Of course, it is actual to say that exercising political power is simply a large theatre; a place where various plays are exhibited, mostly dramatic, but sometimes entertaining.
Power, from an anthropological point of view, belongs to the essence of life. It is even, 1 might say, its kind. In a word where there are at least 2 people – there is already hierarchy, distinction, and this straight leads to the conclusion that there is always any relation of superiority and subordination between these people, and that is what we call power. In time, as communities grow, these fundamental behaviors get an institutionalized character, they form the rituals of power and accompanying its manifestations. Until we start talking about political power. And in this relation we come to a point where we can say that power is – not primarily – but besides a theatre. The scene of this endless performance. With the triumph of the mass, meaning the proclamation of the spread of power, this theatre became immense and even gigantic.
The large scene, the powerful apparatus that allows the show to be broadcast and the virtually unlimited audience. Rows of chairs, beds and inexpensive standing places. But let's not be deceived, a dramatic scene, contrary to appearances, is not what political theatre is. The second is simply a simple imitation. possibly necessary, but in its pronunciation it is trivial. So what's all this art about? Scenes and audiences are invariable in this case. Everyone actually plays their part. He is either an individually known actor or an anonymous crowd of viewers. Whatever. tiny or large. It is so a fun convention: to entertain, to instruct, to inspire feelings and emotions, but nothing more. And what is the theatre of power called upon in the title? He's a gigantic charm. It's expected to chain it to a chair or any another place for the viewer.
So why do we propose that there is simply a difference between these types of theatres? That is due to the fact that modern political theatre is something completely different. It is said that in this spectacle everyone is actors and spectators. Places are – this time – interchangeable. There's no more scene and territory for the audience. Large and uniform space dominates. All the players in the game are in constant motion. present here, next day there. Not much: it's even said that with any luck, actually anyone can become a manager or another functional person.
We are not only exhibitors, actors, spectators, but in fact everyone is the author of the performance, or at least co-author; even 1 issue played. 1 drama, 1 piece, 1 mass. And it doesn't seem like a stage. Everything is public, painfully public. These signs of the time besides affected institutions from their deepest nature as conservative as the Roman Church. Nowadays, in sacral construction there is no discrimination between the chancel and the space for the faithful. The naves besides disappear. Democratisation of spiritual architecture is simply a determinant of the era. All this until blood is shed, lots of blood.
Antoni Koniuszewski
Przemyśl Polska, nr 13-14 (24-31.03.2024)
