If we agree that the real is a structural gap (it needs to be there in order for the triad to exist and it is still a gap), and if we agree that it is ineffable, how could we approach it? Could we approximate it through another gap such as silence? Eckhart Tolle asks his audience to pay attention to “the silent spaces […] in which the words happen”13. To him things, words, thoughts belong to the manifested world. There is also the unmanifested. By acknowledging the silent spaces we can be aware of the unmanifested, the ineffable. Although this sounds like a difference-between, space and silence can be viewed as pure differences. Silence is not the opposite of speech. It preexists and that is how we can hear the words. The space in between the words written on paper preexists in order for the marks to be visible. Of course one would say, the spacing when writing a text is mostly predetermined and even more so when typing
who says
that this is the only way
to write ?
Eckhart Tolle pauses and draws attention to the s i l e n t s p a c e s when he addresses his audience.
I think that silence as pure difference could be employed in performance to a p p ro a c h the real or a t least realness if we agree with Ridout.
What this practic a l l y means
silence and silent spaces in a performance
remains to b e i n v e s t i g a t e d
If we go
back again
to the thought that we can’t use language to access the ineffab l e r e a l
I s e e t h e r e anotherpossibility
nonlanguage
Whatisthat?
nongreeknongermannonenglishnonbodylanguagenonsignlanguagenonsymboliclanguagenoncolourlanguage
it is yet another exploration
Finally
I want to return to the lacanian triad (Symbolic-Imaginary-Real) and consider as Žižek does the three structural parts as correlating spheres14
all three parts need to be there for the structure to exist
the spheres intersect
there are spaces where two spheres at a time or all three of them intersect. Hence the spheres don’t exist separatelysymbolicimaginaryrealsymbolicimaginarysymbolicrealimaginaryrealrealrealimaginaryimaginarysymbolicsymbolic SYMBOLICimaginaryrealSYMBOLICimaginarySYMBOLICrealimaginaryrealrealrealimaginaryimaginarySYMBOLICSYMBOLICsymbolicIMAGINARYrealsymbolicIMAGINARYsymbolicrealIMAGINARYrealrealrealIMAGINARYIMAGINARYsymbolicsymbolicsymbolicimaginaryREALsymbolicimaginarysymbolicREALimaginaryREALREALREALimaginaryimaginarysymbolicsymbolicSYMBOLICIMaginaryRealSYMBOLICIMaginarySYMBOLICRealIMaginaryRealRealRealIMaginaryIMaginarySYMBOLICSYMBOLICsymbolICIMAGINARYRealsymbolICIMAGINARYsymbolICRealIMAGINARYRealRealReallMAGINARYMAGINARYsymbolicsymbolicSYMBOLICIMAGINARYrealSYMBOLICIMAGINARYSYMBOLICrealIMAGINARYrealrealrealIMAGINARYIMAGIARYSYMBOLICSYMBOLIC
if the spheres correlate then the real exists within the imaginary as well as within the symbolic
by presenting the symbolic which is re-presenting
by employing the imaginary
one could talk about the correlating real
I started by investigating representation and questioning the disciplined body’s ability to approach the real through the symbolic. An
d here I am revisiting representation
it sounds like a different representation than the one that I have experienced
in several theatre performances so far. The correlating spheres and the acknowledgment of the gap seem to have shed light on it.
silence
non-language
correlating spheres
it is an exploration in black and white and
for the b o d y in practice
