words and objects

I’m a very inexperienced viewer of performance art, and so I’ve particularly appreciated the wealth of comments.

One thing that surprises me a bit–and reminds me that I must do it all the time myself–is the policing reaction–e.g., the tit can’t be phallic, can’t be monumental. I’m also not sure I should call it “policing,” since I hardly think we can dispense with criticism.

Anyway, the importance of an object is that even one that’s as potently symbolic as a breast is that it’s more semantically open than a word, isn’t it? And the single tit, quite apart from the cancer reference (and I’m wondering how to factor in that empirical register except to really appreciate the empirical caring), by being single, becomes more open to varieties of interpretation ….

Was all the laughter playful? some motivated by relief?

I was struck by how lyrical Masa’s saxophone was toward the end. And the care with which Tari finished, and the luminous smile that came to her face then.

Masa said afterwards that as a musician, she was not used to the questions that were posed to her–or more fundamentally, to questions at all. Since I like her prose text so much, I wonder how we could formulate questions that would be more conducive. I also felt Tari’s responses might have changed some (in relation to emotion and distancing, especially) had we continued.

Which reminds me of the delicacy, patience, and imagination that verbal exchange requires ….

Looking forward to reading and discussing more–

Norma

pleasure, play, and an impressive Tit

I saw the “Dear Tari” documentary last year at the Gender Studies workshop, and I’ve remembered it vividly since– I was really excited to see Tari perform in person, because I find her performances incredibly moving. Given the emotional resonances I find in Tari’s work, I– like others, I think– was surprised when she said that she tries to keep emotion out of her performance (although she did say that she felt emotional last night), and the performance we saw last night, at least, is just about her interaction with an object. So maybe pleasure doesn’t seem like an “emotion,” in the same way that anger or frustration, whichTari feels toward a heteronormative society, does. Because pleasure seems exactly what last night’s performance was about– pleasure in one’s own body and it’s acoustical capacities, pleasure in moving, and orienting toward an object in a sensual, playful manner– pleasure in sharing that orientation with an audience… Tari’s face is extraordinarily expressive, particularly when seen WAY up close on a screen!, and her performance seems like a window into the most private recessess of pleasure and play. Her talent as a performer is illustrated in the ways that she makes this privateness a gift to her audience, who she brought into the performance in an extremely generous way. (Because didn’t you want to touch the Tit, yourself?)

On an unrelated note: one of the audience members mentioned in the Q&A that the Tit seemed phallic. I’ve been contemplating this comment– which could refer to the Tit as seeming “phallic” in terms of “like a penis” or even in terms of giving pleasure– but it could also refer to something about the imposing size of the Tit (which really does need to be capitalized!). So it’s actually amusing to me to think that “phallic” means, in a publically available heteronormative and male centric sort of way, “impressive.” Ha! I don’t think that’s what Tari had in mind, needless to say. But the comment did express the power, or something, of this sort of discourse. (Anyway, I’m trying to avoid seeming like I’m criticizing this woman for making that comment– because I’m pretty sure she wished she hadn’t said it, as soon as she had.)

What do you all think?