The positive valuation of theatre as live performance, and therefore also its transience, is frequently accompanied by the urgent expression of the need to counter that transience by means of documentation. This desire to ‘save’ theatre reaches its most fervent expression (and hope of authority and permanence) with the live performance archive. Archive theory, however, now insists on the instability and uncertainty of the archive, which not only documents but also constructs its subject. In this article, Matthew Reason argues that, by tracing comparisons between archives and human memory, it is possible to establish a new formulation of the archive – as detritus, not completeness – that puts a value on mutability as a reflection of theatre's liveness. Matthew Reason is currently completing a PhD on representations of live performance at the University of Edinburgh. He has edited a special edition of the Edinburgh Review (ER106) on Theatre in Scotland, and has previously worked at the Edinburgh International Festival, where his responsibilities included maintaining the archive.
[1]
H. Freshwater.
The Allure of the Archive
,
2003
.
[2]
Nick Kaye.
Live art: Definition and documentation
,
1994
.
[3]
H. Bradley.
The seductions of the archive: voices lost and found
,
1999
.
[4]
T. Sağlam.
Theatre: At the Crossroads of Culture
,
2005
.
[5]
R. Fensham,et al.
More-and-Less-Than: Liveness, Video Recording, and the Future of Performance
,
2000,
New Theatre Quarterly.
[6]
Catherine J. Johnson,et al.
Securing Our Dance Heritage: Issues in the Documentation and Preservation of Dance.
,
1999
.
[7]
I. Velody.
The archive and the human sciences: notes towards a theory of the archive
,
1998
.
[8]
Beth Davis-Brown,et al.
The making of memory: the politics of archives, libraries and museums in the construction of national consciousness
,
1998
.
[9]
Eugenio Barba,et al.
Eftermaele: "That Which Will be Said afterwards"
,
1992
.