Even if you plan everything in detail for your activist activity you cannot control what other people do in areas in the immediate vicinity of your chosen arena. An example of that is what happened to the pressure group Save and Renovate Slussen! (Rädda och rusta upp Slussen!) when staging a protest meeting in April 2010. Things beyond the group's control, or even anticipation, interfered for some minutes with the group's demonstration in Ryssgården square in the center of Stockholm. In the following that incident will be regarded as a disturbance in the realm created by the meeting and thus, a disturbance in the theatricality of the event.
Even if you plan everything in detail for your activist activity you cannot control what other people do in areas in the immediate vicinity of your chosen arena. An example of that is what happened to the activist group Save and Renovate Slussen! (Rädda och rusta upp Slussen!) when staging a protest meeting in April 2010. Things beyond the group´s control, or even anticipation, interfered for some minutes with the group's demonstration in Ryssgården square in the center of Stockholm. In the following that incident will be regarded as a disturbance in the realm created by the meeting and thus, as a disturbance of the theatricality of the event. The City's plans for the future of the Slussen area were decided on December 12th, 2011 and last date for appeal is January 10th, 2012. Appeal can be done by anyone, so a lot of appeals are expected. The pressure group's Facebook account offers a ready made template of an appeal and every member on that site has been sent an e-mail with the template. This is in a way a case of theatricality. By showing how many persons that are dissatisfied with the current official plans for the future of the Slussen area the pressure group probably intends to use the legal appealing formula to make a point – the discontent is large. Then we might of course ask how many people protesting there are need for of a population of almost a million inhabitants in the greater Stockholm area. The pressure group is only counting around 4.000 people.
The struggle for moderation of the rebuilding plans for Slussen – the area around the water lock between lake Mälaren and the Baltic Sea – has been going on for a couple of years now. The background is that the Slussen area is in need of restoration after 75 years of wear and tear. The increased traffic, with its congestions, has also created new demands on the logistics of the area.
The City of Stockholm opened up for input in form of an architectural competition on what could be a solution to the needs. The suggestions from architects were presented and the general feeling of the people who did not like them were that the sketches shown indicated that the open space in the area was going to be lost. The pressure group Save and Renovate Slussen! (Rädda och rusta upp Slussen!) was formed among the people negative to the ideas for a new Slussen. The main objection towards the suggested plans was that they all were going to take away the open impression of the Slussen area. I think of the objections boiled down reading “Don't fence us in!”
The group registered an account on Facebook and soon had in excess of 4.000 members. Facebook was used to gather information like what is said in the media on the matter and give information about meetings and rallies. Save and Renovate Slussen! also staged a series of meetings, guided tours related to the objective of saving Slussen and demonstrations – all starting or ending in the Slussen-area. The group also documented their activities and uploaded video-clips on YouTube.
The group showed considerable skills in handling the traditional media and in using the digital media to promote their cause. In their Facebook account the members (I am one of them) discuss plans for what is going to be the next step, they are presenting pictures, internet links and ideas on what is possible to do with a non existing budget. They use an array of techniques of traditional movements, demonstrations and marches with music, singing and speeches. When the season was right they have, on several occasions, carried torches during their marches and thus used the theatricality of fire against the dark skies of the city of Stockholm.
Watching five video clips on YouTube made by sympathizers or members in the Save and Renovate Slussen!-group it became clear that the average age of the participants in the marches and demonstrations was rather high. There were a lot of people with gray hair in the clips. One may wonder if it is age that make the activists react against the rebuilding plans for the Slussen area. Feral (2002) argues that the theatricality of a building, like a theater, is sitting in the walls – some kind of materiality is present. That might be true even regarding places like the Slussen area. In a manner of speaking it is the theatricality of the area, the familiar surroundings most of the activists may have grown up with, that is threatened by the plans.
The red card incident > With an metaphor borrowed from the world of sports a group of around 50 activists visited the City's Technical Chamber and gave the responsible politicians and officials “red cards” as a verdict from “the people” (Dagens Nyheter, September 29th, 2011). This was a nice, laid-back, way of telling the City what the activist group thought of the suggested plan for the Slussen area. It also was a theatrical way of conveying a message. Féral (2002) puts the question: “Is theatricality a property that belongs uniquely to the theater, or can it also be found in the quotidian?” Féral goes on to ask several questions – all aiming at defining what theatricality is (Féral 2002, pp 94-95). Féral describes theatricality as a contract between spectator and performer.
The incident with the red card might be an example of that theatricality may indeed exist in everyday life. Theatricality produces spectacular events for the spectator; it establishes a relationship that differs from everyday life. Theatricality's life outside the theater might be easier to discover when it occurs in a shape that is so obviously a “play” for an audience like in the red card example. It might even be, thinking with Féral, that theatricality is the consequence of a certain theatrical process related either to reality or to the subject.
The interference incident > I attended one demonstration in the spring of 2010 at Ryssgården, the open area in front of the metro station Slussen. The organizers had gathered a crowd of around 300 people – among them singer/entertainer Robert Broberg. Among the speakers were author Björn Ranelid and multi-artist Carl Johan De Geer. Several other speakers appeared and talked on subjects relating to that Slussen was worth saving and why it was wrong to rebuild the area. During the speeches a group of anti-demonstrators appeared on the walkway to Katarinahissen (Katarina elevator – a freestanding outdoor construction) and started shouting slogans and using bull-horns faced down towards the crowd trying to conduct the program of the demonstration.
As I recall it the activists crashing the party had their own agenda – one that did not interfere with the message the Save and Renovate Slussen group was trying to get through. Some of the police officers that were posted outside the entrance to the Slussen Metro station hurried across the street and went into the building, presumably to use the elevator inside the building. The reason they could not use the Katarinahissen was that it was closed for repair. After a couple of minutes the hollering from the elevator walkway stopped. The activists on the walkway had only caused a brief disturbance while interfering with the major demonstration down on the square. You could say that the “competing” activists for some minutes were entering the realm of the Save and Renovate Slussen!-activists, with their own realm of theatricality. This example might even support the notion that politics, thinking with Palonen (2003), is about creating new possibilities, again and again. The creation of the new possibilities does not necessarily have to be generated by the activists themselves, but can, as in this example be created by the environment in the form of other activists competing for the general public´s attention. The new possibilities in this case could be said to emerge from the breaking of the realm of the Save and Renovate Slussen!-activists event and the competing activists fleeing the area when the police officers stepped into action. The new possibilities in this case could be said to be of a negative kind, but that may not count as a bad thing in general. The activists realm was disturbed – but maybe the realm was strengthened by that.
Final comments > The incident with the red card might be an example of that theatricality may indeed exist in everyday life. Theatricality´s life outside the theater might be easier to discover when it occurs in a shape that is so obviously a “play” for an audience like in the red card example.
Why do we need a concept like theatricality? A simple way of answering this question is to state that we are used to labeling and categorizing objects, people and events. If we do not have a word for a sensation, an object or something happening it is hard do really see it.
In this text I have used Palonen´s description of politics which on the grass root level can be described as a manner of conveying meaning in the down-up direction. In the top-down model it is about politicians exercising their power according to their party´s policy. Theater/activism is a concept covering and trying to explain political events like war, protest rallies or organized political work within, or on the limits, of the democratic political process.
The plans for the reconstruction of the Slussen area have been decided. Maybe the last word in this case has not been uttered, last date for appeal is January 10th, 2012. The officials will probably require some weeks for processing the appeals. It is presumably with anticipation the activists are looking forward to knowing the result.
References
Féral, Josette. 2002. “Theatricality: The Specificity of Theatrical Language”, In: SubStance: A Review of Theory and Literary Criticism # 98/99, vol. 31, nos. 2 & 3, 2002, special issue Theatricality, ed. by Josette Féral, pp. 94-108, translated by Ronald P. Bermingham.
Palonen, Kari. 2003. Four Times of Politics: Policy, Polity, Politicking, and Politicization. In: Alternatives: Global, Local, Political vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 171-186.
Digital media
Dagens Nyheter. September, 29th, 2011. Slussenvännerna visade rött kort mot nya Slussen.
http://www.dn.se/blogg/epstein/2011/09/29/slussenvannerna-visade-rott-kort-for-nya-slussen/
(retrieved January 7th, 2012).
