International Theatre Olympics

The Artistic and Intercultural Power of Olympism

Jae Kyoung Kim

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9789811025723
• eBook ISBN:
  9789811025730
• Topic: Media & Performing Arts
• Subtopic: Performing Arts

This pivot examines how the Theatre Olympics, born in 1995, have served to enrich each host country's culture, community, and foreign relations. Looking at the host country's political, social, and cultural circumstances, it considers how the festival expands the notion of Olympism beyond its application to the Olympic Games, expressing the spirit of Olympism and interculturalism in each country's distinct cultural language.

It also emphasizes the festival's development over the twenty years of its existence and how each festival's staging has reflected the national identity, theatre tradition, and cultural interest of the hosting country at that time, as well as how each festival director's artistic principle has attempted to accomplish cultural exchange through their productions.

© The Author(s) 2016

Jae Kyoung KimInternational Theatre Olympics10.1007/978-981-10-2573-0_1

Begin Abstract

1. Introduction

Jae Kyoung Kim¹

(1)

Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea

Abstract

This book analyzes the Theatre Olympics chronologically from the first event in 1995 to the most recent one in 2014. By analyzing the first six Theatre Olympics in chronological order, this book addresses the following ideas: how each festival expressed the spirit of Olympism in each country’s distinct cultural language, how each festival’s theme supported the idea of interculturalism, and how each festival’s attendees attempted to accomplish cultural exchange. This book also examines how the Theatre Olympics has served to enrich each host country’s culture, community, and foreign relations.

Keywords

Origin of the Theatre OlympicsDirector’s festivalOlympismCoubertin

End Abstract

Putting aside their busy schedules and different projects for a few days in June 1994, six theatre artists—Núria Espert (Spain), Antunes Filho (Brazil), Tony Harrison (United Kingdom), Yuri Lyubimov (Russia), Suzuki Tadashi (Japan),¹ and Robert Wilson (United States)—arrived at the Athens International Airport and headed to the Attis Theatre in Athens, Greece. Unfortunately, Heiner Müller (Germany), who was supposed to join them, could not make the trip due to illness. Greek director Theodoros Terzopoulos, who was the host of this meeting, welcomed each one of them with open arms. Despite their different nationalities, languages, and ideologies, these artists were excited to see each other, like old friends after a long absence. Although some of them had been in Greece before, this occasion might have been the first time they could enjoy the freedom of meeting with like-minded artists without the burden of an official schedule or the obligation of performing a show. This group of artists then made a short trip to Delphi, a significant archeological site in Greek culture and arts located in lower central Greece, about a 3-hour drive from Athens. No place could give these artists more spiritual and artistic inspiration than Delphi, which overflows with mythological and theatrical heritage. In their short but pleasant time there, they openly discussed the current needs of the theatre: how to revive the past glory of theatre and promote an international network for future theatre artists. As a result of this meeting, they agreed to inaugurate a new international theatre festival that would embrace different theatre traditions, respect diverse cultures, and encourage intercultural networking among theatre artists around the world. This agreement gave rise to the basic philosophy of the festival’s charter, which was also a product of their previous meetings, including the one in Shizuoka, Japan, a year earlier, and of their official/unofficial communication before and after the Delphi meeting.

Between the end of the eventful and critical twentieth century and the dawn of the uncharted twenty-first, these artists sought to create a new form of networking that could connect past, present, and future theatre artists. Having traveled to various foreign festivals, they had each been exposed to different cultures and theatrical expressions, but they envisioned an ideal theatre festival, one that would encourage aesthetic freedom and be indifferent to commercial success. They called the festival “The International Theatre Olympics” (hereafter, Theatre Olympics), giving it the subtitle “Crossing Millennia” to signify the cross-fertilization of the past and the future. As their pilgrimage to Delphi signified, ancient Greek mythology and classics had been a great inspiration to these artists. Accordingly, they returned to their own countries with a promise to meet again and perform, at the first Theatre Olympics, new works inspired by the ancient Greek tragedies. This promise, made on June 18, 1994, in Athens, Greece, marks the beginning of the Theatre Olympics.

The Avant-Garde, Auteur-Directors, and the Director’s Festival

This book grew out of my curiosity about the Theatre Olympics and then developed from my desire to trace the festival’s history through the lens of Olympism. What motivation drove these world-renowned artists—who had until then been invited independently to theatre festivals, ran individual theatre companies, and organized local events—to create a new festival together? Why did they consider a theatre festival to be a place to bridge different time periods, generations, nationalities, and cultures? How is their festival different from other existing international theatre festivals managed by local specialists? Finally, have the festival’s achievements fulfilled the original goal? And can it truly claim the name of “Theatre Olympics” without giving offense to other festivals and artists? I aim to address these questions associated with the festival’s name, “Olympics,” and its artistic muse, “Olympic spirit.”

Before searching for the answers, I would like to find a common denominator for the eight founding artists. Although using a definitive aesthetic to classify them is impossible, “avant-garde” and “auteur” might be the most appropriate terms under which to group them all and identify their status in world theatre. While the early avant-garde movement was initiated by a particular group of artists who demonstrated a strong political message against existing social, political, cultural, and artistic conventions through their radical and experimental creations, the term has gradually been expanded and widely applied to various art forms. Nowadays, as Christopher Innes states, the avant-garde movement could apply to “any type of art that is anti-traditional in form” (Innes 1993, p. 1). Innes has reached the conclusion that in avant-garde theatre, a philosophical alliance is more essential than stylistic similarity: “its members are linked by a specific attitude to western society, a particular aesthetic approach, and the aim of transforming the nature of theatrical performance: all of which add up to a distinctive ideology” (p. 4). From this point of view, the eight founders are avant-garde if, at the very least, we acknowledge their rare effort to initiate a theatre festival that originated from the Olympic spirit and favored artistic communication.

As avant-garde movements evolved from marginal to mainstream phenomena, many directors have attempted to infuse avant-garde elements into their diverse artistic styles, gain international popularity through worldwide tours, and stage larger and richer productions with generous support from governments, cultural organizations, or theatre festivals. The eight founders, without exception, underwent a similar process. They enthusiastically attended many festivals and worked with theatre companies around the world in the 1970s and 1980s respectively, and thereby had established a solid position within the global theatre market by the end of the twentieth century.

Even with their international fame, however, each artist possessed a persistent artistic philosophy that resisted the conventions of modern theatre, a tendency I call the auteur element. Since the power of direction took hold in European theatre, critics have used the term “auteur-director” to describe directors who establish their own distinct productions, artistic styles, and acting methods. Since David Bradby raised the notion of “directors’ theatre” and defined the principles that drive well-known directors (Bradby and Williams 1988), several scholars have published books about the productions, directorship, and acting methods of the founders, including Suzuki (Allain 2011; Carruthers and Yasunari 2004), Lyubimov (Beumers 1997; Gershkovich 1988), and Wilson (Holmberg 2005). However, even identifying all eight founders as “directors” is somewhat problematic because despite their directing careers, one is better known as an actress (Espert), one as a poet (Harrison), and one as a playwright (Müller). Nevertheless, these three also illuminated their directing capacity, each with a poetic and performative intuition, which was enough to build mutual interest among other founders and qualify them to share the title of auteur-directors.

In the early 1990s, these eight artists began to be regarded as veterans in the theatre world. Befitting their status and meeting the demands of the times, they often performed secondary tasks: running various cultural institutions, organizing national events of culture, representing their own country’s artistic traditions, and leading young artists. Explaining how many directors have filled multiple roles and how their status has risen in the twenty-first century, Maria M. Delgado and Dan Rebellato state that the role of director has evolved from “metteur en scène” [literally “scene-setter”] to “the directeur or intendant” (Delgado and Rebellato 2010, p. 8). Under these circumstances, when the veteran directors gathered to launch their theatre festival, they felt no compulsion either to create a specific regulation or to set a political agenda that might have an influence on the directors’ creative works. Instead, they, under the name of “Olympics,” considered each other as a representative of their respective nations and respected each member’s individuality. Because this alliance was voluntary and undemanding, they were free to use the festival to experiment artistically and openly exchange different points of view. Meanwhile, they also solidified the director’s role as an intercultural leader, one who could educate the young artists who would lead the next generation of theatre. At that particular time, their alliance to create the Theatre Olympics may have been a desirable choice before them. With their international fame, long experience, and artistic maturity, they could explore the true potential of a “directors’ festival.”

Do International Theatre Festivals Matter Today?

As international travel and communication have become more feasible, theatre artists have been eager to export their productions, and theatre producers have become more proactive in their attempts to import popular foreign productions. The mass-industrialized theatre companies, including Broadway musical companies, have already encroached on the world theatre market with their mega-productions. As a result of expansion overseas by these Western companies, people in the East, similar to New Yorkers and Londoners, can easily attend world-famous productions at local theatre venues. At the same time, these global “McTheatres,” a term coined by Dan Rebellato after the global franchise restaurant McDonald’s, have virtually blocked the overseas activities of independent theatre directors who manage small-scale theatre companies (Rebellato 2009, pp. 40–42). Unlike McTheatre companies, which profit by selling their franchise across the world, some production companies encourage individual artistic creation and manage their own international activities. Change Performing Arts, an independent production company in Milan, Italy, is one example. Working with many world-renowned artists, including Robert Wilson, Peter Stein, Philip Glass, and Tim Yip, the company not only assists artists in the creative process but also arranges international performance tours. As a result, each artist is able to focus on his or her creative work without having to attend to technical and practical issues. However, only a small number of artists are fortunate enough to enjoy this type of professional service. Many theatre directors and their companies have to devise their own ways of breaking into the international market.

For directors, participating in theatre festivals overseas is a gateway into the world theatre market, and presenting at a well-known theatre festival is more advantageous than an individual world tour. First of all, during a festival, directors have opportunities to evaluate their own productions by observing the responses of festival attendees, expand their artistic vision by watching other productions, and build a global network with other directors. In addition, festival participation guarantees various tangible benefits. Once a festival invites foreign directors, its affiliates provide excellent local support for staging the directors’ productions in the best possible conditions. Because the festivals generally pay negotiated performance fees to the directors, the festivals temporarily carry out the duties of a production company. They distribute publicity materials, sell tickets, and arrange venues and staffs. Of course, some festivals do not offer these ideal conditions. In the case of the Avignon Festival in Avignon, France, invited artists of the official “In” festival enjoy full support from the festival, but artists participating in the fringe “Off” festival have to rent their venues, prepare flyers by themselves, and lure potential spectators on the street. These differentiated services are likely necessitated by various factors, including the international profile of the artists, target audiences, ticket prices, festival management, and festival sponsorship. In any case, directors tend to welcome the opportunity to participate in many overseas festivals. Beyond these practical interests, attending famous international festivals gives directors the incomparable pride of contributing to cultural exchange through their artistic works. They become cultural diplomats.

International theatre festivals, whether organized by nonprofit organizations, local authorities, or private theatre companies, bring cultural benefits to their local communities. First of all, they offer local residents an unusual chance to watch a variety of shows in a short period of time. The array of additional events provided by a festival also enriches local cultural life. In the case of world-famous festivals, such as the Avignon Festival and the Edinburgh Festival, the hosting community reaps the economic benefits of tourism.

More than the scale of the program or the star power of the invited artists, a significant factor in judging the artistic quality of a theatre festival is the intercultural communication it promotes among attendees. Hosting a theatre festival means more than scheduling an array of individual theatre performances: the overall aesthetic direction of a festival matters. Each festival needs not only a skilled executive director who manages festival business but also a creative artistic director who guides the festival’s artistic vision. Driven by an artistic concept, the artistic director presents a blueprint for the festival program and determines which theatre productions will be featured. Without an attractive artistic concept, a festival is little more than a random collection of individual performances. Ideally speaking, a theatre festival is an integrated organism composed of individual performances and relevant secondary events such as workshops, concerts, street performances, and exhibitions. While the major performances, produced and staged individually, constitute the skeletal structure of a festival, the peripheral events are the muscles and tendons that hold it together, and the artistic concept is the lifeblood. The artistic value of the festival is heightened when the principles it embodies guide the productions of participating artists, when the festival creates a network for artistic exchange, and when the artists and spectators internalize the festival’s artistic goal. Despite the existence of numerous festivals, those that satisfy these requirements are difficult to find. Understanding this reality about the existing festivals also motivated the eight founders to envision a festival where these requirements would be met.

When first hearing the term “Theatre Olympics,” some are quick to raise the following questions: “Does theatre really have an Olympics? Is it related to the Olympic Games? If so, does it award medals?” In basic terms, the Theatre Olympics is an international theatre festival that revives the ancient Olympic spirit and resembles the format of the Olympic Games. However, the Theatre Olympics awards no medals because it promotes collaboration among artists rather than competition. Furthermore, as an independent, nonprofit cultural organization, the Theatre Olympics has no direct connection to the International Olympic Committee (IOC), though it did build a cooperative relationship with the 2001–2004 Cultural Olympiad, which was designed to reinforce the Olympic spirit in celebration of the 2004 Summer Olympic Games in Athens, Greece. Until recently, the idea that a theatre festival could be understood through the lens of Olympism was by no means evident. Furthermore, the theatre artists’ way of expressing the Olympic spirit may differ by country, culture, and age; however, Olympism as the principal tenet has guided the Theatre Olympics since its inauguration in 1994.

Olympism Applies to More than Sports

The term “Olympism” was first coined by Frenchman Baron Pierre de Coubertin (1863–1937), founder of the IOC, ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Frontmatter
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Tragedy Shall Last Forever
• 3. The East and the Nature
• 4. Theatre, Carnival, and the People
• 5. A Step Closer to Greece
• 6. Humanism and Globalization
• 7. Glory of Beijing Olympics
• 8. Conclusion
• Backmatter