Ritual Performance

Rituals, and ritual behaviour, inform both the everyday life and the aesthetic art of a culture.

Agnicayana
Image Source: allempires.com

Schechner writes about the reproduction of various forms of ritual, such as the Agnicayana,[1] which was staged for filmic purposes. All performance, both ritual, everyday and aesthetic is subject to the Hawthorne effect: subjects modify their behaviour when observed. Or “the act of observing changes that which is being observed.” Even context changes the interpretation, and interpretation changes, to the observer, the action. In the case of the Agnicayana ritual, the original behaviours were changed due to filming and location constraints, but also because of modern-day sensibilities - substituting wrapped vine leaves in place of sacrificial goats. The past has been changed for the present.

Here modern behaviour has altered past behaviour, and therefore any future interpretation of this behaviour. In theatre, it is the ephemerality of performance which lends it impact, and the performance can only be understood in its present moment, which has been previously discussed.

Can we read the past within the confines and conventions of the present? If behaviour is formed from socially conditioned restored behaviours, then it can only be understood within the conventions of the context in which it was produced, which may conflict with our present understanding and/or conditioning.

Image Source: BT.com

Ritual performances, which have been staged for the purposes of being recorded and preserved carry their own form of ‘staged authenticity’ – they become the ‘original’ and form the basis for future reference.

There is an inherent contradiction in the idea of an ‘original reproduction’. Here the act of filming the ritual has changed it already through intercultural intervention – what was once a religious rite has become entertainment. Future reproductions based on the recording, which itself was Restored Behaviour, will inevitably change the interpretations of this ‘original’ behaviour.

Even performances in film and television, are subject to a faking of authenticity, in that behaviours on screen are rehearsed, codified and recorded. And ‘original film’ may be a splicing of many different takes, angels, and interpretations.

Often, ritual is reproduced as art. In India the ancient Bharatanatyam Dance has been resurrected: the ‘new’ dance is based on ancient temple art and sculpture. In the more recent past the same dance was performed as entertainment by prostitutes, who also claimed the dance as part of a history of temple performance. The ‘new’ dance stated that the more recent incarnation was a ‘corruption’ of the farther past, and that they have ‘purified’ and ‘renewed’ the true original. This is the past redefining the past in order to make it palatable for the present. This kind of history-rewriting-history can also be seen in ballet: the Paris Opera Ballet girls were referred to as “rats”, and were considered to be little more than prostitutes, but the modern incarnation of ballet stresses its royal roots from the court of King Louis XIV, and is now considered to be ‘high art’.

Dancing in the Attic of the Paris Opera House, ca. 1930
Image Source: vintag.es

When ritual, or culture, is commodified, it leads to the uncomfortable subject of cultural appropriation. Schechner writes that “Restorations need not be exploitations.”[2]
In the case of the Bharatanatyam Dance it is now a cultural signifier and is taught and performed across the world. Culture has been commercialised and commodified, and, as a performance art, has been dictated and driven by the consumer.

As this develops further, arts become a commercialised commodity: culture as a signifier of a privileged class. Schechner refers to “…genres of industrial leisure...”[3], reflecting the classification of culture to be something sold and consumed.

The conflict here is that cultural behaviours can die out without commercial interest, and cultures change to integrate this. For example, the Hula dance was originally performed by mature women – I would interpret this to reflect the power of matriarchy, fertility, and the feminine. However, to attract tourists, the modern dance is performed by young, slim, commercially ‘beautiful’ girls, which naturally changes the cultural interpretation but has, in turn, become part of the emic culture. Here commercial interests have changed a culture. In the case of the Mudmen of the Asaro River Valley, a ritual dance appears to have been created specifically to attract tourists, and the home culture has created a cultural history in order to present the dance as something emic. The creation itself has become part of the authentic culture.

This reflects Conquergood’s idea of the colonialization of culture, and what has been previously discussed – an etic view can only see what the emic culture wishes to display.

Turner writes about the pros and cons of different approaches to anthropology: “There are then both etic and emic ways of regarding narrative.”[4] As previously discussed, we learn both through analysis and immersion: the ‘emic’ view which is inherent from within a culture and the ‘etic’ view which is from without and tries to be general and objective. We carry our own emic bias, even when trying to be etic and this influences our views and readings. In part, I believe that homogenised Western culture creating a worldwide emic culture that is recognised even from an etic experience, influencing both our reading of a performance/behaviour, and the performance/behaviour itself.

Theyyam Fire Dance
Image Source: youtube.com

Performance sometimes develops directly out of ritual. Turner recognised this, writing “Often when ritual perishes as a dominant genre, is dies, a multipara, giving birth to ritualized progeny, including the many performative arts…”[5] Performance grows out of Restored Behaviours, and ritual, or ceremony, informs performative action within a culture. For example the Haka Dances, which are “…a fierce display of a tribe’s pride, strength and unity […] still used during Māori ceremonies and celebrations…”[6]  What was traditionally a war dance or ceremonial rite is now a cultural signifier, tourist attraction, and performance art.

Beautifully, also Turner writes that “…Ceremony indicates, ritual transforms…”[7] and Schechner recognises that “Immediately before going on stage, most performers engage in some ritual.”[8] This is literally ‘transforming’ into character.

---

[1] Richard Schechner, ‘Restoration of Behaviour’, in Between Theater and Anthropology (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985), from P.55,

[2] Ibid., P.65.

[3] Ibid., P.86.

[4] Victor Turner, ‘Social Dramas and Stories About Them’, in From Ritual to Theatre: The Human Seriousness of Play (New York: PAJ Publications, 1982), P.65.

[5] Ibid., pp.79-80.

[6] www.newzealand.com/uk/feature/haka/

[7] Victor Turner, ‘Social Dramas and Stories About Them’, in From Ritual to Theatre: The Human Seriousness of Play (New York: PAJ Publications, 1982), P.80.

[8] Richard Schechner, ‘Restoration of Behaviour’, in Between Theater and Anthropology (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985), P.105.