De Pauw (Engels) - depot voor het VTi

josse de pauw
(whereby the build-up of tension focused mainly on the passage
of time). In addition to these quite new (meta-theatrical) elements,
there were also a considerable number of constituents
from the world of cartoons (e.g. an immensely long arm that
crawled over the stage) and parodic variants on variety theatre
(e.g. catch and acrobatic numbers, puppet numbers, dance and
music numbers). Radeis wegens ziekte was a chain of more or
less separate absurdities whose main connection was the set. The
agency behind all this absurdity was also written into the performance.
Is it the four directors who sit in their film-set chairs at
the end? Or the implacable voice that shouted where the actors
had to drag parts of the scenery: ‘Attention. Position K2.
Interior: upstage middle. Position K1. Interior: 30° left, position
K2. Position K3. As arranged.’
The next production, Ik wist niet dat Engeland zo mooi was
(1979-83) was invited to the Amsterdam Festival of Fools and
from there took off internationally (with an adapted title: I didn’t
know the continent was so beautiful). Whereas it was hardly possible
to distil any theme out of Radeis wegens ziekte, in its successor
the group was more focused on a goal. This production no
longer consisted of a series of numbers quite separate from each
other, but was a more or less coherent whole: four holiday-makers
who end up in cheerless surroundings fill it up in no time at
all with things that can be used to make jokes. The piece
arranged fairly classical acts as intermezzi (2 clowns, acrobats,
megaphone band, etc.) in a basic structure that combined variants
on variety (striptease, Hawaiian dance) with a surprising
series of absurdities. There is a permanent humorous contradiction
between events on stage and the very clear frame of reference
(holiday-makers). In the booklet The Flemish Theatre and
the work of Radeis, Carlos Tindemans described the piece as ‘A
clown’s work of high level, homogeneous from concept to structure’.
6 Frivolous meta-theatricality remained a trade mark of
Radeis in this piece too. It was not by chance that the performance
ended with several words (spoken by Josse De Pauw): ‘La
mare. Teatro esperimentale’.
Gag-o-matic (1979-80) was not really a theatre production, rather
a sort of travelling exhibition, a peepshow, made out of the sets of
the previous productions and specially intended for fairs and such-
18 / Kritisch Theater Lexicon - 14 e - August 2001
artistic development: de pauw’s way and weg
like. The actors’ performance was reduced to minimal proportions,
and in fact they became the invisible manipulators of a
miniaturised theatre of objects. The spectators could peep at about
fifty miniature scenes through peepholes.
Radeis once more increased their dramatic unity in the last but
one production Vogels [Birds] (1981-84). The successive situation
sketches formed a proper mini-story with a beginning, middle
and end. The acting area was filled by an immense birdcage.
A small bird-being suddenly hatched from a giant egg and was
soon seeking freedom. Two other birds, who had lived in the
cage for some time, followed the newcomer when it escaped.
After an enjoyable exploratory trip (full of nonsensical jokes)
they return to the cage. The youngest bird-being has had slightly
too much enjoyment from his freedom and has to be punished
(by having an egg smashed on his head: another clown act).
Although Radeis prided themselves on not appearing moralistic,
in this case it was more difficult to ignore the direct symbolism.
The synthesis of Radeis’ work and at the same time the end of its
artistic career was Echafaudages (first version 1981, second
1983). In the second version in particular, this piece followed a
logical, coherent pattern. The group now introduced a clear
social discourse, regarding the relationship between worker and
machine. The action was set on a building site, near some scaffolding.
Even before the working day began, the work area was
brought to life by invisible hands: machines made strange
sounds, a trestle went for a short walk, etc. Then the actors
themselves made their entrance, as workers. The machines are
caressed, lamps light up when they are stroked, a circular saw
roars for its breakfast, two machines enter into a jealous duel for
attention and love. After this confrontation with their equipment,
the workers direct their energy at each other. In this way
they escape the dreary reality in all kinds of games and fantasies.
At the end the workers form a protest march with an odd solidarity,
and march lame and stumbling towards the audience with
the red flag raised. In this play, the act of communication with
the props reaches a peak. The actors manipulated the objects in
such a way that with only minuscule movements they began to
lead a life of their own. All at once the smallness of the animated
objects became the centre of the action.
19 / Kritisch Theater Lexicon - 14 e - August 2001