Photos: Ingrid Bugge
Photo: Ole Wagner
Power. Lust. Enthusiasm. Humour. Guilt... The well-known Shakespeare story about the passionate couple, who become murderers and afterwards are eaten up by guilt and bad conscience.
Despite the fact, that the performance is based upon the classic Macbethian issues, Asterion's Hus' production is far from being conventional. The audience will experience the story being torn to pieces and restored in an a playful, sensuous and experimental space.
Macbeth is the third production in the Asterions Hus' trilogy about love. First Robin Hood, then Romeo & Juliette - and now Macbeth about the mature love and lust.
Performers: Tilde Knudsen, Peter Kirk
Instructor: Emil Hansen
Producer: Asterions Hus
Organizer: Asterions Hus
Age: From 14 years
William Wains Gade 11
1432 København K
The performance requires total black-out and a stage that is 9 m wide, 8 m deep and 4m in height.
"Asterions Hus' version with Peter Kirk and Tilde Knudsen doesn't look like anything else. Emil Hansen safely directs the shenanigans for port. It's virtuous. Itøs catchy and incomparable."
Michael Svennevig, Ørkendrømme
"Peter Kirk and Tilde Knudsen master the slight tales, that as stilistic impressions are fired at the audience with dripping blood."
Casper Koeller, Sceneblog
”For many years I've been dissapointed that theatres don't follow what goes on in society. Especially regarding form. A clear trend in film and tv series like "Stranger Things" is intertekstuality. A piece of art (of any kind) refering to another. This production was filled with it. It felt like seeing ‘Ready Player One’ – and it was super cool!"
Jais Ikkala, Kulturformidleren
”The interaction is as always very physical and the two actors interplay to a sparkle on stage."
Gudrun Hagen, Teateravisen
PRAISE TO TEATERØEN
Macbeth. Funny? Unpredictable?
Hardly the first words popping to ones mind. However, at Teaterøen it is. Here they play. With words. The language. The references. The presence of the audience.
It must be experienced. Final conclusion? Entertained? Si/Qui/Doch/Ja/Yessir.
ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE
The team behind the performance is considerably small compared to many other productions. We have been three developers; Tilde Knudsen, Emil Hansen and Peter Kirk. We have all rotated between the different parts as scenographer, dramaturg, costumier, light designer, video designer, performer, playwright etc.
In an unusually straightforward process we have all been able to work together on the different facets. Busy – especially in the last couple of weeks, where all the pieces had to be put together, but nevertheless uncomplicated as our common understanding of the common creation has been exceptionally fruitful.
The three of us are all formed by the more traditional understanding of theatre, the psychological, narrative theatre, where the 'director' redeems and interprets the textual source and the actors function as the 'emotional requisites' in the directors creation.
However, we have all evolved from the paradigm and thrive in the non-narrative, devised and equally created – where the moment is more important that the story, the present rather than the representation and the creation is more valueable than the recreation. We have talked, imagined, thrown ideas in the air, and almost constructed the scenography while acting out the performance. At times we have all been directors.
We have all had a clear aim to capture the details; sounds, atmospheres and associations that can hit a nerve or line. All in possible and impossible ways. The most of our ideas have evolved between us and hopefully they will be redeems between us and the audience.
FRAGMENTARY COMMENTS FROM CONSTRUCTOR/DIRECTOR
”We are working on giving the text a new context, tear it out of the old one and thereby giving it a new meaning. The language as more than mere transmission of the content. We would like to show, that the words are not identical to what they transmit.However, away from it's original context, the text looses it's authority and changes meaning, depending on recitation, situation, addressing and with which motive, they are said. We find that not only important, but interesting and bringing a new array of possibilities."
”The coincidence as a necessity, not something one should avoid.”
”Performance as an actual form of art.”
”Art defines itself through a becoming, not a being.”
”Why are we doing this? Solely out of passion – as an inner necessity.”
”We aim for a performance as art for its own sake. That is the performance most worth seeing, as the observer is not only a consumer, but a sensing and acknowledging being. Our performance art addresses everyone, but is not for everybody. Our audience does not exist yet and it is not a crowd. Vi do not address the majority, more like an unknown amount of minorities. We play with representation and demonstrate the fleeting relation between the words and what they describe. We excite the narration instinct within the observer without telling ”the good story”, which is often limiting the great theatrical experience.”
”We see actors as creating artists, not second-rate artists merely interpreting litterature.”
”We are producing a construction with meaning as a profit, but not a specific meaning. Meaning is to be discovered, it already exists in a text or on stage and refers to an essence or idea one aims to find. Meaning has to be invented, created, designed. We do this as producers, but our audience does it too.”
”We provide ourselves to the arts: The formation of moments and chance; not merely to the idea of it.”
”It is the immediately striking surface to be experienced that interests us. Not an essence or a thorough idea or the underlying.”
”The language in our universe does not have a universal meaning, but is situated and according to context. Something one can play around with. We are more interested in ”how” than ”what”.”
”The narrative is not a tool for construction, but a tool to read and understand the world and our surroundings. The tool therefore belongs to the audience!”
”We compose knots, overlaps, synchronisations, displacements, shifts, repetitions and series – with text, images as if it were a non-figurative painting, we were to paint with narrative fragments.”
”We think there is a great difference between narrating, renarrating and narrating something specific. We balance between recognition and the unknown in a field of tension...”