Scenography Expanded An Introduction To
Scenography Expanded An Introduction To
Scenography Expanded An Introduction To
Nicholas Till
To cite this article: Nicholas Till (2017): Scenography expanded: an introduction to contemporary
performance, Studies in Theatre and Performance, DOI: 10.1080/14682761.2017.1413734
Article views: 20
BOOK REVIEW
The title of this book refers unmistakably to art critic Rosalind Krauss’s definitive essay ‘Sculpture
in the Expanded Field’ of 1979. In this brilliantly incisive text, Krauss identified a new field of
‘sculptural’ practices (land art, installations, constructions, etc.) that straddled the borders of
landscape and architecture, marking a terrain that was quite distinct from the familiar carved
or cast sculptural object of history.
Scenography, of course, engages some of the same terrain as Krauss’s expanded field of sculp-
ture – it may, for instance, be both ‘architecture’ and ‘not-architecture’, to use Krauss’s structuralist
categories. At what point does architectural scenography cease to be scenography and become
the now recognised practice of performance architecture? (And does it matter?) In an essay on
this question in a section of the book on Architectural Space, Thea Brejzek argues that the work
of a scenographer such as Anna Viebrock allows for critical reflection upon architectural forms
and spaces that the ‘aesthetic imprisonment’ of the architect (the phrase used by Jacques Herzog,
who as part of the team Herzog and de Meuron is best known for Tate Modern in London, but
who has also worked with de Meuron in theatre) doesn’t allow – although a radical architectural
practice such as the Viennese deconstructionists COOP HIMMELB(L)AU might beg to disagree.
The question that this thought-provoking collection of essays poses is whether what has
been called the ‘scenographic turn’ in recent theatrical and performance practices marks a dis-
tinctively new field of practice demanding empirical investigation, and enquiry into why such
practices should have emerged, or whether we are dealing rather with a reconceptualisation,
or new theorisation, of existing practices – proper critical attention at last being brought to an
under-recognised and under-theorised area of theatrical and performance-making. The answer,
of course, is a bit of both, which is what this book so usefully offers.
In the introduction to the book, McKinney and Palmer suggest that scenography has increas-
ingly become an ‘autonomous practice’ (5). But within this expanded field, where scenography
may refer to activities as varied as installation, land art, guided tour or street festival, are terms
like ‘scenography’ and ‘performance design’ even still useful, let alone the practice autonomous?
(Performance design itself is a slippery term – does it imply design for performance, or the design
of performance, in the way that people talk of event or project design?). The book also recog-
nises, however, that a practice like scenography is always dependent; the first section of the book
offers chapters by Christopher Baugh and Dorita Hannah on the impact of new technologies
upon our conceptualisations of the ontology of the scenographic space, liveness, materiality or
bodily presence and absence; ontological displacements that remain whether or not technology
is employed. In this respect any art is relational, and relationality is, indeed, a key concept in
this collection, along with materiality, affectivity and agency. These concepts draw upon some
trends in contemporary critical theory and philosophy, and a handful of thinkers recur through-
out this book as points of reference: the philosophers Karen Barad and Jane Bennett, part of a
group of philosophers associated with the ‘new materialism’, or ‘agential realism’ – the theory
that matter has agency and that agency is always relational; the social-anthropologist Tim Ingold
on the relation between human beings and their environment. In a theatrical context, argues
Dorita Hannah (as cited by Ethel Brooks and Jane Collins in their chapter on the scenographic
2 BOOK REVIEW
Nicholas Till
University of Sussex
[email protected]
© 2017 Nicholas Till
https://doi.org/10.1080/14682761.2017.1413734