I – THE PUBLIC IMAGE OF TROUBLEYN

We do not recognise ourselves in the pitch-black image depicted of Troubleyn and Jan Fabre since the publication of the open letter in 2018. The letter’s description of Troubleyn as a closed, repressive, sexist, toxic community does not reflect our experiences. We do not support the image portrayed of Jan Fabre as a racist, abusive harasser, who uses torture, mockery and violence in the workspace. This description does not fit the person we know.

We are deeply saddened to have read the testimonies of the former colleagues who felt their work with Troubleyn crossed personal borders. It is not our intention to attack our former colleagues or to question their personal experiences. We do respect their feelings. We do hear them. Nevertheless, we feel compelled to give voice to those performers and collaborators who see their time at Troubleyn and their working experience with Jan Fabre as a positive, fulfilling, even crucial step in their careers. We wish to convey the positive experiences and interactions that are part of Troubleyn, because until now, they have been wholly overlooked.

Some of us have already attempted to add our experiences to the public debate, but have been met with intimidation. For this reason, in February 2019, we presented Sven Gatz, the Belgian Minister of Culture at that time, with a letter supporting the future of Jan Fabre and Troubleyn. One hundred and thirty-three former and current collaborators of Jan Fabre signed this letter, which was accompanied by 90 testimonies describing positive personal experiences with Jan Fabre and Troubleyn. But as we listen to the opinions and condemnations of Troubleyn and Jan Fabre by people who have never worked with or had
any affiliation with the company, as we watch Troubleyn and Jan Fabre repeatedly used as symbols for all that is wrong in the performance arts sector, we want to speak up publicly.

II – WORKING AT TROUBLEYN

We want to be clear about the following – (1) We were not victims. (2) We were not accomplices. (3) We were not manipulated by a toxic organisation.

Troubleyn is a company that supports diversity of culture, opinion, thought and
expression. It has inspired generations of performers and marked the turning point in many careers. For us, it is a place of creative collaboration where the exchange between performer and director is at the core of the work. The deep respect and mutual trust established very early on in the rehearsal process create immense freedom of artistic expression, whereby everybody can explore their personal borders. This freedom and exploration form the basis behind the entire rehearsal period.

A significant number of scenes in a Jan Fabre production are conceived by the performers. The intensity and intimacy of these scenes can only be achieved in a safe environment, where each individual is free and responsible for the safety of himself/herself and his/her colleagues. The idea that performers are forced to do things on stage against their will contradicts this working process.

We understand that what some consider to be a welcome challenge or a stimulation may be felt by others as intimidation or pressure. That what some people feel as discomfort, others experience with joy and gratitude. That the freedom some feel through the intensity of exploration, others feel only as suffering. This is a matter of personal perspective.

We feel that we all have the responsibility to find inclusive solutions that accommodate our different characters, needs, strengths and vulnerabilities. These are all equally important. Adapting the workspace to accommodate the feelings of the most sensitive is not always fair to everyone. We want to work towards an empowered theatre scene, not a neutral one devoid of risk. We see this as our challenge.

Following the publication of the open letter, Troubleyn committed itself to the call for change that had arisen throughout the performing arts field. Not in the form of a rhetorical signature supporting the idea of change, but with real steps towards real change. Its current work policy is a testament to that.

III – JAN FABRE’S WAY OF WORKING

The suggestion that Jan Fabre does anything he pleases with his employees in the name of Art is not true and has unfair implications for the people who work or have worked with him. It undermines their autonomy, their self-respect and their will. To imply that performers allow themselves to be tortured, abused and bullied by Jan Fabre in order to reach certain levels of artistic expression, or as a way to please him, diminishes their talent, their achievements and their professionalism. It is reductive of Jan Fabre’s decades of experience and knowledge as a leading director to suggest that violence and intimidation
are his ‘artistic strategies’. They are not.

We make a clear distinction between Jan Fabre’s powerful leadership and the systematic tyranny of which he has been accused. The strict discipline and firm structures used in his work are platforms that enable performers to reach authentic states of expression; this intense process is central to his work and is not to be confused with tyranny. After all, anybody who has ever undertaken an artistic project understands that creativity does not tend to thrive under any form of tyranny.

Any performer who has ever worked with Jan Fabre knows the depth and range of creative expression that he inspires. The appreciation, respect, attention and trust he gives to each performer generate a tremendous amount of confidence, pride and courage.

Jan Fabre has high expectations of excellence, an explosive energy, a tough conduct and authority in the workspace. We see these qualities as the attributes of a strong character – a strong director. The theatre has been, and (we believe) should always be made up of explosive, implosive, extroverted and introverted people who challenge both each other and the taboos, ideas and norms of society.

There will always be people who are enthusiastic about Fabre’s work, and others who criticise it. But, surely, when someone decides to work with Jan Fabre, he/she is familiar with the intensity and the topics of his work. These should not come as a surprise. It is sufficient to look at his work from the past 35 years, or to participate in one of his auditions, to understand the nature of his research. Nobody stands on his stage by chance.

IV – CANCELLATION OF PERFORMANCES

Today, after all that has been said and done, we have to express our profound regret. In 2018, 2019 and again in 2020 several performances of Troubleyn were cancelled. This was the direct result of the open letter, the public shaming, and the pressure that was put on theatres and festivals by various action groups to specifically cancel Troubleyn shows.

The performances that were cancelled were created by Jan Fabre at the Troubleyn -Laboratorium in Antwerp, but would not have been possible without the enormous creative, physical, mental and emotional investment of the performers, technicians, designers and assistants. It is a great loss that this work was disregarded and destroyed with the aim of damaging the future of the company. It is demoralising and a form of aggression, censorship and monopolisation of justice that we do not endorse.

On a broader cultural level, we would like to ask the question – should members of the public or the performance community have the right to determine which performances should be banned or not, according to whatever social justice movement they are aligned with?

We do not claim to have a better truth, or that Jan Fabre and Troubleyn are perfect or without error. But we share what we know from our experience because we have worked with Jan Fabre and with Troubleyn; a company that has celebrated the beauty, the diversity, the fragility and the strength of the human spirit for decades.

We defend and continue to value the many worthwhile and enduring contributions they have made – not only to the history of Western theatre, but to our careers and our lives as well.

We hope that our opinions, our experiences, our perspectives and our sincere feelings offer an insight into the workspace of Troubleyn, and why we do not support its destruction as a gesture of empowerment.

Signed by Total of 276 (19 Anonymous) :

© Reframe Platform - all right reserved