The rise of small screen platforms accessible on mobile devices for visual, performed entertainment, such as Twitch and YouTube, has led to the use of certain mobile applications as online theatre spaces; effectively creating the ‘YouTube Theatre’. Whilst new content is continually uploaded, this has tended to take the form of memes, copies of old movies that are difficult to access, and short skits from comedians, gamers, and vloggers, facilitating the rise of the YouTube star. Within this range however, a very small number of performers are now utilising the platform for the upload of performance art and very fresh theatre works designed for internet use, so reinventing parts of these platforms as a cultural theatre space. The best known of these is the collective formed by LaBeouf, Ronkko and Turner, which star Hollywood actor Shia LaBeouf and feature performances that arguably combine performance art and theatre with underlying commentary on the social psychology of digital networks.
The performer of the LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner collective, Shia LaBeouf, in the performance piece #INTERVIEW, contacts a DAZED magazine journalist (Aimee Cliff) by email and invites her to an interview. An email discussion follows this, documented in script form, which is then followed by the physical interview. In the interview itself, which is between Cliff and LaBeouf, neither party is permitted to speak. Instead, each attendee wears a Go Pro headcam focused on the other, and they sit in a room watching each other. The interview that follows is based on body language, with no spoken communication, though the parties are not held to silence. #INTERVIEW was then uploaded to Vimeo, the LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner website (which displays performed pieces in the form of an online art gallery), and was also released through YouTube, though not by the collective itself. The piece is performatively interesting as it focuses completely on the one-hour unspoken interaction between the participants, following the long and detailed written interaction in the form of the email correspondence. While the two parties have become associated in written form, they have not directly interacted previously; Cliff has written about some of LaBeouf’s work, and hence has attended some previous installations. In this way, Cliff makes the transition from a LaBeouf spectator, arguably almost a fan, into the lead performance within a LaBeouf performance, interacting directly with the focus of her recent work. The piece is completed by the magazine writeup by Cliff (2014), in which she discusses the many ways in which the ensuing viral media storm plays out immediately following the release of the #INTERVIEW.
In the email correspondence with Cliff, LaBeouf cites several main influences on his performance work. These include Antonin Artaud, Bertolt Brecht, Kurt Lewin, and Vito Acconci, but LaBeouf also discusses the concepts of such works as Robin Mackay’s accelerationism “we all have to be performance-athlete-artists in the social media age…the work refers to the acceleration and simultaneity of production/ consumption spectatorship/ participation across the networks of the digital and the physical the virtual and the actual” (LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner, 2014, p3). Lewin is particularly important to the concept of the #INTERVIEW through his theories on the impact of environment on individual psychology: “every scientific psychology must take into account whole situations, i.e., the state of both person and environment” (Lewin, 2013, p26). Cliff makes further connections to the work of Constant Dullaart, a Dutch conceptual artist whose work stems from connections underlying network culture and who, in a possibly ironic addition, references his own Wikipedia page (Wikipedia, 2017) from his website under the heading “resume curriculum vitae press” (Dullaart, 2017). In the same vein as artists like the playwright Caryl Churchill in Love & Information and Escaped Alone, LaBeouf cites the underlying fragility of postmodernist-network-culture attitudes, particularly prevalent in the western young-adult population, as a major inspiration for his internet performances: “we want to change things we want to have hope we just don’t know how or where to look” (LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner, 2014, p4). The impact of the work of Deleuze is also suggested by LaBeouf both within the discussion and through internet links posted by the correspondents: “I’m finding myself through the networks and exploring the multiplicity of personas the public me the private me I’m exploring what started as an actual full blown existential crisis is now a full blown existential exploration” (LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner, 2014, p5).
The content of the email discussion is interspersed on LaBeouf’s part with frequent Deleuzian linguistic references such as Kenneth Goldsmith and James Neu, alongside writers and poets such as Rudyard Kipling and Charles Bukowski, and Marxist associations such as Christopher Hitchens. Interestingly, both Cliff and LaBeouf integrate YouTube cartoon clip links to shows such as the Simpsons and Adventure Time into the conversation; these short episodic shows were utilised by Rushkoff to illustrate his Present Shock theory, a recent and major work in the study of network cultures. The influences of both Antonin Artaud and Marina Abromovic, postulated in preceding essays examining the works of LaBeouf by this author (YouTube Theatre and Small Screen Theatre respectively), are also both confirmed within the #INTERVIEW script, though LaBeouf views the two pieces of work as being opposites: “hers was the artist is present in ours the artist is absent - I was gone” (LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner, 2014, p24). The influence of Peter Brook also shows strongly in Cliff and LaBeouf’s discussion on acting, wherein LaBeouf describes working within a major Hollywood company as a fresh actor with strong ideals and talent is muted by the impact of Brook’s Deadly Theatre, until as an experienced actor the performances dull from lack of fresh objectives. “Persona acting has little to nothing to do with ability & everything to do with charisma & ticket sales…when the films get blasted for lack of performance you get blamed for things you had no say on” (LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner, 2014, p24). In the words of Brook (1968, p14), “somewhere, someone has found out and defined how the play should be done”.
In terms of the performance of the piece, the interview begins with a vertically split screen, one side blacked out and the other showing footage from Aimee Cliff’s Go Pro camera (already switched on) in a hotel lobby, which then follows her movements up in the elevator and into the interview room, where Shia LaBeouf is already sat (again with the camera already switched on). Initial problems managing the Go Pro camera headset, particularly in the lift when Cliff can view her own reflection, make the first few seconds slightly humorous. Cliff shakes LaBeouf’s hand and takes a seat in an identical red leather chair opposite him. From the point at which the two participants can view each other, the Vimeo becomes a vertically split screen of both sets of footage. There are several immediately obvious points of interest in terms of the staging. Cliff has been seated in front of the windows, which show full daylight outside, slightly muted by the window dressings. LaBeouf in contrast is seated directly opposite the windows, facing the daylight. All the lamps in the room are lit, including those behind both interviewees. The immediate effect is to make the lighting and colours brighter and warmer on LaBeouf, and duller and cooler on Cliff who is shadowed. This effect is so sharp that the identical red leather chairs appear to be two different colours. This also makes Cliff appear further away than LaBeouf despite the distances clearly being identical, as the two are filming each other. The only shadows cast are those behind LaBeouf. This has the odd effect of making it seem that LaBeouf is the interviewer, rather than the interviewed star, and may be deliberate.
The second impact is that of sound, which the low quality of the equipment used amplifies; the mutual echo of recorded silence and occasional birdsong seem deafening at normal listening volume, which heightens the lack of action. LaBeouf particularly specified the Go Pro cameras for this performance; these cameras are the preferred starter equipment for low-budget and action vlogging. Once the pair are seated, there is a degree of nervous laughter and discomfort at the lack of spoken interaction, which by the third minute into the Vimeo has died down to attention detraction on Cliff’s side such as finger biting and hand movements. LaBeouf does not engage in any kind of similar detraction, but sits calm and still, highlighting the difference between the trained actor as diametrically opposed to someone not used to being filmed; LaBeouf instead rearranges himself after the first few minutes so that he is sat on his hands. He also appears the most relaxed of the two, Cliff is clearly more nervous generally. The initial few minutes are a shock, both to the participants, and to the viewer. The scene is oddly intimate, and the interview overall is pervaded by an odd sensation of the mingled intimacy and discomfort of a first date, which the viewer is drawn into as thoroughly as the participants. By the seventh minute of the interview, the interviewees are mirroring each other’s facial expressions, movements, smiles, and hand positions. Cliff tends to mirror LaBeouf, perhaps taking a natural lead from the more comfortable member of the group, and this continues almost until the mid-point of the interview period, at which time natural independence reasserts itself. There are long periods in which the two simply watch each other, and as the viewer becomes bored, instances in which they break the tedium by rocking, moving backwards and forwards, and trading facial expressions. As both are seated with no verbal communication, the full focus is on face, hands, and small movements.
As the second half of the hour-long interview gets underway, LaBeouf begins mirroring Cliff; this appears purposeful and introduces a new dynamic. LaBeouf succeeds in this section of the interview in enticing Cliff into more direct interaction, particularly through camera movements, and the two interact more easily with a reduced sensation of awkwardness. There are odd moments of entertainment interspersed with the background tedium that a lack of movement produce, which would not have been noticeable without this part of the #INTERVIEW taking place. Tilting the head makes the person opposite appear to sway as if at sea, which regains the attention of the viewer. Leaning forward zooms the screen in, while leaning back zooms it out. In the early part of the video, Cliff struggles to maintain eye contact; however, dropping her eyes focuses the camera on LaBeouf’s midriff, a faintly humorous effect that would not be noticeable without the presence of the film. The difficulties Cliff has in maintaining direct focus on LaBeouf underline the drawbacks in the increase in electronic and network communication; this is at the price of direct bodily interaction, which arguably becomes underutilised. In the written dialogue, Cliff suggests that online communication is becoming analysed like a new kind of body language. The interviewees are very much coordinated with the online viewers, as shown by the need of both parties to break the tedium at the same moments. Overall, the long period of concentration that each interviewee has on the other means that they are preserved very clearly in the mind; this is certainly true of the viewing audience, and it is likely this sensation is magnified to the interviewees; the face opposite becoming ingrained in the viewer’s memory, and the image of the two sitting (as in the Vimeo) side by side is a simple one to recall. This is not an easy piece to forget once it has been watched, despite almost nothing taking place.
The production ends after the hour interview period with Cliff standing, and leaving the room with a smile and a last glance back at LaBeouf. LaBeouf’s side of the split-screen turns black again as the door closes on the interview room, while Cliff’s side fades to grey from footage of her returning along the hotel corridor to the elevator. Despite the #INTERVIEW never having been formally reviewed as a performance, news reports on the piece such as that by CNN Entertainment have suggested it could easily be viewed as either provocative or pointless (Hare, 2014). While this view is somewhat substantiated through the level of tedium provoked in the viewer for a significant amount of the interview period, taken with the liveliness of debate within the written record, it is nonetheless an interesting approach that definitively meets LaBeouf’s initially stated objective “…so I’m present in the magazine only in words obtained digitally [through the email discussion] and online I’m present only through a mute physical presence and the reality of my self lies somewhere between and beyond the two it's thoroughly metamodern I think” (Cliff & LaBeouf, 2014, p11).
Seen in its entirety, the #INTERVIEW summarises LaBeouf’s metamodernist viewpoint poised against a theoretical background of marked acting and performance influences such as the method acting principles of Konstantin Stanislavsky and Sanford Meisner, who developed a combined approach of method acting produced from imagination rather than simple study, joined with philosophical influences such as Marx and Deleuze. LaBeouf’s works are clearly focused on identifying a reality within the distinctions of an individual’s physical and digital self, particularly within celebrity culture, but also with a much wider remit, with the actor referring to a personal presence on social media outlets as a “curated persona” (Cliff & LaBeouf, 2014, p31), and stating that there is not one true self, but many, with all masks being interchangeable.
The desire evidenced by LaBeouf to link with the audience, and to be on the same level rather than a product of celebrity culture, is evident throughout the latter part of the #INTERVIEW email discussion, in which the actor’s dislike of these performances being shoehorned into a celebrity cry for help or mental health issues is discussed with Cliff, and juxtaposed with the need of the collective to produce something new. Despite undoubtedly using the media attention to garner greater public interest, these performances are bruited as an answer to avoiding the sterility of performance explained by Brook in his Deadly Theatre essay. Acknowledging that people do not generally attend theatre or performances but instead review what is presented to them on the internet, the discussion subtly suggests the collective may be a method of forcing Artaud’s Theatre of Cruelty through the chosen contemporary social system: “it is essential to put an end to the subjugation of the theatre to the text” (1958, p89). The imagery lacking in the Vimeo section of the #INTERVIEW is diametrically opposed to the movement and imagery in the text-based discussion, an effect undoubtedly sought after by both Cliff and LaBeouf, who use dramatic examples such as the crowds who stand for days in the cold for an iPhone 6 while museums stand empty, leading this naturally to the democratisation of art and removal of both taste and choice through the elitist power structure of the contemporary art world, highlighting the ways in which this turns the population away from engaging. The aim of LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner (2014, p60) is to re-engage with a young audience using fresh methods: “the theatre is [always] dying…the collaboration of the networks is winning through…the networks might struggle to coherently represent the individual but the collective can achieve coherence and empowerment of self (selves) through a shared creative consciousness”.
The LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner collective has only publicly produced performance projects since 2014; these works are new, and whilst widely known in the public sphere, have not been replicated by other artists. The continual submersion of LaBeouf into what may become recognised as a latest role of media victim, could negate the impact of the performances overall and so nullify their longer lasting implications; however, these should be recognised as interesting experiments into the use of network cultures, and social media in particular, as a free online theatre space, with much greater parameters than have been trialled previously.
REFERENCES
Artaud, A. (1958) The Theater and Its Double. Canada: Grove Press Inc.
Brook, P. (1968) The Empty Space. New York: Touchstone.
Cliff, A. (2014), Interviewing Shia wasn’t that weird. What happened next was. London: DAZED Media. Available from: http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/22862/1/interviewing-shia-wasnt-that-weird-what-happened-next-was [Accessed 30 September 2017].
Dullaart, C (2017), Constant Dullaart Art. Netherlands: Constant Dullaart. Available from: http://constantdullaart.com/ [Accessed 30 September 2017].
Hare, B. (2014), Shia LaBeouf’s silent interview: provocative or pointless? San Francisco: Cable News Network (CNN Entertainment). Available from: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/27/showbiz/celebrity-news-gossip/shia-labeouf-i-am-sorry-dazed/index.html [Accessed 30 September 2017].
Labeouf, Ronkko & Turner (2014), LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner Collective: the #INTERVIEW. USA: LaBeouf, Ronkko & Turner. Available from: http://labeoufronkkoturner.com/ [Accessed 26 September 2017].
Lewin, K. (2013), Principles of Topological Psychology, Redditch: Read Books Ltd.
Wikipedia (2017), Constant Dullaart. California: Wikipedia. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_Dullaart [Accessed 30 September 2017].
Harvard reference if accessing item for use:
Taylor, S. (2017). The Interview. Sheffield: Squarespace. [Online]. Available from: www/fairfaxcuratorart/gaming-narratives-portfolio/the-interview [Accessed Date].