Diana Taylor - The Archive and The Repertoire Summary

ACTS OF TRANSFER

The Hemispheric Institute of Performance and Politics convened the second annual Encuentro in 2001.
The gathering aimed to explore performance as a means of political intervention.
Participants, including artists, activists, and scholars, engaged with the term "performance" diversely.
Jesusa Rodríguez humorously labeled the participants performenzos, highlighting the perceived craziness of their endeavors.
Tito Vasconcelos impersonated Marta Sahagún, humorously acknowledging the ambiguity and potential irrelevance of performance.
The exchange underscored the anxieties surrounding the definition of performance and its potential for interventions.

PERFORWHAT STUDIES?

Performance studies offers insights into Latin American and hemispheric performance traditions.
This is done by reevaluating disciplinary and national boundaries from the 19th century and centering on embodied behaviors.
Conversely, historical debates on performance practices in the Americas inform the theoretical scope of performance studies.
It's crucial to address the specifics of performance within a cultural milieu shaped by corporate promotion of "world" music and decisions made by UNESCO regarding cultural rights and heritage.
Performances serve as crucial acts of transfer by conveying social knowledge, memory, and identity through reiterated behaviors.
Richard Schechner refers to these reiterated behaviors as ‘‘twice-behaved behavior.’’
Performance functions as both the object of analysis, encompassing various practices and events, and the methodological lens for analyzing events.
Practices like dance, theatre, political rallies, and funerals involve theatrical, rehearsed, or conventional behaviors.
These practices are typically separated to create specific analytical focuses.
Framing can either be part of the event itself or imposed externally through a methodological lens.
Performance can be a methodological lens that enables scholars to analyze events.
Civic obedience, resistance, citizenship, gender, ethnicity, and sexual identity are rehearsed and performed daily in the public sphere.
Understanding these as performance suggests embodied practice, along with other cultural practices, offers a way of knowing.
Performance and aesthetics of everyday life vary from community to community, reflecting cultural and historical specificity in enactment and reception.
Performances travel, influencing others while remaining rooted in their immediate environment.
The "is/as" highlights performance as simultaneously real and constructed, bridging ontological and epistemological discourses.
The multifaceted uses of "performance" reveal complex layers of referentiality.
Victor Turner connects performance to the French etymological root parfournir to furnish forth, relating to completing or carrying out thoroughly.
Performances for turner reveals culture's deepest and truest character.
Performance can also denote constructedness signaling artificiality antithetical to the real, or the constructed recognized as coterminous with the real.
Framing acknowledges differentiation. however, it does not imply that performance is not real or true.
The idea that performance distills truer truth than life itself runs through Aristotle, Shakespeare, Calderón de la Barca, Artaud, and Grotowski.
Business contexts often use the term to mean acting up to one’s potential.
Political consultants recognize performance as style over substance in determining political outcomes.
Science explores reiterated human behavior via memes which are stories, songs, habits, skills, inventions copied through imitation.
Performance studies encompasses wide ranging notions about the definition, role, and function of performance.
The field addresses embodiment while also challenging traditional ideas of it.

Staying power of performance

Digital technologies prompt reformulations of presence, site, ephemerality, and embodiment.
Peggy Phelan limits performance's life to the present, emphasizing its disappearance.
Joseph Roach connects performance to memory and history, emphasizing its role in knowledge transfer.
Debates on ephemerality are profoundly political when considering whose memories and traditions disappear if performance lacks staying power.
Terms like 'performative' (Austin) and 'performativity' (Butler) have emerged from philosophy and rhetoric.
Austin defines 'performative' as uttering that performs an action, clear in marriage ceremonies where "I do" carries legal weight.
Derrida emphasizes citationality and iterability querying if a performative statement could succeed without repeating a coded statement.
Butler frames 'performativity' as the socialization producing gender and sexuality identities through regulating practices.
Butlers framing is harder to identify because normalization has rendered it invisible.
In Austin, performative points to language that acts while in Butler it goes in the opposite direction.
The performative becomes less a quality of performance, instead it's a quality of discourse.
We should use performático or performatic to denote the adjectival form of the nondiscursive realm of performance (contemporary Spanish usage).
It is vital to signal digital and visual fields separate from the discursive one privileged by Western logocentricism.
Problems in using performance and its cognates arise from the broad range of behaviors it covers.
Multilayeredness indicates interconnections and frictions among systems of intelligibility.
The concept of performance has a history of untranslatability being locked into disciplinary and geographic boxes.
These untranslatabilities are what make the term and the practices theoretically enabling and culturally revealing.
Performances reflect our desire for access and the politics of our interpretations.
Part of undefinability characterizes performance studies as a field.
Performance studies emerged from social and disciplinary upheavals in the late 1960s and sought to bridge anthropology and theatre by examining social dramas and enactment.
Performance studies grew out of these disciplines and inherited assumptions and methodological blind spots.
It is important to keep in mind that anthropology and theatre studies were and are composed of various different and conflicted streams.

Disciplinary Preoccupations

Performance studies inherited a radical break with normative behavior notions from 1970s anthropology.
Emile Durkheim argued that social conditions account for behaviors and beliefs, not individual agency.
Those who disagreed with this position argued that culture was an arena of social dispute in which social actors came to struggle.
Turner, Singer, Goffman, and Geertz wrote of individuals as agents in their own dramas.
Norms, they argued, are contested, not merely applied.
Analyzing enactment was crucial in establishing claims to cultural agency.
Humans shape systems.
The dramaturgical model highlighted aesthetic and ludic components of social events as well as the in-betweenness of liminality and symbolic reversal.
Hymes, Bauman, Briggs, Bateson, and Rosaldo were influenced by Austin, Searle, and Saussure.
They focused on the performative function of communication parole (Saussure).
The linguistic emphasized cultural agency at work in the use of language.
The everyday creativeness of other people was invested in as resourceful, specific, and authentic ways of using language.
Performance scholars face the Western positioning of anthropology from its colonial heritage.
The "us" studying and writing about "them" was part of a colonialist project.
Scholars working in the 1970s were trying to break away from the paradigm that fetishized the local, denied agency, and excluded them from knowledge circulation.
Communication continued to be unidirectional as "they" did not have access to "our" writing.
This revealed ambivalence as to whether "they" occupied a different world or whether there are interrelated and coeval.
The emphasis was still on written instead of embodied knowledge.
Little thought was given to the ways contact with the non Western shaped the very notion of Western identity.
Some anthropologists and theatre scholars were influenced by the modernist impulse to seek the authentic, primitive, and purer expression of human conditions in non Western societies.
1970s literature attempts to illustrate that these "others" were fully human with meaningful performance practices exposed anxiety produced by colonialism about the status of non Western subjects.
Explanatory frameworks were decidedly Western in spite of decolonizing sentiments.
Turner's concept of social drama has been foundational but the universalist claims for its ubiquity strain against the rather narrow filter he has for understanding it which is Aristotelian drama.
The idea is that social drama closely corresponds to Aristotle’s description of tragedy in the Poetics.
Turner’s theories about events structured with a recognizable beginning, middle, and end may have less to do with the supposedly spontaneous events than with his analytical lens.
They may be correct in noting the interdependency of social and cultural performances, it may be important to question whether and how this interdependency would work cross culturally.
His position as an objective observer sets up the unequal and distorting perspective that results in the double gesture in writing about performance practices in contexts other than our own.
From theatre studies, performance studies inherits a proclivity toward the avant-garde that values originality the transgressive, and the authentic.
The non Western is the raw material to be reworked and made original in the West.
Performance is an aesthetic practice rooted in surrealism, dadaism, cabaret, the living newspaper, and rituals of healing and possession.
Avant-garde emphasis on originality, ephemerality hides traditions of performance practice.
Kirby asserted environmental theatre is a recent development, associated with the avant-garde, admitting examples from Greek theatre onward labeled by the same term.
Claims such as the one put forth by Kirby in the late 1960s epitomize the period’s self conscious obsession with the new as it forgot or ignored what was already there.
These assertions prompted accusations that the nascent field of performance studies was ahistorical.
Western and non-Western mutual construction and ties are not seriously thought about by theorists and practitioners.
That would require that scholars learn the language of the people with whom they seek to interact and treat them as colleagues rather than as informants or objects of analysis.
These colleagues would remain in the loop of all the projects that involved them, from production, to distribution, to analysis.
It would also entail a methodological shift, a rethinking about what counts as expertise or as valid source.
There must also be a valid recognition of the permanent recycling of cultural materials and processes between the Western and non Western.
This reciprocal contact has been most commonly theorized in Latin America as transculturation, the transformative process undergone by all societies contacting and acquiring foreign cultural material.
Cross-cultural discussions remain strained.
Nervousness continues to haunt the writing on performance as an aesthetic practice.
Western theorists in 1990s need to renounce claims of global or universalizing theory.
Easy assumptions regarding decipherability and newness have been lost by many scholars.
Two or three decades after Turner and Kirby, many scholars have lost the easy assumptions regarding decipherability and newness.
Western theorists in the 1990s need to renounce claims of global or universalizing theory.
Emphasis on seemingly disinterested observation and survey reinscribe dominance of the critical position.
Historical documents are all written by decidedly First-World theorists.
Foreign views differ radically from those of the Euro-American interculturalists, being less self assured.
The double critical move highlights an area of concern (the non Western) and negates it in the same move.
It distances non Western cultural production as radically other and then attempts to encompass it within existing critical systems as diminished or disruptive elements.
Roach points out that Performance is as much about forgetting as about remembering.
Domination by culture, by definition, by claims to originality and authenticity have functioned in tandem with military and economic supremacy.
Methodologies should be revised constantly through engagement with other interlocutors as well as other regional, racial, political, and linguistic realities both within and beyond national boundaries.
This does not mean extending existing paradigms to include other forms of cultural production, nor does it justify limiting interlocutors to those whose backgrounds and language skills resemble our own.
There must be an active engagement and dialogue, however complicated.
Performance existed as long as people have existed, even though the field of study in its current form is relatively recent.
Performance studies emerged on the academic scene with inherited baggage but has overcome some of those limitations.
Eurocentrism and aestheticism of some theatre studies clash against anthropology’s traditional focus on non Western cultural practices as meaning making systems.
Geertzs ethnography of trying to read a manuscript is set against theatre insisting on everyones active participation and reaction.
We are all in the picture, all social actors in our overlapping, coterminous, contentious dramas.
Distanciation relies on notions that spectators are keenly bound up with events onstage, not through identification but participation and intervention.
In Latin America, performance has commonly referred to performance art.
Charges that performance is an Anglo word has people appreciating the strategic qualities of the term.
Although the word may be foreign and untranslatable, the debates, decrees, and strategies arising from the many traditions of embodied practice and corporeal knowledge are deeply rooted and embattled in the Americas.
Performance includes, but is not reducible to, any of the following terms usually used to replace it: teatralidad, espectáculo, acción, representación.
Teatralidad and espectáculo capture the constructed, all encompassing sense of performance.
Theatricality sustains a scenario a paradigmatic setup that relies on supposedly live participants, structured around a schematic plot, with an intended end.
Scenarios as culturally specific imaginaries that are activated with theatricality.
Unlike trope, theatricality does not rely on language to transmit a set pattern of behavior or action.
The colonial encounter is a theatrical scenario structured in a repeatable fashion.
Theatricality flaunts artifice and constructedness.
Theatricality strives for efficaciousness, not authenticity and connotes a conscious, controlled, and, always political dimension that performance need not imply.
Spectacle, I agree with Guy Debord is not an image but a series of social relations mediated by images.
It ties individuals into an economy of looks and looking that can appear invisibly normalizing.
Theatricality highlights the mechanics of spectacle.
Both terms are nouns with no verb.
Acción can be defined as an act, an avant-garde happening, a rally or political intervention.
The economic and social mandates pressuring individuals to perform in certain normative ways fall out.
Acción seems more directed and intentional, and thus less socially and politically embroiled.
Representation conjures up notions of mimesis, of a break between the real and its representation, that performance and perform have complicated.
A better term may be Olin coming from the indigenous language Nahuatl meaning movement.
Olin, meaning movement in Náhuatl, seems a possible candidate.
Olin is the motor behind everything that happens in life, the repeated movement of the sun, stars, earth, and elements.
Olin, also meaning hule or rubber, was applied to sacrificial victims to ease transition.
Areito is the term for song dance, from the Arawack aririn, and was used by the conquerors to describe a collective act involving singing, dancing, celebration and worship that claimed legitimacy.
In this case, replacing a word with a recognizable, albeit problematic, history such as performance with one developed in a different context and signal a profoundly different world view would only be an act of wishful thinking and domination.
As a theoretical term rather than as an object or a practice, performance is a newcomer to the field.
Performance carries the possibility of challenge, even self challenge, within it.
It connotates a process, a praxis, an episteme, a mode of transmission, an accomplishment, and a means of intervening in the world, it far exceeds the possibilities of these other words offered in its place.
The problem of untranslatability is a positive one a necessary stumbling block that reminds us that we do not understand each other.
We should proceed from the premise that we do not understand each other and recognize that each effort in that direction needs to work against notions of easy access, decipherability, and translatability.

Performance Studies

By taking performance seriously as a system of learning, storing, and transmitting knowledge, performance studies allows us to expand what we understand by knowledge.
This shift might prepare us to challenge the preponderance of writing in Western epistemologies.
Writing has paradoxically come to stand in for and against embodiment.
Critics claim that the indigenous peoples past had disappeared because they had no writing.
Embodied expression has participated and will probably continue to participate in the transmission of social knowledge, memory, and identity pre- and postwriting.
Embodied culture must revalorize expressive in order to shift our focus from written culture and the discursive.
Instead of focusing on patterns of cultural expression in terms of texts and narratives, we might think about them as scenarios that do not reduce gestures and embodied practices to narrative description.
The concept of performance would prove vital in redefining Latin American studies because it decenters the historic role of writing introduced by the Conquest.
Writing seemed not to spring from social life but rather to be imposed upon and to force it into a mold not at all made to measure.
Writing was primarily a prompt to performance, a mnemonic aid.
More precise information could be stored through writing and it required specialized skills, but it depended on embodied culture for transmission.
Coding transmitted knowledge, writing censored and scribes lived in fear.
Histories were burned and rewritten.
The space of written culture then as now seemed easier to control than embodied culture, because writing was far more dependent on embodied performance for transmission.
Florescano’s description of these mutually sustaining systems overemphasizes the role of writing.
Limiting to understand embodied performance as primarily transmitting those essential facts written in the codices would be limiting because the codices communicate far more than facts.
Many kinds of knowledge that involved no written component were also passed on through expressive culture through dances, rituals, funerals, colors.
Scribes were trained and taught dancing and recitation.
What changed with the Conquest was not that writing displaced embodied practice but the degree of legitimization of writing over other epistemic and mnemonic systems.
Those who controlled writing gained an inordinate amount of power to the exclusion of the indigenous.
Writing allowed European imperial centers to control their populations from abroad.
Writing Is about distance.
There was repression of indigenous embodied practice as a form of knowing as well as a system for storing and transmitting knowledge.
Nonverbal practices that preserve a sense of communal identity and memory were not considered valid forms of knowledge.
Many kinds of performance, deemed idolatrous by religious and civil authorities, were prohibited altogether.
Claims manifested in the tying of robes or in performed land claims ceased to carry legal weight.
Those who dedicated their lives to mastering cultural were not considered experts instead of book-learned scholars.
Neophytes could no longer lay claims to expertise or tradition to legitimate their authority, instead the church substituted its own practices.
The rift does not lie between the written and spoken word, but between the archive and the ephemeral repertoire of embodied practice/knowledge.
Archival memory exists as documents resistant to change.
The archival sustains power and works across distance.
Bones might remain the same but their story may change, depending on the paleontologist or forensic anthropologist who examines them.
Written texts allow scholars to trace literary traditions, sources, and influences.
The archive exceeds the live.
Objects located there might mean something outside of the framing of the archival impetus itself.
Objects become what is selected and classified.
Individual things might mysteriously appear or disappear from the archive.

What is the Repertoire?

The repertoire enacts embodied memory of performances, gestures, orality, movement, dance, singing and it requires presence.
The actions that are the repertoire do not remain the same.
The repertoire keeps and transforms memories.
Sports and Dances change over time.
They permit scholars to trace traditions influences.
Individual instances of performances disappear from the repertoire, to a lesser degree in the archive.
The process of selection, memorization, and transmission takes place within specific systems of re presentation.
Multiple forms of embodied acts are always present, though in a constant state of againness and knowledge.
Even weddings need the performative utterance of I do and the signed contract and Columbus planting a flag.
Materials from the archive shape embodied practice in ways that are never totally dictated.
Viewers make use of mass media and allow for responses.
Those responses and behaviors are taken up and appropriated by the mass media in a dialogic rather than a one way manner.
The tendency has been to banish the repertoire to the past.
Writing provides historical consciousness and orality provides mythic consciousness.
Millieux de memoire what he calls the real environments of memory enact embodied knowledge, gestures/habit.
Sites constitute the primordial, unmediated, and spontaneous sites of true meaning and the archival memory is their antithesis and fictional.
The relationship between them is not sequential, nor true versus false.
Even though it too readily falls into a binary, the written in archival constituting hegemonic power and the repertoire providing the anti hegemonic one.
Modes of storing and transmitting exist.
Performances contribute to maintaining repressive order, from pre conquest sacrifices to lynchings to torture and disappearances as the relationship between different kinds of knowledge is often antagonistic in cultural survival and supremacy.
Tensions in the the archive and the repertoire continue to play out in discussions about world culture and intangible heritage.
Laws increasingly come into place to protect intellectual and artistic property, including the protection of intangible property.

UNESCO

Laws have increasingly come into place to protect intellectual and artistic property.
UNESCO is considering ways to protect Intangible heritage, they promote work in safeguarding, protecting and revitalizing cultural spaces or forms of cultural expression proclaimed as masterpieces of the oral and intangible heritage of humanity.
These safeguards would protect traditional and popular forms of expression such as storytelling.
Yet, it is not clear that UNESCO has been able to conceive how best to protect this Intangible heritage, with associated strategies with the archive.
Masterpieces points not only to objects, to an entire system of valorization that Artaud discarded as outdated.
Heritage, linked etymologically to inheritance, again underlines the material property that passes down to the heirs.
UNESCO's project involves moving materials from the repertoire into the archive through recording their form on tape.
UNESCO is trying to protect embodied transmission and has developed “Living Human Treasures.”
These solutions seem destined to reproduce the problems of objectifying, isolating, and exoticizing the non Western that they claim to address. this conjures visions of a fetishized humanoid object.
Without understanding the working of the repertoire it will be difficult to know how to develop legal claims to ownership.
The strain between the archive and the repertoire has often been constructed between written and oral language, and contains verbal performances of songs, prayers, and speeches along with nonverbal practices.
Traditions are stored in the body and transmitted “live” in the here and now to a live audience.
The writing = memory/knowledge equation is central to Western epistemology.
That model continues to bring about the disappearance of embodied knowledge that it so frequently announces.
In the writing is a limitation that de Certeau attributes here to speech, contributes to the political, affective, and mnemonic power of the repertoire as I argue in this study.
Freud's writing pad bypasses the historically situated human body in his theorizations on memory.
The psyche can be imagined only as a writing surface, the permanent trace only as an act of writing.
Freud calls for a “history of writing’’.
The dominance of language in writing has come to stand for meaning itself.

Performance and Performance Studies

It can take seriously the repertoire of embodied practices as an important system of knowing and transmitting knowledge.
The repertoire expands the archive used by academic departments as some of these departments do combine the workings of the archive and the repertoire in productive ways.
Nonetheless, many of these departments do combine the workings of the archive and the repertoire in productive ways, although perhaps not in the way that scholars might expect.
Departments that take the teaching of language seriously think about reiterated embodied social practice.
Theorizing these practices as not just pedagogical strategies but as the transmission of embodied cultural behavior allows to branch out.
The disciplinary compartmentalization of the arts reinforces the notion that they are separable from the social constructs within which they participate.
Every performance enacts a theory, and every theory performs in the public sphere.
Performance studies can bring disciplines previously kept separate into direct contact and context.
Training challenges students to develop theoretical paradigms by drawing from textual and embodied practices.
They receive training in various methodologies.
The tendency in cultural studies to treat all phenomena as textual differentiates it from performance studies.
Paying attention to the repertoire now.
Instead of privileging narratives, we could also look to scenarios as meaning making paradigms that structure social environments, behaviors, and potential outcomes.
Scenarios of discovery appear constantly throughout the past five hundred years, and have explanatory and affective power that can be parodied and subverted by what is already there.
Ghosts, images, stereotypes get discovered and might be staple characters.
People undertake adventures to live the glorious fantasy of possession.
The scenario structures our understanding and becomes a form of hauntology by resuscitating old dramas.
The framework allows for occlusions and helps to disappear others percepticide.

Scenarios

The scenario includes features well theorized in literary analysis but demands that we also pay attention to milieux and corporeal behaviors not reducible to language.
The setup lays out the range of possibilities and all elements are the product of economic, political, and social structures.
They pass as universally valid, and are flexible and open to change.
The friction between social actors and roles allows for detachments and agency.
The scenario of conquest has been subverted from within.
Like narrative, scenarios are limited to a finite number of variations, classifications, categories, themes, forms, characters.
To recall reactivate a scenario we need to conjure up the physical location.
Scene denotes intentionality and conscious strategies of display.
Furnishing, clothing, sounds, and style contribute to understanding.
If space is a practiced place then there is no such thing as it.
In scenarios, viewers needs to deal with their embodiment of actors.
introduce the generative critical distance between social actor and character, stressing importance of the attributes of character.
Whether mimetic representation or social actors assuming socially regulated patterns, the scenario allows us to keep actor/role in view simultaneously, and recognize resistance and tension.
These frictions make for moments of parody and resistance in performances in the Americas.
Parody takes place in front of Spaniards.
The model says the opportunity to rearrange characters grants the embodied nature of the repertoire.
Scenarios, by encapsulating setup and actions predispose outcomes and allow change.
The frame is repeatable and transferable.
Scenarios reference each other through framing.
The frontier scenario organizes diverse events.
Scenarios reflect the multifaceted systems at work, and the challenges is not to translate from embodied expression to linguistic but recognize strenths of each.
Transmissions remind of the existing of many forms, not reducible to the next.
The scenario forces us to be there, therefore it precludes distancing, although that is not easily achieved. even the ethnographer is involved in the scenario, even as they fight against it.
A scenario is not necessarily mimetic; rather, it is about reactivation of familiar situations.
Saidiya V. Hartman says that its obscence to exploit the sufering of slavery, is our role to witness.
The scenario physically places the spectator, and can force the ethical question.
By expanding our ability to analyze practices, traditions, and forms of transmission the notion will let us realize archives works to transmit knowledge in this way; also the scenario frames the spectator to be part of its ethics and politics.

HISTORICIZING PERFORMANCE

Two discursive moves that work to devalue native performance, even while the colonizers were deeply engaged in their own performative project of creating a new Spain consist of: 1 the Dismissal of performance is episteme because of its ephemeral and constructed and visual nature, 2 dismiss content and deemed as bad object.* Discourses sustain each other
Erasure and discredit populations, therefore, are under questioning
Documents were destroy
The Huarochiri manuscript states a connection between writing with the existance of early life. therefore only fading from view happens when the population doest write
the lives of the peoples writing, disappears, its like they where never around, performance sudies has no populations its like an absence
That scholars complain of lack of valid sources proves and stresses biases
Durán stressed values of writing for and it the colonial project.
The knowledge must be lost in the destruction of writing because the consultation of memory is gone, therefore one should rely on their own best judgement.
Writing serves a strategy for repudiating and foreclosing the very embodiedness it claims to describe.
Repudiations of practices cannot be limited in an exhibition
Thinking helps in determining the form, so that no archival logic affects what is seen, it is also an advantage to thinking about a repertoire performed through dance, theatre, etc., as something that cannot be housed in an archive, due to its ephemeral being.
Charges against the ephemeral and constructed visual state has tied the disrcourse to idolatry.
Truth destroys idol with “Hammer of God.

Idolatry

Sahagun claims Creator's power/the people create idols the unhappy people.
Fact vs Construct dichotomy creates fracture with Ontological and Epistemological (is/as)
Colonist insist sacred power comes from seeing and those know how to see true God.
Indigenous have manifested a god through sun, moon, ect. What's to come requires a certain level of force.
Mexicas believe that nature must also ritually change and be naturalized.
Mountains as much as temples go between what's above vs below, in terms of functions.
The ixiptlal the image does not suggest imitation but suggests the understanting of “sprititual and physical being fully intergated”.
What this translates to is that made vs sacred/quality, since making means a way to communicate with someone or something, an presence, and to exchange.
That said something had to make way for a delegate since they where sacred, they acted as one body with god in this context.
Catholics saw objects as “bad” idols.
Spaniards suggested with the temporyiness that phenomena came and went, but they where still present in the way and role of human beings.
During years the leading elders have spoken with Sahagún to educate and have images that show idolatrous things and do its role.
Performances would not give order, this is because it would suggest a debate rather then actually following a directive.
The Devil planted land and thicket to preform work and hide.
Colonist can only meet access, while the devil gets to be open.
Community is constituted through shared performance and linguistic context.
Colonist writing is recognised because the devil will return!
Preservation is a call for erasure and the approach allowed documentation and disappearance.
Sixteenth Century have reveal admiration and value
Performances would mean that the observer could not understand.
A government order said to leave fiestas and make sure there is no areitos and this suggests to stop those in church to make it look like a spectical.
Dancing, jumping, were labeled and had a scandal.
The church said there was NO point in saying dance the song of ritual of there past, so they say keep in there mind “superstitions of ancient heathenism”.

MULTICODED PERFORMANCE

Indigenous performance transferred the knowledge in this new church system in that it was not a tension but the conversion to that system.
Then the convert were being found to worship the old way.
Idol hidden where in use under churches to reverence God.
Instead of replacing practices allowed continuity since “those” kneels.
Truth in pirty made someone ask the truth due to native performing.
Mimetic ability led colonists use to to make them Christian and use sacraments.
How could clergy now when converted would be sincere. Since where they now with them in performance now, because they still do this till this day.
Even Catholicism where linked to heathen like “ridiculous “ cerimonies
Image allowed belief system to flourish.
Transcultured formed such as music, dance and the use of color continued in old times.
The Bent Knee may signal devotions to the Catholic Saint
In that case the transfer works to multiplication and simultaneity that said by Joseph to transmit occurs.
Rejection and not rejection and embrace causes change to allow there cultural practices.
Story could tell continuity with face.
Multicodedness is visible by what one spectator, spectator, and witness all say.
It gives a convergence and is called (CORPUS CHRISTI) or there a acquiescence.
They did this while priest kept watch, since everyone acted “appropriate” in a ritual.
People where getting there point because now make believe could take place in performances to this day.
Religious pilgrims maintains culture and combines element in various belif.
Artists uses older plots to illuminate modern conditions; others such as Coatlicue, who uses heay metal to show concern in anything she sing and does.
Issues that occur are:
To what degree does performnce take part in transfer in terms of transmission in terms of memories.
That is by gender for chapter 3 can race effect memories.
What happens to a new scence of calutre after a radical change is introduced
How does some scenarios take advantages in political situations
And so in order to avoid rejection instead we avoid a certain intercultural situation.
My past has led my to my understanding.
Therefore my part I take, by joining hemisperic meetings and events.
I give insight I have witnessed in september 11 attacks.