Somewhere between catwalk and military parade, passive voyeurism and solidary dependence, the situation on stage varies from appropriation to individual experience, from spatial distribution to division and allocation. In “What is left” five performers occupy the space and are simultaneously taken over by it.

The bodies get their appearance close and discreetly and at the same time are presented in an ominous way. In the distorted juxtaposition of authentic presence and the presentation mode of the everyday social fashion walks of this world, the individual makes its way in the struggle for attention and dependence in togetherness. In the midst of distorted gestures, giddy confidence and pulsating bodies, an energy arises that spirals upwards into the heights of space.

Starting point for "What is left"

The trilogy "Geometry and Politics" experiments intensively with the theater as a space of experience, based on archetypal spatial arrangements in parliaments, and deals in three pieces with architectural spatial settings in each case.

This is also the case in the third and last production of this series: "What is left", based on the frontal "classroom" arrangement, deals with spatial structures that shape human communication culture. We are familiar with it from the waiting situation at counters, the hierarchy in the courtroom, in school and in church, from attention in the theater hall, as well as from advertising screens in subway stations, which demand and structure the gaze attention of the bodies in the room.

The frontal arrangement focuses all attention in one direction on the speaker position and spatially creates an active-sending and a passive-receiving side. This creates a powerful communication monopoly. We encounter this, among other things, in the classical classroom, in the courtroom, in the theater, in church, in the cinema or in the theater, but also at counters in waiting rooms or in the form of public advertising screens, e.g. in subway stations. All arrangements are united by a one-sided power of communication and a spatial formatting of the gaze.

We are interested in the mode of action of this frontality in two ways: First, in the structural connection between order and power, and second, in the psychological connection between authority and destructiveness: A specific quality of frontal space is to distribute, order, and classify bodies, forces, speeds, and signs. This connection between order and power is especially evident in colonial systems of order that were used to produce subjects addressable by power; for example, through the introduction of school systems. In this context, different frontal spaces show very particular qualities of partitioning.

In addition to the quality of the space, we are also interested in the underlying psychological mechanisms of the authoritarian and the effective power of leading and following. The psychoanalyst Erich Fromm describes the authoritarian character as a personality with a penchant for power and order and stereotypical conventions, mental conformism, subservience to authority, destructiveness and self-aggrandizement. Analogously, he describes the sadomasochistic character: "He admires authority and strives to submit to it; at the same time, however, he wants to be authority himself and to make others submissive to him."