Abstract
Engaging with Asian traditional performance forms in Singapore’s globalised, urban and multicultural society entails rethinking the boundaries of culture and identity for learners exposed to primarily modern and Western forms of culture. It prods an acknowledgement that the contemporary condition is simultaneously modern and traditional, challenging these allegedly binary oppositions. It also points to the need for enlarged spaces to learn and understand tradition, in the face of intense modernization and complex global flows. That traditions of performance are largely seen as fixed, yet are in reality constantly adapting to change, suggests potent parallels with established notions of culture and identity that have to grapple with issues of reinvention and flux.
Nonetheless questions about how to effectively manage the task of cultivating interest and then generating meaningful learning processes for learners who are little exposed to traditional performance, emerge in my experience of conducting a compulsory module entitled Asian Traditional Theatre Forms for all Year 2 theatre students at the National Institute of Education. Issues of what is realistic as an introduction and contextualization of these complex and intricate forms having only 36 hours over 12 weeks to work with, and concerns about what is resonant to young adults who tend to consume primarily Western popular culture as their daily thoroughfare of art forms, inform the primary basis for my reflections in this chapter.
In the autoethnographic process of interrogating the choices made, I examine the work of dealing with traditional forms as an intertwining of ‘arborescent’ and ‘rhizomatic’ (Deleuze & Guattari) approaches to knowledge and culture. This frames my pedagogical process as a contextually based attempt to draw links and forge connections between the immediacy of everyday life and the seemingly remote realms of tradition. It is my argument that this engenders a critical curiosity about how the present is in many respects a ‘multiplicity’ (Deleuze & Guattari) that allows for tradition to enrich and enliven the contemporary. I also draw on responses from students to question whether and how this empowers a capacity for broader choices in a globalizing world.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Agamben qualifies the ‘archaic’ as close to the ‘origin’, and thus ‘not only situated in a chronological past’ but also ‘contemporary with historical becoming’ in the same way that ‘the embryo continues to be active in the tissues of the mature organism, and the child in the psychic life of the adult’.
- 2.
As part of my research for this chapter, I requested students who were in the 2011 cohort to respond to questions about their experience in the course, as feedback about the effectiveness and value that it had for them. I draw on some of these responses to reflect the range of views and issues that emerged, all of which cannot be fully explored within the confines of this article. The NIE students who participated in this dialogue were Ahmad Musta’ain, Amanda Wong, Chia Ying, Danial Hanafi, Harvinder Singh, Lisa Lok, Siti Rafidah Bte. Rahman.
They were given a list of questions, which they responded to in their own time via email. Their responses were elicited after the process of assessment and grading had been completed. The questions were: (1) In your exploration of Asian traditional theatre forms through readings, watching performances and videos, what did you find most interesting? This can include what was challenging and what was compelling, or what was simply perplexing. But explain why. (2) What, if any, was the value of doing the practical workshops with Joanna Wong and Biju as part of this course? How did you negotiate working with two different forms and two different traditional performing artists? (3) When you were creating the workshop performances, what did you most enjoy and most dislike in the process? When you watched the performances your classmates presented, what did you find most engaging? (4) As a contemporary person and a theatre student, how has this brief encounter with traditional theatre impacted on your perspectives on theatre and culture? This can include aspects that relate to personal identity, or how to view theatre, or the conflicts of being between cultures, etc.
- 3.
“Multiple belongings” and “overlapping allegiances” are phrases frequently used in the discourse on cosmopolitanism, to discuss identity constructs as inherently plural even in seemingly homogenous cultures. They challenge the idea that “singular” belongings and “distinct” allegiances, ideas propagated by nationalism and communalism are the only valid basis on which to build a sense of social cohesion.
- 4.
Malaysian theatre director Krishen Jit referred to the notion of ‘multiculturalism within bodies’ (2004) as an alternative to frames of multiplicity that emphasise differences between cultures, but fail to recognise the differences within them as well. This is particularly relevant in contexts such as Singapore, where several cultures have co-existed and interacted over several generations, and thus the boundaries that divide have become much more porous and permeable. See Rajendran and Wee (2007) for discussion of Jit’s politics of difference in multicultural society, and the challenges of dealing with difference in theatre.
- 5.
For Chinese Opera, students worked with a leading exponent of Cantonese Opera, Joanna Wong from the Chinese Theatre Circle, Ltd. See http://www.ctcopera.com.sg/joanna.html. For Kathakali, students were trained by Kathakali performer and teacher, Sri Kalamandalam Biju from Bhaskar Arts Academy. See http://www.bhaskarsartsacademy.com/dancers.html.
- 6.
- 7.
Intercultural theatre is broadly defined as theatre that brings together traditional and contemporary elements from different cultures, often foreign to each other, to juxtapose and fuse new ways of engaging the intersections of culture. Multicultural theatre refers to theatre that draws on diverse cultures that often co-exist within a nation or society but remain othered through political and cultural structures. The delineations between cultures are often sustained to suggest parallel streams of culture. In alternative multiculturalism the fixity of these boundaries is challenged, without denying their relevance.
- 8.
Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari (1987) suggest that ‘rhizomatic’ patterns of thought allow for non-linear configurations of knowledge that are less dependent on ‘arborescent’ notions of ‘rootedness’ as the basis for understanding. This can also be related to notions of identity and subjectivity that are ‘nomadic’ in their capacity to shift between different locations and notions of self and other.
- 9.
Lear was first performed in Tokyo, Japan in 1997, and appeared in Singapore in 1999. It was an elaborate and cutting-edge performance that brought together varied contemporary and traditional artists from several Asian countries such as Japan, China, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. Working with traditional forms such as Noh, Chinese Opera, Thai classical dance and Indonesian gamelan, the director, Ong Keng Sen created a work that was multilingual and multi-textural, allowing for a range of vocabularies to converge and diverge on stage. For further discussion see Wee (2007, pp. 121–142) and Bharucha (2000).
- 10.
This refers to a workshop held at the National Institute of Education, conducted by dancer-researcher Garrett Kam, on Indonesian classical dance. Kam, who is ethnically Chinese, is originally from Hawaii, but based in Indonesia and trained in several Indonesian classical dance traditions.
- 11.
Even though Ahmad is a Malay-Singaporean student, his ethnic origins are Boyanese and thus he identifies with being culturally Malay and Boyanese, and thus Indonesian as well.
References
Agamben, G. (2009). What is the contemporary? In What is an apparatus? And other essays (pp. 39–54) (D. Kishik & S. Pedatella, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Bharucha, R. (2000). Consumed in Singapore: The intercultural spectacle of Lear (Research Paper No. 21). Singapore: Centre for Advanced Studies, National University of Singapore.
Bharucha, R. (2001). The politics of cultural practice: Thinking through theatre in an age of globalisation. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Canclini, N. G. (1995). Hybrid cultures: Strategies for entering and leaving modernity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Chua, S. P. (1995). Reaching out for cultural roots: A Singapore example in reviving traditional theatre. In S. P. Chua (Ed.), Traditional theatre in Southeast Asia (pp. 91–102). Singapore: UniPress for SPAFA.
Cohen, M. (1995). Rooted cosmopolitanism. In M. Walzer (Ed.), Toward a global civil society (pp. 223–234). Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Delanty, G. (2006). The cosmopolitan imagination: Critical cosmopolitanism and social theory. The British Journal of Sociology, 57(1), 25–47.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). Introduction: Rhizome. In A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (pp. 3–25) (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Hobsbawm, E. (1983a). Introduction: Inventing traditions. In E. Hobsbawm & T. Ranger (Eds.), The invention of tradition (pp. 1–14). Cambridge: Press Syndicate of The University of Cambridge.
Hobsbawm, E. (1983b). Mass-producing traditions: Europe, 1870–1914. In E. Hobsbawm & T. Ranger (Eds.), The invention of tradition (pp. 263–307). Cambridge: Press Syndicate of The University of Cambridge.
Kwok, K. W. (2004). The problem of “tradition” in contemporary Singapore. In A. Mahizhnan (Ed.), Heritage and contemporary values (pp. 1–18). Singapore: Marshall Cevendish.
Lo, J., & Gilbert, H. (2002, Fall). Toward a topography of cross-cultural theatre praxis. The Drama Review, 46(3) (T175), 31–53.
Nascimento, C. T. (2009). Crossing cultural borders through the actor’s work. New York: Routledge.
Pavis, P. (1996). The intercultural performance reader. London: Routledge.
Rajendran, C., & Wee, C. J. W-L. (2007). The theatre of Krishen Jit: The politics of staging difference in multicultural Malaysia. TDR: The Drama Review, 51(2) (T194), 11–23.
Wee, C. J. W.-L. (2007). The Asian modern: Culture, capitalist development. Singapore: NUS Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rajendran, C. (2013). Brief Encounters with Traditional Theatre Forms: In Critical Dialogue with the Contemporary. In: Lum, CH. (eds) Contextualized Practices in Arts Education. Education Innovation Series. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-55-9_32
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-55-9_32
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-4560-54-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-4560-55-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)