What is Contemporary Circus through the evaluation of Marcos Furtnero? My first Circus essay.

Circus critical evaluation

Marcos Furtnero is a devil stick artist who has created a unique style by fusing circus skill with Latin dance. He uses precise and quick footwork to contrast with the rigid stance of a juggler. I will explore if his style therefore fits into the Traditional or Contemporary view of circus.

Furtnero has experimented and adapted with devil sticks through the use of traditional elements, cultural music and costume, which supports Next Door Circus’ definition of contemporary circus and therefore Furtnero as "the result of creative experiment". When “contemporary circus” came about it did not want to push away from its “tradition” but due to the social shift it needed to adapt to stay relevant. Circus evolved and as a result gets branded into two main categories- Traditional or Contemporary.

Traditional circus was performed solely by families and so trade secrets never left their hereditary lines. Acts could be repeated whilst still mesmerising an audience due to the lack of knowledge and insight. In his performance, Marcos relies on Ferdinand de Saussure's signifiers for an audience to make sense of his style. His act has been tailored for a stereotypical understanding based on audience’s pre-determined knowledge of Latin culture. Thus to show where the music originates, Maracas and Ukulele's play a prominent role in the music track, using the instruments as the Signifier and the related culture as the signified.

The music in the performance is a 3/4 time-frame, which is commonly used in waltz and is a signature in traditional circus performance. He uses music to serve a primary focus of circus- entertainment. Traditional circus plays music of its culture, meaning playing Latin to an American audience is a contemporary idea. However, in the 21st century using another cultures music can be seen as a modern statement but with the openness of travel and diversity it has become a social change and not one due to circus. Furtnero utilizes the audience he has and could replicate the act by relying on the signifier’s stereotypically associated worldwide. Circus therefore is still profitable and able to travel.

Furtnero's reliance on signifiers relays onto his costume. Stereotypical garments are used such as sombreros and serapes (poncho-like garment). The choice of costume between Marcos and the three waiters in his act are varied and hint towards a hierarchical order between the characters, with the wealth associated with the job role portrayed and type of garment. The trademark of Furtnero’s costume is his moustache, being the real aspect of him to represent how he is the true Latino in the act. To show the three waiters as un-authentic they wear the costume that a reader would stereotypically associate with the culture (a sombrero and serape.) Furtnero uses the other characters as tools to signify his authenticity to the audience. Lehmann's theory of seeing circus as "look[ing] in depth into myth", analyses the historical and social side of Mexico and its society shown through the expressive nature of dance and music.

The exploration of the performers’ body became a signature of “contemporary circus” following the revolution era of the 1960’s. Times were changing. Just how Circus’ showed something exotic and new to audiences, contemporary did the same to the next generation. The newest trend was to start challenging the publics’ perception of what was happening around them. Due to the debate in animal rights, circus performers found it was no longer feasible to work with them in their performances. Most of the “never before seen animals” were now common in Zoos and so I feel circus would still have had to start adapting for new exciting acts. As Tait and Lavers pinpoint the 1970's was the "emergence of contemporary circus as a radical art form". The move to “contemporary” was one of a gradual shift and not a jump from one to another.

Regardless, this change has caused Pascal Jacobs, a cultural theorist, to now question “what is the sense of a circus? Does circus still exist?” and made Peta Tait, circus scholar, come to terms with the “new circus.” She concluded that the “crucial element of circus [is] its bodies and their different physicality’s”. Circus could no longer push boundaries, and be defined as just that without having to be further classified, to be able to understand and measure the growth. Both scholars still focus on the larger idea of circus, with coming to terms with a key feature “bodies and its physicality’s”. Both in Traditional and Contemporary circus, the performer’s body had to be in peak condition to replicate each act with a clarity to show off the skill to their audience.

Kumar observes that postmodernists believe ‘our concepts of time and history are illusory. There is only timeless time’. How can we put Furtnero into a bracket of “what is contemporary circus?” if we are living in the contemporary times? We cannot fully engage critically with the theory of today, but instead reflect on the past. I chose to call Furtnero circus. If circus is stated as “ever changing”, then contemporary circus is still traditional circus which has changed with society and technological advances. Lehmann states that “when human bodies join with objects, animals and energy lines into a singly reality, theatre makes it possible to imagine a reality”. Here the body exploration linked to contemporary circus and the animal acts linked with traditional circus are fused to show that circus is just circus and that is about making a story.

If Circus was defined by animals can we call contemporary circus “circus” without them or is it a new genre altogether? We call both categories “Circus” meaning socially we see the association between Traditional and Contemporary and not seeing them as separate. The performer is crucial in Circus, Marcos is crucial, showing the skill to the audience. That is the purpose.

Bibliography

• Browning, Halcli, Webster (2000). . London: Sage Publications: 50-60

• Gale, M (2013). Issue 1: : Maggie Gale. . 23 (1)

• Ivey, C. (2011). Available: http://www.devilstick.de/english/info/geschichte.htm. Last accessed 27th October 2015.

• Lavers, K. The Political Body in New Circus and Contemporary Circus Arts: Embodied Protest, Materiality, and Active Spectatorship. . 55-68.

• Lehmann, H-T (2006). . Oxon: Routledge. 80-100.

• presents artists and workshops in Positivus festival. Available: https://nextdoorcircus.org/tag/contemporary-circus/. Last accessed 1st November 2016.

• Saucier, M. (1982). . 23.- Accessed through http://dev.juggle.org/history/archives/jugmags/34-4/34-4,p23.htm

• Tait. P, Lavers, K (2016). . London: Routledge. 1-20.

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxNVFP1pa2I-

Quoted from 2015. Next Door Circus

Paraphrased from Lavers, K: 56

Quoted from Lehmann 2006: 80

Quoted from Tait and Lavers 2016: 3

Lavers, K: 57

Lavers, K: 58

Browning, Halcli, Webster, 2000: 58

Tait, Lavers, 2016: 2

Quoted from Lehmann, 2006: 81