2022-12-30

藝術節在民間:以「亞洲廣場」藝術節與趙川「草台班」為討論核心

許仁豪。〈藝術節在民間:以「亞洲廣場」藝術節與趙川「草台班」為討論核心〉。《民俗曲藝》218 (2022.12): 7-57

Hsu Jen-hao Walter. “Art Festivals in Folk Worlds: A Discussion Centering on the Asia Madang Arts Festival and Zhao Chuan’s Grass Stage.” Journal of Chinese Ritual, Theatre and Folklore 218 (2022.12): 7-57.

 

Abstract

 

本文從李克•諾里(Ric Knowles)對當代藝術節的討論出發,嘗試論述2005 年發生於韓國光州的「亞洲廣場」藝術節在全球化時代作為民間藝術節的政治與歷史性意義,並將誕生於其中的中國大陸當代體制外劇團「草台班」看成是其「民間」精神的延續與轉變。本文首先將聚焦討論「亞洲廣場」藝術節與亞洲民眾戲劇網絡的變遷關係,說明其以何種美學策略在全球化時代直面冷戰歷史幽靈,批判性地面對時代變局。然後討論上海的「草台班」如何誕生於這個迸出的藝術節?並透過創團作品《38 線遊戲》的詳細分析,試圖闡明「亞洲廣場」藝術節的激進性質如何接續影響趙川與草台班的戲劇理念與表演方法?以之進一步說明,雖然「亞洲廣場」藝術節僅只發生一次,但卻在全球化的時空下,促成了在地劇場美學的轉變,如何在與世界資本主義高度結合的當代中國,打開新的異質空間,重新理解左右政治之於當代生活的意義?而在這新的歷史情境下,我們又如何重新思考藝術節之於民間的關係?

透過集中討論「亞洲廣場」藝術節與趙川「草台班」,本文認為民眾劇場的標籤在當下此刻的亞洲也不是那麼重要了。在這個資本竄流時代找尋民眾的位置,或許更重要的是打開一個不帶功利算計的場域,讓四方諸眾持續碰撞、對話、辯論甚至爭吵,在歧異與差異之間思索當代生活壓迫的根源與未解的政治與歷史問題關聯之所在。如是,在全球資本主義決定與宰制所有人生存的當代,「民間」的在地與跨國意義才能打開。

Taking Ric Knowles’s discussions of contemporary arts festivals as a point of departure, this article attempts to explore the political and historical significance of the Asia Madang Arts Festival held in Gwangju, South Korea in 2005, a time of high globalization. This study seeks to theorize Grass Stage, a Chinese nongovernmental and nonprofit theatre troupe from Shanghai born out of this festival, as a continuation and transformation of its folk spirit. First, this article discusses the changing relationships between the Asia Madang Arts Festival and Asia People’s Theatre Network, illuminating the aesthetic strategies they adopt to confront the historical specter of the Cold War and critically engage with pressing contemporary political issues. Then, using a focused discussion of 38th Parallel Still Play, Grass Stage’s pioneering performance, this article reveals how the radical qualities of Asia Madang have determined and influenced Grass Stage’s theatrics. This study further suggests that, despite the fact that Asia Madang only happened once, it has succeeded in opening up a heterotopia in globalized time-space, allowing Grass Stage to critically engage with radical political issues in contemporary Shanghai. Based on the ensuing development of Grass Stage, how can we renew our conceptualizations of left- and right-wing politics in contemporary China? How can we maintain subversive folk spirit in today’s historical condition?

The above-mentioned discussions suggest that it is futile to demarcate the domain of People’s Theatre in today’s Asia. In a world already permeated by flows of capital, how can we relocate the positioning of politicized people? Maybe the key is managing to open up a nonprofit time-space for multitudes from different parts of the world to come together, collide with each other, or even argue with each other. It is between differences and divergences that we seek to reveal the sources of oppression and their relationship with unresolved historical and political issues. In so doing, we may hope to maintain folk spirit in a world dominated by global capitalism.