This rehearsal room looks like a film studio. Is it true that audiences cannot see the players?

That's right. If you use video, you have to do it right. That also means that the audience does not see the actors playing 'live'. Take this part of the set, for example. It looks shitty when you're on top of it but with strong lighting we create a "lens flare" effect on the movie screen. A really cool image that you could never create on an open stage. In France, they still experience this as a provocation. But this choice has mainly to do with Don DeLillo's visual style of writing. Which calls for a cinematic approach.

‍

How can we see that? That video in theatre is perceived as provocation?

Until a few years ago, critics always immediately questioned it. Whereas we now have some directors who do it really well and people can see that this technique can have the same power and quality in theatre as in film, it is better understood. But then again, we are talking about France huh... how can I explain that? It's not so much conservatism as the face that French theatre tradition is based on the poetic power of language. It is still a strange sensation for me working with Dutch actors; they attach less importance to that. What interests them is the situation their character is in. That is what they play. In France, actors are more concerned with the beauty of the language. Here, they feel free to change the text if they don't like it.

‍

A word on the use of video. What is its importance to you, in terms of what you want to tell? Is that about focus, perspective …

No - I don't care about that. When directors say it's about focus, that's a lie. Because you can do that even with the means of theatre. For me, it's about something completely different. My problem with theatre is that it is always about the 'here and now'. Theatre is barbed present. What I like about film is that it is dead. I don't want to tell stories to celebrate the present. I'm a sad guy, I want to feel that it's over. Moreover, Don DeLillo's work echoes twentieth-century American and European film history. He writes books like the films he saw when he was young; in his language, the images are more important than the words. The same is true of many other writers. Getting audiences to experience this literature does not work through speaking actors. One of the actors asked me if I wouldn't rather make films then . I never ask myself that question. My opinion is that if you do this in the theatre, then it is theatre.

What I find interesting about what you describe is that the 'dead' film and the 'living' theatre happen simultaneously in the performance. The actors may not be visible but audiences know and feel that life is happening behind the screen. Surely that is a theatrical strategy par excellence.

Exactly. I think audiences should always suffer a little. The power of language and image are greater when you have to work for it. Not getting to see what you want is part of that. In all the performances I have made, with or without video, I look for such tension. It has something violent but I hope it makes people think. I consider my work more installation than theatre. Beauty in form and structure are more powerful than the idea of, say, a 'clean soul'. I care less about the stories. The most powerful emotions I experience with film and literature always have to do with the structure and with the sheer beauty of the form.

‍

Is it your first time working outside France, without the collective?

I worked in Germany once before but stopped there after two weeks. That had to do with the conditions. I can't actually work in rehearsal rooms. The images I make are at least as important as everything else and I have to be able to see the result immediately. The actors are part of the material. Don't get me wrong, I love them and the goal is for them to be the most important in the end. But that is not my starting point. They have to work hard to rise above the technique. I cannot work if what I see is not beautiful.

‍

How do you like working at ITA?

Frankly, I am very impressed with the level and flexibility of the actors and their ability to understand a variety of theatre language. My language is close to a way of working that is familiar to them but if I were to take a classical approach, they can do it too. Like my own company, they work hard. That's nice because you don't often come across that in the big European theatres. The days are too short, I think, but when they come they know the text and are willing to dive fully into it. It's very nice to work with them. And in this space I have almost everything I need.

‍

You have previously been a guest at ITA with two productions. What impression did you get of Dutch audiences?

For Les Particules élémentaires, I was there and it was a fun but strange experience for us to see that Houellebecq's language does not shock audiences here. As if it were the most normal thing in the world, the way the characters talk about sex, about violence. There are moments in the show where people are so cruel... Audiences here found that "amazing". That was very strange for the actors. In France, audiences react differently. For example, when talking about the female body you can feel the tension rising. Or about the hippie movement, about which rather bold statements are made. In France, I hear "You really can't say that!" Here, people respond with "Yes, that's the way it is".

‍

What is your take on that, is there more openness or is it indifference?

I have only been here for six weeks so I don't know this country very well yet but I sense something in society that is very different from France. Here, people seem so... structured. They know what they are doing and react in a controlled way. It's different from North America. There, during the performance, nothing happens at all but when it's over, people clap loudly and shout "wow, wow". Like robots. It's not like that here. People are elegant and restrained. "It was beautiful", they say, "let's have a beer". And everyone is nice, even the waiters. That's different in France. I feel at ease. But that ability to tolerate violence in language remains strange.

Is your work also understood differently than in France?

I don't think so, it's not so much about what they think and feel but more how they express it. The fourth part of 2666 consists of almost an hour and a half of loud music and text, without actors. Here I got a lot of reactions from people who at least tried to understand the artistic choice. In France, they react more directly, much less reflexively.

‍

Would you direct a French classic?

No. Or maybe when I'm old. And even then, there will need to be a good reason for it. I talked about my penchant for nostalgia, maybe for that reason I will one day pull out a Molière. I keep having to explain here that in France there are only a handful of directors fighting for contemporary theatre. Here in the Netherlands this is normal, in Germany too. They find doing a Molière sexy. But in France we still have a battle to fight. It is a political choice for me to be one of the guys who choose only contemporary authors.

‍

Does it give you freedom, to work abroad and not have to deal with that discussion?

Yes indeed. But I am also missing something. When I play in Avignon, I know exactly which critic will hate my work. Here, I have no idea what makes people uncomfortable. But the good thing is: this company [ITA ensemble] was built up by Jan Versweyeld and Ivo van Hove to make the kind of theatre I want. I can work here with two of the best video designers in Europe. It's a privilege. I know young creators from Italy, Spain and Eastern European countries for whom it is necessary to work internationally because otherwise they have no opportunities to produce. In France it's different, you can spend your whole working life in the theatre. That's a luxury but also a problem. My company plays half the time outside France because I want to make European theatre. That's not just a term, it really means something.

What does that mean to you, being a European artist?

I grew up with Flemish theatre culture. They were the first performances I fell in love with. Then came German theatre and the work of Italian Romeo Castellucci. That was all a far cry from what I knew from France. Many of my generation discovered theatre through Isabella's Room by Jan Lauwers. That was an important production for a whole generation of artists, as was the work of Jan Fabre and Toneelgroep Stan. That inspired us. I feel more related to that than to the Comédie Française. I love theatre but I don't think you should glorify a theatre culture. That happens in France. It's about how to speak, move or act. We have to create a boundless theatre. I feel more European than French. Except when it comes to gastronomy. Here, I only eat seeds and grains. Hahaha!

‍

Will more guest directing follow?

In France, I have my own company with 30 staff and that brings responsibility. If I work elsewhere, it comes at the expense of creating a show with them. I find that problematic. They are my life, my friends, my family, my energy. My life consists of not being alone. I don't feel lonely here but I'm not with my family. That's the reason why I say no to international assignments. At ITA, they were persistent and I am grateful to them but I don't want to do it too often.

I read that you plan to move to Calais with your theatre family?

That's true but it won't happen before 2022, 2023. When I was younger, my dream was Theatre Group Hollandia [the company founded by Johan Simons and Paul Koek in 1985, ed.]. In France, nobody knew that but I dreamed of a big theatre company in the countryside. But within the French theatre system, an independent company with its own venue is almost unimaginable. Yet it's a good system, the best in Europe perhaps, for a single reason: as an independent artist to realise a huge production like 2666, that's only possible in France. If you want to get started in Germany as a young director, you have to start with a small production and the worst actors. That I could do this is crazy. So there is money but artists always have to work with an institution. I want my own place and I want to realise that in Calais.

‍

Why there?

It is a tough, hard city with a complicated political situation because of migrants. How they are treated is terrible. It is very important to have a cultural place there. And because I am a child of Belgian theatre culture, I like being in that part of Europe. It will be difficult but I hope it works out.

‍

Published on 10 April 2019.

‍

Photos: Harry Brieffies