintesi performancesby the Italian Futurists (see Ramsay 2010).Edward Gordon Craig’s übermarionette theatre also comes to mind (Craig, 2009).Verdonck›s work is not arising from the senseof frustration with theatrical form that drivethese modernist artists, however; it is to placeobjects in ambiguously theatrical interactiveenvironments that Verdonck’s work aims for.Everything in the theatrical frame is a gure;thus, as Laermans’s notes, ‘performativequalities and potentialities of both human and

non-human actions [are] equal’ (Laermans2010: 415). It is also the fact that these ‘quasi-bodies’ (Laermans, 2010: 415), or manifestgures, in Verdonck’s performances connect with ideas of strangeness, thereby revisitingthe vital idea to make the work an expression

of unheimlichkeit (uncanny-alienation)impressions. The ‘quasi-body’ status of thegures as liminal and, hence, potentiallytransforming, is of primary interest here.

Finally, the coincidental use of the word‘gure’ in Jacques Rancière’s recent writing onpolitics and art is also interesting to consider inrelation to Verdonck’s use of the term.

The art of the aesthetic age has never stopped

playing on the possibility that each medium could

offer to blend its effects with those of others, to

assume their role and thereby create new gures,

reawakening sensible possibilities which they had

exhausted. (Rancière 2009: 113)

In shifting inert object-gures suchas marionettes into sensate, expressive,performative and dramatic modes ofrepresentation, Verdonck’s objects and formsexpress feelings and emotions; they ‘reawakensensible possibilities’ and everyday thingsare transformed. Further, an evident ‘blend ofeffects’ in Verdonck’s work, combining humanand machine elements and rendering humanexpression into ‘quasi-bodies’, supposes a porousinterdisciplinary approach to performance,the uncanny new relationships of which createdisturbance. This is ultimately a way to presage

the possibility of new forms of expression.

A C T O R # 1

A discussion of the three-part work, Actor #1, helps to develop this point. This performanceat the Festival a/d Werf, Utrecht, in July 2011,explored three treatments of the idea of thegure of the actor. The performance proposeda substantive re-imagining of an actor’s rolethrough ‘refunctioning’ (umfunktionierung ,Brecht 1992: 42) and ‘retooling’ the actor’sphysical presence in the space. Terms and

ideas connected to processes of acting such as‘character’, ‘agency’, ‘expression’, ‘truth’ and‘pretence’ were realized by means includingrobots, gaseous substances and projectionsof human forms. In other words, Actor #1 shows a variety of gures in the expression

■ Image 3: Dancer #3.

Photo: Reinout Hiel




of a performance of actors, and in that waydraws attention to how theatre is ineluctablyconnected to the presentation of acting, butmore importantly, how acting has been bothextended and disputed as a practice in waysthat have dramatically intensied in recenttimes with the introduction of media andother forms of interactive technology. ‘Howdoes an actor act?’ is a question that hasbeen considered by artists and scholars formillennia. But the question of how acting hasbeen transformed by new media dramaturgiesin the theatre is only now gaining moreattention. Verdonck’s work is interestingprecisely for how it engages with historical andphilosophical questions of acting mingling with

contemporary perspectives on media and thebody. He combines ontological questions thathave been raised throughout the long history ofaesthetic theory with more immediate politicaland cultural ideas about the displacement ofthe body in contemporary art.

This is immediately apparent in the rst partof the performance called Mass, consisting ofa swirling mass of smoke that seemingly occurs without human agency. As viewers entereda darkened room, a dense fog emanating froma central pool seemed to begin to breathe.People were free to walk around the piece and

often lowered their hands into its depths orsimply watched its slow-moving undulations.Sound effects amplied the industrial hissingsounds of the smoke and made for an intenseatmosphere. The sensual qualities of the work were a contrast to the dry tone of the programnote, describing Mass as: ‘A poetic landscapeof constantly moving sculpted mists in whichchemical and physical processes are takingplace’ (Festival a/d Werf 2011).

Verdonck wanted Actor #1 to explore statesof creation ranging from chaos to order withthe likely assumption that Mass as the rst

work in the triadic sequence points to a kindof chaotic sublime state. The drifting qualitiesof the smoke suggest this. All the same, givenVerdonck’s interest in taxonomy and the manyreferences to science in his work, there isanother perspective to consider. In scientic

literature mass is a measure of resistance. Themetaphor is an interesting one to consider.Resistance is not only a scientic term but a keyproblematic in contemporary art – where artstands against and proposes alternatives to

the status quo. Indeed it could be argued thatresistance to power elites is essential to survivaland is an important measure of our times thatis reected in contemporary cultural productionmore broadly. Additionally, if we think aboutmass resistance as public protest we returnto the image of a swirling mass – of bodiesattempting to express an ineffable awesomepower. While this is not an obvious reference forthe work it is an intriguing possibility – to thinkabout how the immersion in the sensory worldof Mass that is a performance without humanagency might also propose an idea of human

resistance. A theatrical scene without bodies with the eventual aim to activate bodies in the wider social space is an intriguing proposition.

Moving to a second room, the audience viewed a third-sized projected image of an actorperforming excerpts from Samuel Beckett’stext Lessness (1969) in a work called Huminid . Huminid seems to be a play on the word‘hominid’ – an extinct bipedal mammal of theape family. The projected image is seeminglythree-dimensional, exceptionally sharp andcompletely life-like. In actual fact, the actor inthe scene, Johan Leysen, has been lmed and

his performance was projected on to a scaledthree-dimensional form of his body set in themiddle of the darkened space. The performanceis all the more compelling because of Leysen’ssonorous performance of Beckett’s text and theregular iteration of the phrase ‘Little body little

■ Image 4: Dancer #3.

Photo: Hendrik De Smedt




74

block heart beating ash grey only upright’ that isused in various poetic arrangements throughoutthe text. In fact, the ‘little body’ is Verdonck’srepresentation of a homunculus. As vanKerkhoven notes in a dramaturgical statement:

HUMINID is inspired by the history of the creationof the ‘homunculus’. This is an articial miniature

human that philosophers, alchemists and scientistshave sought over the centuries since Greekantiquity. In HUMINID, the spectator is addressed

directly by a creature that can be called part humanand part doll. (van Kerkhoven 2011: 24)

In the nal sequence of Actor #1, an epiloguefollowing the three performance installations,the homunculus is addressed conceptually ina projection of a talk by the philosopher and

mathematician Jean-Paul Van Bendegem.He discusses the complicated allegorical,alchemical history of the homunculus, whichspans medieval thinking and the Enlightenmentand has contemporary uses in science as a termthat denotes a scaled model of the humanbody. The homunculus is a representation ofKleist’s marionette refashioned as a clone in

Huminid ; it is an object that presents a humanactor in an act of radical transformation, even

distillation. It is between a creative propositionof life and the ‘little body/little block heart’poetic reection on the painful nature ofexistence. It is also made ‘virtual’ by the fact ofthe projection. With the use of video images andtime compression that the gure plays with, theperformance shows how ideas of technologicalreproduction open new perspectives onexistence. Audiences are drawn to question theliveness of the homunculus that looks and actsso uncannily life-like in the space and yet isshrunk and can only repeat the same desiccatedfragment of text; a text that is arguably, like allof Beckett’s texts, a mediation on our precariousstate of existence as a species.

The last work in Actor #1 is called Dancer #3 .

It takes the form of a machine in the shape ofa large piston – a kind of elaborate Pogo Stick

that stands on a central platform. The objectemits squeaky blips in an uncanny imitationof R2-D2’s vernacular ‘robot speak’ in the1977 lm Star Wars and thus seems to createempathy among the audience, feelings thatare aided by the anthropomorphic effect of theobject’s two speakers that are positioned likeeyes on the object’s ‘head’.

The performance itself involves the object’sattempts to jump in the air, a repetitious andredundant gesture that ultimately fails when

it loses its balance and topples over. A smalldrama is played-out as the object is lifted byan umbilical cord and righted only to beginjumping again. The routine is varied andalthough a computer terminal controlling therobot’s operating program is visible in thebackground, Dancer #3 seems to be performingspontaneously; waiting as the tension buildsand then going off. The inevitable falls drewsighs of concern from the audience on thenight I viewed the work, while the manictap-dancing routine evoked laughter: ‘a robot… trying to stand up straight; he always falls

down again, but never gives up. His energy andclumsiness display the optimism of a clown who is always tripping over’ (Festival a/d Werf2011). Dancer #3 is a variation on Verdonck’sinterest in redundant objects. Lisa Wiegelargues that this reects his focus on an essential

■ Image 6: Huminid.

Photo: Reinout Hiel




interdependence between body and machine(Wiegel 2010: 48), a statement for the inevitableontological confusion of human experience inour time. In fact, the totality of the performanceof Actor #1 is an arrangement of guresexpressing this idea. The mist, the homunculusand the dancer are all actors by other means –both body and machine – ‘objects that return usto life’ and, at the same time, the memory of thelife of objects is suggested.

C L O S I N G : T H E A U T H E N T I C I T Y O F

R E A L I T Y

In closing, I want to briey return to theidea of uncanniness that is so important

in Verdonck’s work. We have seen how thegures enact feelings of disturbance andengage with audiences in uncanny ways. Ina recent conversation, van Kerkhoven givessome background to Verdonck’s expression ofthe uncanny, noting that the German sourcefor the term unheimlich literally translatesas ‘unhomely’ or ‘out of place’ (Conversation2011). Freud’s concern with the unheimlich was with sources and experiences of disturbanceand fear. By extending this to include an ideaof ‘unhomeliness’, we can also see how theuncanny signals outsider experiences and

political questions about life at various margins.This idea creates a critical distance from whichto observe the evolving vocabulary of the work.In this sense it is also a dramaturgy that isself-evident in the foregrounding of the guresin ways that are clearly invested in evoking theidea of theatrical encounter. We saw this in thediscussion of each of the works above, especiallyin the ways that Verdonck involves audiencesin the subjective and immersive experienceof the performance. We also experienced thisidea in the ways that audiences negotiated thetheatrical space itself.

The gures in these works are haunting andghostly, but also aim to be substantive versionsof theatre. ‘Because they are constructed frominstallation art practices they have a depthand authenticity associated with reality’(Conversation 2011). They perform actions –

falling, hopping, owing – elements, withoutgravity but with consequences that arise fromthe repetitious and deeply troubling unhemlichactions. In other words, Verdonck’s explorationof redundant dramaturgies, liminal bodies andlooking back askance at audiences aims to putthe unhomely back into the idea of theatre.

R E F E R E N C E S

Agamben, Giorgio (2009) What is an Apparatus and Other

Essays, trans. D. Kishik and S. Pedatella, Stanford: StanfordUniversity Press.

Belgian Biodiversity Group (2011) http:// ias.biodiversity.be/

species/all, 14 December, accessed 11 January 2012.

Brecht, Bertolt (1992) Brecht on Theatre, trans. and ed. J.Willett, New York: Hill & Wang.

Conversation (2011) between Peter Eckersall, Marianne vanKerkhoven and Kris Verdonck, Brussels, July.

Craig, Edward Gordon (2009) ‘The actor and the Über-marionette’, in Franc Chamberlain (ed.) On the Art of the

Theatre, London & New York: Routledge, pp. 27–48.

Festival a/d Werf (2011) www.festivalaandewerf.nl/detail.php?id=226, accessed 13 January 2012.

Gross, Kenneth (2011) Puppet: An essay on uncanny life, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Laermans, Rudi (2010) ‘Inpure gestures towards“choreography in general”: Re/Presenting Flemishcontemporary dance, 1982–2010’, Contemporary Theatre

Review 20(4): 405–15.

Ramsay, Gordon (2010) ‘The use of objects in Sintesi of theItalian Futurists’, Performance Research 12(4): 115–22.

Rancière, Jacques (2009) The Emancipated Spectator ,London: Verso.

Regine (2011) ‘EXOTE, an indoor garden for invasivealien species’, www.we-make-money-not-art.com/ archives/2011/08/exote-a-greenhouse-for-invasiv.php,accessed 11 January 2012.

Van Kerkhoven, Marianne (2011) ‘Exote’, Exhibition #1,Hasselt, Belgium: Z33 Huis voor Acteule Kunst, 33–4.

Van Kerkhoven, Marianne (2011), ‘Humind’, Exhibition #1,Hasselt, Belgium: Z33 Huis voor Acteule Kunst, 24.

Vanhoutte, Kurt (2010) ‘Two-fold Origin: Performinghybrids between theatre and media’, Contemporary Theatre

Review 20(4): 475–85.

Verdonck, Kris and Van Kerkhoven, Marianne (2011) ‘An

interview with Kris Verdonck’, Exhibition #1, Hasselt,Belgium: Z33 Huis voor Acteule Kunst, 7–13.

Wiegel, Lisa (2010) ‘Perception in a Digital Age: Analysingaesthetic awareness of changing modes of perception’,

RMA Dissertation, Utrecht: Utrecht University.


kris verdonck - locations of dramaturgy

Documents