My recent performance work – PENUMBRA – involves the use of traditional theatrical lighting to project a special ‘zone’ onto the stage – the lighted area is described as a “NO ZONE.” Outside of the “NO ZONE” something is permitted. And inside the “NO ZONE” that same something is prohibited.
The work attempts to mix-up roles which are usually kept separate – that of ‘on-stage’ actor/performer and ‘behind-the-scenes’ director/technician.
Since I am both performer and lighting-operator I can direct the powerful beam wherever I want (even into the faces of the audience) and, within the construct of the performance, the “NO ZONE” is imposed wherever the light falls.
A member of the Liverpool audience suggested that the space described is in fact a “NO COMFORT ZONE” and this seems very fitting!
(images – stills from video documentation by Sam Meech)
Typically, when re-presenting and interpreting ‘law’ we use ‘words’. And such has been the bias of the use of the technology of words in re-presenting and interpreting ‘law’ that the two seperate things often become inter-mingled in our minds. Example:
We talk about the letter of the law. But, in situations, where this phrase is deemed appropriate close scrutiny reveals that what we really mean is the law of the letter.
I’d like to imagine a universe where instead of ‘words’, ‘law’ is re-presented and interpreted using ‘light’ and ’shadow’.
In the opening chapter of ‘The Concept of Law’ (1961) “persistent questions” and “perplexities” at the heart of legal theory are outlined, and H. L. A. Hart (regarding the difficulty which judges and legislators face in interpreting and ascribing ‘law’) enigmatically states:
all rules have a penumbra of uncertainty
Hart’s allusion to the medium of ‘light’, and the boundary between light and shadow, to describe the edge/perimeter/boundary of ‘law’ not only makes for an elegant metaphor, but also points to a greater bandwidth of media – not merely words – which could be instrumentalised for legal communication.
Recent Comments