Reviewed by:

• Nomadic Theatre: Mobilizing Theory and Practice on the European Stage by Liesbeth Groot Nibbelink
• Silvija Jestrovic

Liesbeth Groot Nibbelink argues in her brilliant book Nomadic Theatre: Mobilizing Theory and Practice on the European Stage not only that the spectator becomes mobile, but that the theatre space itself is set in motion by nomadism. Conceptually, the book adapts Deleuze and Guattari’s notion of nomadology, the point of which is not rootless rambling but rather a specific attitude to place that destabilizes the fixity and normativity of space as territory, into its own original proposition: nomadic theatre. As Nibbelink understands it, the key attribute of nomadology is neither movement nor mobility, but the way it puts into relation space, place, mobility, and identity, thereby shifting the politics of perception. [End Page 271]

Nibbelink makes clear from the start that nomadic theatre is neither a genre nor a descriptor for various kinds of traveling performances, but rather a concept that is useful “for thinking through practice and for mobilizing theory” (15). Nomadic theatre is concerned with territories and modes of displacement; it explores new experiences of spectating attuned to different affective and sensorial registers; at its heart is experiment and play. The author calls her concept of nomadic theatre a “toolbox” (ibid.) with which to explore the production of space through performance (both its poetics and its politics), the process of spectating, and the interconnectedness of places, objects, ideas, and identities. Hence, as with Deleuzian nomadology, while motions and movements are often deployed in the formation of the theatrical spaces and events the book considers, the nomadic is found in the attitude to place, in the mode in which the web of intersections has been weaved, and in the way the spectator becomes situated within it. Nomadic theatre is therefore both a way of thinking through creative practice and an analytical tool to understand patterns of de- and reterritorializing in and through performance.

These patterns of de- and re-territorialization in staging movement and mobility are examined through the following thematics, with a chapter devoted to each: “Encounter,” “Displacement,” “Cartographies,” “Diagrams,” and “Architectures.” Each adds a new aspect to the formulation of nomadic theatre and its kaleidoscopic dramaturgies. Chapter 2, “Encounter,” uses Dries Verhoeven’s solo performance walk No Man’s Land (2008–14) to explore the question of mobility. Nibbelink argues that the performance confronts the audience with migrant and refugee experience of place, being, and belonging. In chapter 3, “Displacement,” Nibbelink turns to Lefebvre to analyze Rimini Protokoll’s Call Cutta (2005) and its sequel Call Cutta in a Box (2006–12) as specific dramaturgies of the “production of space” through performance, whereby the action is directed remotely yet performed/embodied locally. In other words, the “production of space” is shaped simultaneously from afar and in situ. Set side by side, these chapters complement one another through their approach to performances of mobility on the part of actors and audiences, revealing how nomadic theatre emerges through the intersections of local encounters and remote operations.

Turning to another Verhoeven production—Trail Tracking (2005), an imaginary journey at the site of an abandoned railway station—in chapter 4, “Cartographies,” Nibbelink builds further on the exploration of the politics of location with a feminist twist. The chapter analyzes Trail Tracking’s spatial dramaturgy of connectedness as a way of understanding spectatorship not only as an embodied but also an embedded practice. Nomadic theatre is described here as a situated practice, wherein nomadism is a kind of site-specific and even, one might add, site-sensitive practice, in the sense of performance and its spectatorship being attuned to the particularities of place. Therefore the relationships to and within the site, what Nibbelink calls the “spaces of proximity” (115), become key to understanding how nomadic theatre constructs, or rather opens, the reception process further. This is also the main consideration of the fifth chapter, “Diagrams.” Here, the author deploys the Deleuzian concept of diagram, which invites the spectator into an open process, while also setting the terms of...

审核人：

• 游牧剧院：在欧洲舞台上动员理论和实践Liesbeth Groot Nibbelink
• 西尔维娅·杰斯特罗维奇

Liesbeth Groot Nibbelink 在其出色的著作《游牧剧院：欧洲舞台上的理论与实践动员》中指出，不仅观众变得可移动，而且剧院空间本身也被游牧主义推动。从概念上讲，这本书将德勒兹和加塔里的游牧学概念改编成它自己的原始命题：游牧剧院，其观点不是无根的漫无边际，而是一种破坏空间作为领土的固定性和规范性的特定场所态度。正如 Nibbelink 所理解的，游牧学的关键属性既不是运动也不是流动性，而是它放入关系空间、地点、流动性和身份的方式，从而改变了感知的政治。[第271页结束]

Nibbelink 从一开始就明确指出，游牧戏剧既不是一种类型，也不是各种巡回演出的描述，而是一种“用于实践思考和理论动员”的有用概念（15）。游牧戏剧关注的是领土和流离失所模式；它探索了适应不同情感和感官记录的观看新体验；它的核心是实验和游戏。作者将她的游牧戏剧概念称为“工具箱”（同上），通过表演（诗意和政治）、观看过程以及地点、物体、思想的相互联系，探索空间的生产，和身份。因此，与德勒兹的游牧学一样，虽然运动和运动经常被部署在本书所考虑的戏剧空间和事件的形成中，但游牧者存在于对地点的态度、交叉点网络的编织模式以及观众成为位于其中。因此，游牧戏剧既是一种通过创造性实践进行思考的方式，也是一种分析工具，可以理解在表演中和通过表演进行的去领土化和重新领土化的模式。

这些分期运动和流动性的去领土化和再领土化模式通过以下主题进行了检查，每个主题都有一个章节：“相遇”、“位移”、“制图”、“图表”和“建筑”。每一个都为游牧戏剧的形成及其千变万化的戏剧结构增加了一个新的方面。第 2 章“邂逅”使用 Dries Verhoeven 的独奏表演《无人地带》（2008-14）来探讨机动性问题。Nibbelink 认为，表演让观众面对移民和难民的地方、存在和归属感。在第 3 章“位移”中，Nibbelink 转向 Lefebvre 分析 Rimini Protokoll 的Call Cutta（2005）及其续集Call Cutta in a Box（2006-12）作为通过表演“生产空间”的特定戏剧，其中动作是远程指导的，但在本地执行/体现。换句话说，“空间的生产”是在远方和原地同时成型的。这些章节并排放置，通过他们对演员和观众的流动性表演的方法相辅相成，揭示了游牧戏剧是如何通过本地相遇和远程操作的交叉出现的。

转向另一部 Verhoeven 作品——Trail Tracking (2005)，一段在废弃火车站遗址的想象旅程——在第 4 章“制图”中，Nibbelink 进一步探索了带有女权主义色彩的地点政治。本章分析Trail Tracking作为一种理解旁观的方式，连接性的空间戏剧不仅是一种体现，而且是一种嵌入的实践。游牧戏剧在这里被描述为一种情境实践，其中游牧主义是一种特定于场所的实践，甚至可以补充说，在表演的意义上，它的观众与场所的特殊性相协调。因此，与场地和场地内的关系，即 Nibbelink 所说的“邻近空间”（115），成为理解游牧剧院如何构建，或者更确切地说是进一步打开接待过程的关键。这也是第五章“图”的主要考虑。在这里，作者部署了德勒兹的图概念，它邀请观众进入一个开放的过程，同时也设定了……的条件。