Jan Morris’s retrospective collection of vignettes opens with an encounter with a man on a bench in New York which perfectly distils the tenor of her writing. It embodies an eye for the beauty in apparently unremarkable scenes, a warm sympathy for others, tempered with just a touch of the old-school anthropologist’s detachment: the stranger is consistently ‘the black man’. Morris has a predilection for verbal grandeur, offset by a self-consciousness which punctures any threat of pretension; she enlivens the prosaic with literary allusion and, most characteristically of all, good humour – ‘Be not afeared’, she says, ‘the isle is full of noises’. ‘Bugs, too’, responds the man.

This scene launches a series of ‘brief encounters’, animating the human beings who populate the places she has visited. Taking its name from the cry ‘Contact!’ which launches a spitfire, or the image of electrical contacts, this collection expresses the energising and ‘inspiriting’ effects of human contact. It consists mostly of short independent passages, each with a title ranging from the faintly cryptic – ‘Breath of the woods’ – to the more matter-of-fact – ‘Costa del Sol, 1960s’ – sometimes lifted verbatim from previous publications, otherwise re-remembered and shaped to fit the format. Its subjects are by turns demotic and elite, from Aborigine activists to Yves Saint Laurent and Harry Truman. She leads us from Istanbul to Slovenia by way of a Manhattan McDonalds or a flasher in Athens, taking in portraits at times funny, at others haunting, like the unhappy man in Kanpur who touches objects in the street without a word, ‘apparently to strict unwritten rules’.

Morris has always had an eye for people and a tendency to pepper her accounts of places with insights into those who inhabit them. Her descriptions often have the slight air of a social taxonomist or ethnographer, and her anthropocentric approach brings this aspect of her writing to the fore. The term ‘Negro’ stands out, as does the description of Ethiopians as ‘beautiful lithe-limbed animals’.

There is nothing objectionable in her sentiments, but the reader may occasionally feel a little uncomfortable, as one might with an awkward great-aunt. At times her prose reads like the field notes for Frazer’s The Golden Bough, recording the curious characteristics of the world’s tribes, national, ethnic and social, and their rituals. Morris has seen more of humanity than most, though, and has taken more time to experience its variety. The warmth of her regard for her subjects often comes through.

The fragmented nature of the recollections, and the absence of any narrative cohesion, suggest that this is a book best experienced a little at a time. When read in sustained bursts it can feel like sitting at dinner with a well-read and well-travelled raconteuse: the sheer flurry of anecdotal variety can leave you with diegetic indigestion. The book moves between portraits of individuals with well-chosen details – like a playwright’s spare notes on his characters – suggestive snapshots, and overheard conversations.

Like memories which come unbidden, there is something at once sentimentally satisfying and frustratingly hollow about these portraits: each is a witness to something that is past, its wider context apparently irrecoverable; detached, staccato. Eichmann appears in the dock, but so incidentally that he is immersed in the pool of common humanity, such is the brevity of these vignettes. The collection ends with moments of human intimacy: a shared complicity in winking at a cab driver in Alexandria, and a personal memory of holding hands with her partner as their child dies. The reader, too, feels incomplete: there’s no closure here. All the images it gives us resonate, yet few other portraits are as intimate as this last one. Ironically, this recollection is set at home, and as a counterpoint it reminds us of the transience innate in any human contact.

I’ve often wondered what Michelangelo’s reaction would be if he were plucked from 16th century Milan, and deposited in, say, the Tate Modern. I can’t help but feel that he’d be a little disappointed at what he saw. He must have known that art would develop and change – yet I don’t think he would have predicted the path that the art world has taken in recent years. In the last few decades alone, we have had pickled sharks and unmade beds, people in bear costumes and sheds that are actually boats that are actually sheds.

And now we reach the latest manifestation of this never-ending mutation: Michael Landy’s Art Bin. Essentially, it is a skip. A very large and transparent skip, yes, but a skip nonetheless. As the name suggests, this skip is designed for a particular type of rubbish – unwanted artworks. A ‘monument to collective failure’, Art Bin has already swallowed works by big-name artists such as Tracy Emin and Damien Hirst, and Landy is running a scheme through which we, the members of the public, can apply to have our artworks disposed of. After six weeks, the contents are to be crushed and turned to landfill (or ‘Landyfill’ as the artist has termed it).

Landy is no stranger to such acts of destruction; in 2001 he famously catalogued and then destroyed all of his personal possessions with an industrial shredder. Break Down was celebrated by some as a protest against consumerism, but was criticised by many as a waste: surely it would have been better to give his belongings to charity? Others merely dismissed it all as a stunt. But not only did he destroy his clothes, his passport, his photographs and even his car, he also wrecked hundreds of artworks (a few of which had been gifts from other artists), which was condemned by some in the art world. Landy is by no means the first to carry out artistic destruction – Robert Rauschenberg once erased a drawing by the Dutch abstract expressionist Willem de Kooning – he is simply the first to take it to such an extreme.

As in Break Down, Landy tries to use Art Bin to question the concept of ownership of an artwork. If a piece is sold or given away, whom does it belong to? Of course, legally it belongs to the purchaser or recipient. But does the artist retain any rights pertaining to what happens to the work? Members of the public wishing to dispose of another’s art in Landy’s skip need to confirm they have the express permission of its creator before it will be accepted, which does somewhat quash the debate. But can we go further, and ask whether art should even be destroyed at all? Obviously, only a small fraction of artworks are actually masterpieces, but all art is a creative celebration of the world around us – is it not wrong to destroy any part of it?

Landy wrote in The Guardian that he was ‘interested in failure’ and that it was ‘all about value’. This is one of the major problems I have with the piece. How can an artwork ever be a creative failure? Of course, it can fail in the eyes of its creator, but a piece will always have some value, however small and difficult to find. In terms of artistic merit, there are countless works in galleries around the world that I would have been ashamed to produce as a toddler, yet others celebrate them. It takes only one person to view an artwork, and it is worth something. Or, in the case of Art Bin, it just takes Landy to view it, and it can be worthless in a moment. And that is the strange thing. He judges what ends up in the skip – he is the self-termed ‘bin monitor’. So the contents of Landy’s creation are based on his opinion of failure, rather than on the opinions of others.

But can we even call Art Bin a creation? Surely it is the opposite of creation; the whole concept behind it is centered on destruction and its own existence is meaningless without the dropping, smashing and eventual crushing of the work of others. Can we even call it art? Perhaps it is something else. Anti-art? Call me old-fashioned, but there needs to be some aesthetic appeal to something for it to be referred to as ‘art’. That doesn’t mean that I only consider paintings and sculptures to be art – in fact the ‘readymade’ work Bicycle Wheel, by the pioneer of conceptual art, Marcel Duchamp, is a favourite of mine. It possesses an innate beauty and poise, with the wheel balanced gracefully on the stool. A large skip, on the other hand, holds no such attraction.

Art Bin projects a question mark onto the state of the art world today. What is the value of art? Like most contemporary artworks, it sets out to be novel and outrageous and, for a brief while, it has commanded the attention of the media. But is this enough?

The Imps are all about improvisation and this latest show is no exception. If you’ve been to anything they’ve done before, you’ve seen how they work the same word or idea in many unexpected ways.

This show continues with their trademark audience involvement and improvisation. Here they use just five performers and the energy level felt muted; of course that could be due to the grey Thursday evening, but it was disappointing.

The other consequence of the small cast was that the characters could be confused easily as roles changed raidly. The lack of props makes the characterisation all the more important and, although in some cases this was handled well, greater consistency was needed.

Details aside, the acting was quite impressive and the cast seemed to be enjoying themselves. The second half revisits the first half’s scenarios with an ambitious twist, yet this wasn’t really pulled off well. The idea of setting the first half’s scenarios in the past is a good idea but was not always convincingly executed. The choice of time period relies on the audience.

There were some good moments when the actors managed to include a few references to the World Wars or other topical details, but even these were not that funny. Transforming a scene set at a bus stop in the first half, to one at a tram stop in the second is clever but not in itself humorous.

The concept is probably too ambitious because it demands that the actors know the appropriate vocabulary and social customs for whichever time period the audience choose and that they must convey this without props or costume.
The idea is an ingenious one, but I’m sceptical about whether even the Imps at their best could do this and I don’t think they were at their best during the preview. Despite this, it is still a fun way to spend an hour or so, and it will be interesting to see how the show changes when it is on next week.

two stars

IMPerium is at the BT Studio, 23-27 Feb, 19.00

The day is May 5th. The year is unspecified. The cast and crew of Anton Chekhov’s infamous Three Sisters invite you to a small provincial town in Russia (conveniently located in the Hertford College Bop cellar) for Tara Isabella Burton’s rendition of the play.

The piece, performed in a promenade style where the audience is invited to sit, stand and walk around the living room set, deals with the frustrations and aspirations of the Russian Prozorov family, who are dissatisfied with the state of their current lives.

Olga (Flo Oakley), Masha (Cassie Barraclough), and Irina (Ali Walsh), the three sisters, distinctly unique in their respective character approaches, each give the performance an authentic believability that carries the play.

The brave attempt to incorporate spectators directly into the piece challenges the audience to see an overall picture of the piece as it progresses. ‘Dynamic performing’ is taken to a new level as the acting is not limited to one section of the ‘stage’ at a time, but involves continuous action throughout the duration of the play.

Keeping the audience continually involved, however, at times impedes on the focus on any ongoing dialogue as there is a lack of specific focus.

The ensemble struggles to find a rhythm throughout parts of the play, and there is a slight lack of energy and flow within the group as a whole. Yet there are notable highlights, including several touching and mesmerizing monologues. One is almost compelled to lean over and console Masha as she passionately declares her love for Vershinin (Huw Smith-Jones) to the other two sisters in Act Three.

Anything but conventional, one will inevitably be drawn into the play. If not on a mental plane, then at least physically.

three stars

Three Sisters is at the Hertford Bop Cellar, 23-27 Feb, 7.30pm

The impressive and imposing setting of Merton’s Gothic chapel gives this production of Milton’s 1671 tragic drama the weight and atmosphere it deserves.

The play combines a model of Greek tragedy with a Hebrew setting. Taking its inspiration from the Book of Judges, it follows the struggles of the Biblical hero Samson and his attempt to come to terms with his loss of strength and betrayal. The play begins with the protagonist reduced to a blinded captive and unfolds as he is visited by three important figures.

The play is staged as a promenade performance in which various scenes are performed in different parts of the chapel. The audience follows the action around and is herded between scenes by the chorus. This approach gives the play a dynamism which it otherwise lacks.

As the play progresses the action moves from the outer chapel into the main chapel itself. This mirrors Samson’s own character development and emphasises a sense of inevitable tragic progression. The performance is thus rendered visually varied and innovative. The choice of space really does carry the production and adds a heavy solemnity to the action. The staging has been carefully planned to maximise the space available and does so very successfully. With a large audience, however, it could be awkward and huddled. I was put off slightly at the thought of standing for fifty minutes in the cold chapel and having to fight for a view.

The acoustics of the chapel were, on the whole, excellent at maximising the actor’s deliveries. Lines however needed to be delivered more clearly and slowly at times due to the echo. The production uses liturgical chants to aid the movement between scenes, contributing further to the sombre feel of the performance. Music also helps to smooth the transition between scenes and builds on an already great atmosphere.

Bevil Luck’s Samson successfully combined the portrayal of an anguished and broken man with the more self-assured elements of his character, andJames Lowe’s sneering and superior Harapha was very enjoyable to watch. His performance made good use of space and movement. However, I would like to have seen more physicality from the performance as a whole. The longer speeches at times lacked variation in tone and pace. The chorus has a perhaps unavoidably problematic role as observers of the action but unfortunately I felt that they only added to this static feel.

Overall the use of the chapel’s stunning visual backdrop was enough to overcome these more problematic elements. In this way they have succeeded in creating a deeply atmospheric and emotionally engaging production.

three stars

Samson Agonistes is at Merton College Chapel, 24-27 Feb, 8.15pm