Laura Cull

Dr Laura Cull Ó Maoilearca


Reader in Theatre and Performance
BA; MA; PhD
+44 (0)1483 686451
04 NC 00

Biography

Biography

Laura Cull Ó Maoilearca is Head of the Department of Theatre & Dance and Senior Lecturer in Theatre Studies.

She is author of 'Theatres of Immanence: Deleuze and the Ethics of Performance' (2012); editor of 'Deleuze and Performance' (2009) and co-editor of 'Encounters in Performance Philosophy' (2014) with Alice Lagaay and 'Manifesto Now! Instructions for Performance, Philosophy, Politics' (2013) with Will Daddario.

She is a founding convener of the professional association, Performance Philosophy (http://www.performancephilosophy.org); joint series editor of the Performance Philosophy book series with Palgrave Macmillan and joint editor of the Performance Philosophy journal launched in 2015.

Research interests

Performance Philosophy; 20th and 21st century experimental theatre and performance - especially Artaud, the Living Theatre, Allan Kaprow, Lygia Clark, Carmelo Bene, Hijikata Tatsumi, Marcus Coates & Goat Island; relationship between performance and Continental philosophy - especially Deleuze and Guattari, Bergson & Laruelle; concepts of authorship, collaboration, collective creation & audience participation in performance; affect; time and duration; nonhuman animals in performance; manifestos; relationship between performance and mental health - particularly schizophrenia.

Research collaborations

Core Convener of the Performance Philosophy network

Joint editor of Performance Philosophy book series, Palgrave Macmillan

Secretary of Performance Studies international (PSi)

Member of Theatre and Performance Research Association (TaPRA)

My publications

Publications

Goulish M, Cull LK (2009) sub specie durationis, 7 pp. 126-146 Edinburgh University Press
This collaborative text explore the relationship between space and time through the lens of Deleuzo-Bergsonian thought and with reference to the work of the performance company, Goat Island
Cull LK (2013) ?Performance Philosophy: The ?Mind the Gap? and/or ?Performance as Philosophy? debate?,
Performance Philosophy:
The ?Mind the Gap? and/or ?Performance as Philosophy? debate

In this presentation, having narrated something of the emergence and development of the field of Performance Philosophy (and the professional association that seeks to cultivate it), I would like to focus on two related debates at the core of discussions in the area. Amongst the many themes that concerns this new field is what I have described elsewhere as ?the problem of application? or illustration ? a theme that we share with the sister discipline of Film Philosophy. That is, a fundamental question of the area remains the nature of philosophy?s engagement with its ?objects? and to what extent we might challenge the conventional hierarchical relationship between philosophy and performance, broadly construed, in which performance is (ab)used as mere illustration for an existing philosophy rather than as a source of philosophical insight in itself.

Secondly, I will continue to address some of the divergent views concerning the nature of the relationship between performance and philosophy by focusing on what we might call the ?Mind the Gap? and/or ?Performance as Philosophy? debate. In his provocative keynote at the inaugural Performance Philosophy conference, specifically addressing the context of ?theatre?, Martin Puchner (2013) argued: ?What makes the study of theater and philosophy interesting, even thrilling, is the very fact that they two are so utterly and irreconcilable different, that they are institutions of a very different ilk that cannot be even brought close to each other. It is the and that makes all the difference, it is the gap between theater and philosophy that makes the study of their relation interesting and even possible in the first place. The study of theater and philosophy must take its point of departure from this gap and this gap must remain at the forefront of all successful undertakings in this direction?. Responding to Puchner, and others, I will also explore the alternative view that articulations of ?philosophy as performance? and ?performance as philosophy? need not be homogenizing or reductive claims that ignore the differences between specific practices; rather, the ?as? (in exchange for the ?and?) signals an opening to reciprocal (in)determination or mutual transformation, as well as questioning the attribution of differences based on conventional disciplinary lines alone.

Cull LK (2015) Editorial, Performance Philosophy 1 1 pp. 1-3
This is an editorial introducing the inaugural issue of Performance Philosophy ? a new open access, online journal that aims to offer international researchers a stage for the performance of thought as to the myriad potential relationships that might be understood to exist between ?performance? and ?philosophy?.
Cull LK (2013) 'A Response to Martin Puchner?s Drama of Ideas', in Forum on Martin Puchner, "The drama of ideas", ed. by C. Rozzoni, with M. Puchner, D. Kornhaber, L. Cull, T. Stern, M. Harries, Lebenswelt: Aesthetics and Philosophy of Experience (3) pp. 116-124
Cull LK (2013) Collective Creation as a Theatre of Immanence: Deleuze and The Living Theatre, 7 pp. 129-144 Palgrave Macmillan
This chapter explores the potential value of addressing the theatrical practices of collective creation and directing alongside the philosophical concepts of immanence and transcendence, particularly as the former are manifested in the work of the Living Theatre and Goat Island, and as the latter are construed in the work of Gilles Deleuze. Also touching briefly on Carmelo Bene and Grotowski?s critique of collective creation, the chapter explores immanent authorship in relation to Living Theatre productions such as Paradise Now and Goat Island?s approach to collaboration. The chapter provides an introduction to Deleuze?s concept of immanence, noting its resonance with notions of self-organization and emergence. Resising dualities of mind/matter, self/other and subject/object, the chapter ultimately argues that collective creation and directing cannot be opposed. Rather, all forms of authorship in performance involve a mixture of both immanent and transcendent tendencies.
Cull LK (2011) Attention-training: Immanence and
ontological participation in Kaprow,
Deleuze & Bergson,
Performance Research: a journal of the performing arts 16 (4) pp. 80-91 Taylor & Francis
In this essay I want to look at the works that
the American artist Allan Kaprow (1927?2006)
referred to as ?Activities?, alongside the
philosophy of immanence propounded by
Gilles Deleuze (1925?1995) and with reference
to the notion of ?attention? developed by Henri Bergson (1859?1941).
Cull LK, Daddario W (2013) Manifesto Now! Instructions for Performance, Philosophy, Politics, Intellect
Manifesto Now! maps the current rebirth of the manifesto as it appears at the crossroads of philosophy, performance, and politics. While the manifesto has been central to histories of modernity and modernism, the editors contend that its contemporary resurgence demands a renewed interrogation of its form, content, and uses. Featuring contributions from trailblazing artists, scholars, and activists currently working in the United States, the United Kingdom, Finland, and Norway, this volume will be indispensable to scholars across the disciplines. Filled with examples, it contains a wide variety of critical methodologies that students can analyze, deconstruct, and emulate.
Cull LK (2011) Performing presence, affirming difference: Deleuze and the minor theatre of Georges Lavaudant and Carmelo Bene, pp. 99-110 Palgrave Macmillan
This essay will begin by providing an exposition of ?One Manifesto Less?: Gilles Deleuze?s little known essay on the Italian actor and director, Carmelo Bene, and his only extended piece of writing on the theatre. Rethinking the presence/representation paradigm, Deleuze envisages theatre as that which can put us in contact with the reality of difference. Having introduced the essay?s key concepts of perpetual variation, virtual and actual, major and minor I will then explore the extent to which the contemporary French theatre of Georges Lavaudant takes up Deleuze?s call for theatre to affirm perpetual variation or difference-in-itself. Like Bene, Lavaudant is well known for his surgical operations upon classic texts, and indeed in the recent work La Rose et la Hache (2006), Lavaudant explicitly addresses his debt to Bene. I want to examine the relations between Deleuze, Bene and Lavaudant with a particular focus on the politics of theatre. As Fortier has argued Deleuze?s essay makes revolutionary claims for Bene?s work which Bene himself might well have rejected. Lavaudant, on the other hand, shares Deleuze?s belief in the power of theatre to constitute itself as a form of resistance to forces of homogenization and stasis. As such, we are left wondering why Deleuze did not look closer to home ? to Lavaudant ? for an exemplary minor theatre. By examining Lavaudant?s most recent productions, the essay will close with a reflection on the different nature of the challenges presented to theatre by the political climate that served as the context for Deleuze?s 1978 essay and today?s globalised world. We will conclude that in order to affirm difference, theatre must place itself in perpetual variation; it must perpetually vary in order to have any hope of affecting change.
Cull LK, Goulish M, Hixson L (2013) A Diluted Manifesto, 7 pp. 119-137 Routledge
?Diluted manifesto? is the result of a collaborative, constraint based writing project. The three authors tasked themselves to write three separate yet related pieces, of 300 words, 600 words, and 1,200 words in which they were to propose two contradictory ideas followed by a declaration of a third position which is the ?becoming? of the first two. The writing process was overseen by Walt Whitman and Roland Barthes, amongst others. Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes. A contrast between the Neutral and the tiresome pressure to take a position on questions that are admittedly important.

The nine sections were then assembled in an alternating form determined by a chance process in order to generate a collective and multiple enunciation. This structure partly echoes John Cage?s composition Inlets, and the idea of a piece ?settling down,? or moving from short to long sections. Like Inlets, the live reading of the piece (by the authors at Performing Publics - the Performance Studies international conference in Toronto in June 2010) was interrupted with a long sustained drone just past the centre point. It ended with the recorded voice of ?Hoover the Talking Seal?.

Cull LK (2013) What is Performance Philosophy?,
This talk provided a fully contextualized introduction to the emerging field of Performance Philosophy.
Cull L (2013) ?Philosophy as Drama: Deleuze and dramatization in the context of Performance Philosophy?, Modern Drama: world drama from 1850 to the present 56 (4) pp. 498-520
This article draws from Gilles Deleuze?s concept of ?the method of dramatization?, as well as his wider engagement both with dramatic plays, to explore the idea of philosophy as drama and indeed, drama or dramatization as a vital new form of philosophy. Here, we see how Deleuze?s concept of dramatization the invites us to think of philosophical texts as stage directions, and philosophical concepts as characters waiting to be played anew in specific context. In turn, we see how dramatization allows Deleuze to construe both concepts and characters, not as fixed essences, but as individuals arising from a drama of relations. The discussion is placed in the context of recent debates in the emerging field of Performance Philosophy as to what extent philosophy and performance should be considered separate endeavors.
Cull L (2013) Philosophy as Drama: Deleuze and dramatization in the context of Performance Philosophy, Modern Drama: world drama from 1850 to the present 56 (4) pp. 498-520
This article draws from Gilles Deleuze?s concept of ?the method of dramatization?, as well as his wider engagement both with dramatic plays, to explore the idea of philosophy as drama and indeed, drama or dramatization as a vital new form of philosophy. Here, we see how Deleuze?s concept of dramatization the invites us to think of philosophical texts as stage directions, and philosophical concepts as characters waiting to be played anew in specific context. In turn, we see how dramatization allows Deleuze to construe both concepts and characters, not as fixed essences, but as individuals arising from a drama of relations. The discussion is placed in the context of recent debates in the emerging field of Performance Philosophy as to what extent philosophy and performance should be considered separate endeavors.
Cull LK (2012) Performance-Philosophy: A ?philosophical turn? in Performance Studies (and a non-philosophical turn in Philosophy),
Martin Puchner?s The Drama of Ideas (2010), Freddie Rokem?s Philosophers and Thespians (2010), and Simon Bayly?s The Pathognomy of Performance (2011) are only three recent publications that one could cite as evidence that the international field of Theatre and Performance Research is undergoing what we might call ?a philosophical turn?: an intensification of its long-standing interest in and engagement with philosophy, as a source of diverse concepts, plural methods and multiple ontologies that can be productively explored in relation to performance.

But what is at stake in this turn? What relationship between performance and philosophy is being staged in this work? In this presentation, I will suggest that we need to move beyond the mere application of philosophy to performance, beyond an approach to philosophy determined by a pursuit of the next new and fashionable method of performance analysis. In particular, I will propose that our experiments with what I am calling ?performance-philosophy? need not begin with clear and distinct definitions of each term. We do not yet know what either performance or philosophy can do; it is precisely the indeterminacy of the distinction between the activities that we call ?performance? and ?philosophy? (as exposed in the ?nonart? of Allan Kaprow) that makes performance-philosophy an exciting prospect.

Ultimately, I will argue that the encounter between performance and philosophy is at its richest and most egalitarian if philosophy is willing to encounter performance as thinking, and as that which might extend what philosophy counts as thinking ? a discussion that will also lead us to question the implications of the provocative idea that everything (not just the theatrical subject or philosophical mind) thinks. In this way, I hope to address not only the philosophical turn in performance, but also the non-philosophical turn in philosophy: the democratization of thought that has recently been called for by the French (non-) philosopher, François Laruelle. Non-philosophy will meet nonart, then ? but as its equal, not as its illustration.

Cull LK (2009) Introduction, Edinburgh University Press
This chapter provides an introduction to the key concepts of Gilles Deleuze and the relationship between his thought and performance practice.
Cull LK, Gritzner K (2011) On Participation. Editorial to the Special Issue., Performance Research: a journal of the performing arts 16 (4) pp. 1-6 Taylor & Francis
Cull LK (2009) How Do You Make Yourself a Theatre without
Organs? Deleuze, Artaud and the Concept of
Differential Presence,
Theatre Research International 34 (3) pp. 243-255 Cambridge University Press
This article provides an exposition of four key concepts emerging in the encounter between the
philosophical man of the theatre, Antonin Artaud, and the theatrical philosopher, Gilles Deleuze:
the body without organs, the theatre without organs, the destratified voice and differential presence.
The article proposes that Artaud?s 1947 censored radio play To Have Done with the Judgment of
God constitutes an instance of a theatre without organs that uses the destratified voice in a pursuit
of differential presence ? as a nonrepresentative encounter with difference that forces new thoughts
upon us. Drawing from various works by Deleuze, including Difference and Repetition, The Logic of
Sense, A Thousand Plateaus and ?One LessManifesto?, I conceive differential presence as an encounter
with difference, or perpetual variation, as that which exceeds the representational consciousness of
a subject, forcing thought through rupture rather than communicating meanings through sameness.
Contra the dismissal of Artaud?s project as paradoxical or impossible, the article suggests that his
nonrepresentational theatre seeks to affirm a new kind of presence as difference, rather than aiming to
transcend difference in order to reach the self-identical presence of Western metaphysics.
Cull LK (2011) While remaining on the shore: Ethics in Deleuze?s encounter with Antonin Artaud, pp. 44-62 Edinburgh University Press
This chapter explores the relation between Deleuze and ethics by way of an examination of his encounter with Antonin Artaud. In the first instance, it examines the differences between Deleuze?s Nietzschean, immanent ethics as articulated in his late essay on Artaud, ?To have done with judgement? with conventional approaches which equate ethics with obligation and duty, virtues such as charity, or a utilitarian subordination of the few to the benefit of the majority. In this text, as in Artaud?s censored radio broadcast To have done with the judgement of god, ?God? is the enemy of an ethics of creation - whether he takes the form of the imposition of bodily organisation, the invocation of a transcendent realm to be infinitely awaited, or the measure of plenitude in relation to which life?s differential presence will always be found wanting. The chapter then goes on to discuss how Artaud?s broadcast attempts to perform an ethics of creation with respect to its listeners, by affirming differential presence in performance as the forcing of thought rather than the communication of a message; as the making of a ?theatre without organs? based on the primacy of force over form. Finally, the chapter addresses some of the ethical questions that arise with regard to the relationship between Deleuzian schizo-analysis and actual schizophrenics, between the affirmation of destratification and its undeniable risks ? questions that Deleuze himself raises on a number of occasions, and to which he provides a series of different responses. In The Logic of Sense, for instance, Deleuze discusses Fitzgerald?s alcoholism and Artaud?s madness and questions the ?ridiculousness? of the thinker or ?abstract speaker? who positions herself outside these dangerous experiments: ?Each one risked something and went as far as possible in taking this risk; each one drew from it an irrepressible right. What is left for the abstract speaker once she has given advice of wisdom and distinction? Well then, are we to speak always about& Fitzgerald and Lowry?s alcoholism, Nietzsche and Artaud?s madness, while remaining on the shore? Are we to become the professionals who give talks on these topics??. Likewise, in A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari ask: ?Is it cowardice or exploitation to wait until others have taken the risks?, to wait until others ? whether they are drug users, artists or schizophrenics (or all three) ? have reached the plane of immanence, before constructing one?s own ex
Cull LK (2014) Deleuze?s bodies, philosophical diseases and the thought of illness, 12 pp. 185-198 transcript Verlag
This essay considers both Deleuze?s philosophy of embodiment and his own body, the lived experience of which was shaped by long-term respiratory problems. It notes the recurring theme of ?the breath of fresh air? in Deleuze?s writings and goes on to suggest that Deleuze?s own concept of bodies ? as becomings, as the sum of their affects and as that which forces us to think ? functions as just such an opening to ?the outside? in relation to dominant discourses on the body (particularly the ?philosophical diseases?, as Deleuze calls them, of Platonism and Cartesianism). Finally, the essay returns to the question of ill-health, Deleuze?s affirmation of which is understood not as an affirmation of asceticism, but as part of a new way of thinking health, bodies and thought beyond their traditional humanist and anthropocentric formulations.
Cull LK (2012) Each one is already several& Collaboration in the context of the differential self. Notes on Goat Island & Deleuze & Guattari,
In this paper, I will try to develop a concept of collaboration based upon the discussion of two specific collaborative practices: the collaborative philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari, and the collaborative performance work of Goat Island. Both of these practices are instances of collaborative-thinking; or better, perhaps, I want to suggest that whilst all thinking-practices belong to a process that tends towards collaboration on the one hand and subjectification or individualization on the other, these particular practices tend more towards collaboration than others ? and not just because they involve more than one person. After all, why collaborate, if - as Deleuze and Guattari put it - each one is already several, if the self ? in other words - is already a site of difference and multiplicity? How can collaboration be conceived if ?self? and ?other? are construed as the by-products, rather than as the basis, for a more fundamental becoming, processuality or we might say, collaboration of all things? What specificity, if any, can be left for collaboration if we acknowledge that the solo artist or author was never self-present or self-identical in the first place? These are some of questions addressed in this paper.
Cull LK (2015) Since Each of Us Was Several: Collaboration in the Context of the Differential Self, 7 Palgrave Macmillan
This chapter draws from the work of the US performance company, Goat Island and the philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari to develop the concept of the ?differential self?: a self preceded and ceaselessly (re-)constituted by its relations. It argues that the differential self requires us to expand the definition of collaboration ? not simply as work by more than one person, but a continuum of activities by individual authors, as well as groups. The chapter proposes that Deleuze and Guattari, and Goat Island, dismantle the (real) myth of individual autonomy through collaborative activity, but that this is not tantamount to a rejection of a natural self-presence. It concludes that philosophy and performance are not the products of pre-existing subjects ? however unified or dispersed ? but productions of subjectivities, plural.
Cull LK (2015) From Homo Performans to Interspecies Collaboration: Expanding the concept of performance to include animals, 1 pp. 19-36 Palgrave Macmillan
This essay is concerned with the idea of a expansion of the concept of performance in order to be more inclusive of non-human animals. Could it be that - as part of developing a more animal-oriented Performance Studies (or, research at the intersection of Animal and Performance Studies) - we need to rethink dominant concepts of performance along similar lines to the expansion of ?the notion of language to include embodied communication? (Puchner 2007: 28)? The first part of the chapter deals with this question with respect to performance scholarship; the second addresses it in relation to two specific examples of contemporary performance practice, both of which could be described as forms of collaborative and improvisational performance involving animals (one with wild animals, the other with domesticated ones). The first of these practices is the work of David Rothenberg - a professor of philosophy and music at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, but also a practicing jazz clarinetist with an interest in the production of ?interspecies music?. The second is that of Sami Sälpäkivi, who has been working with horses in Finland since 1999 and specifically on contact improvisation with horses since 2001-2002, as well as forming the first horse theatre in Finland.
Cull L (2014) Performance Philosophy: Staging a New Field, (1) 1 pp. 15-38 Palgrave Macmillan
Acknowledging the long history of interest in the relationship between performance and philosophy, Cull?s introductory chapter nevertheless argues that Performance Philosophy is a new interdisciplinary field in its own right, not just a ?turn? within Theatre and Performance Studies. The chapter then argues against the idea that ?performance? and ?philosophy? are fundamentally distinct, and in favour of the concept of ?performance as philosophy.? Cull provides a critique of the tendency to merely apply extant philosophy to performance but also acknowledges the real difficulty of escaping the illustrative mode, suggesting that to do so requires a radical expansion or mutation of the concept of philosophy ? as called for by the French theorist François Laruelle in his evocation of ?non-standard philosophy.?
Cull LK (2013) (One Less) Manifesto for a Theatre of Immanence, pp. 145-158 Intellect
This chapter provides an introduction to the complex notion of 'immanence' as it appears in the work of Gilles Deleuze before going on to explore the implications of this concept for performance practice. In parallel, the chapter also includes a manifesto for an immanent performance practice, including images created by the author.
Cull LK, Lagaay A (2014) Encounters in Performance Philosophy, Palgrave Macmillan
Encounters in Performance Philosophy is a collection of 14 essays by international scholars and practitioners from across the disciplines of Philosophy, Literature and Theatre and Performance Studies, addressing the nature of the relationship between philosophy and performance. The essays cover a wide range of concerns common to performance and philosophy including: the body, language, performativity, mimesis and tragedy.

The essays introduce and demonstrate the vitality of the emerging field of Performance Philosophy today, but they also provide thorough analyses of the rich history of thinking and practice that this new field inherits. Chapters engage with the work of theatrical philosophers and philosophical theatre makers from the ancient, modern and contemporary periods. Topics addressed include the work of Socrates, Plato, Nietzsche, Deleuze, J.L. Austin, Merleau-Ponty, Heidegger and Lacoue-Labarthe; explored in relation to practices from Greek tragedy and Shakespeare, music and actor training, to experimental theatre and site-specific performance.

Cull L (2014) Performance Philosophy: Staging a New Field, New Arts - Journal of the National Academy of Art 34 (6)
This article provides an introduction to a new field of research connected to, but also independent, from Performance Studies; namely, Performance Philosophy. Having narrated aspects of the (ongoing) emergence of this international and interdisciplinary field, the article goes on to address what is perhaps the most prominent debate concerning the field at present, which I will summarise as the ?Mind the Gap? vs. ?Performance as Philosophy? debate. Most recently, this debate was staged at the inaugural Performance Philosophy conference held at the University of Surrey in the UK in April 2013; however, one can trace multiple iterations of similar arguments not only in previous literature within Theatre and Performance Studies, but throughout the history of philosophy and in related disciplines such as Film Philosophy. As we shall see, this debate concerns divergent opinions as to the nature of the relationship between performance and philosophy (as institutions, traditions, enterprises, concepts, practices and so forth): are performance and philosophy fundamentally different (and hence we should ?mind the gap? between them as Martin Puchner suggests) or can we think in terms of performance as being its own kind of philosophy and indeed of philosophy as a form of performance? With regards the latter argument in particular, I will emphasise that, in this way, Performance Philosophy is less concerned with the application of extant philosophy to performance (as example or illustration) and more concerned with the extent to which performance might be considered a philosophical activity in its own right. To conclude, I will address some of the main arguments that have been presented against this idea of ?performance as philosophy? (largely drawn from literature from Film Philosophy) as well as providing some potential responses to those criticisms.
Cull LK (2012) Affect in Deleuze, Hijikata, and Coates: The Politics of Becoming-Animal in Performance, Journal of Dramatic Theory and Criticism 26 (2) pp. 189-203
Animal affects:
Deleuze & the politics of becoming-animal in performance

This essay seeks to explore the implications for theatre and performance of philosopher Gilles Deleuze?s specific concept of ?affect?, not understood as emotion, but as a pre-personal process of ?becoming? or transformation. In particular, I want to evaluate the politics of the affective process Deleuze calls ?becoming-animal?, and to address the relationship between this process and the approach to the animal taken by Butoh co-founder, Hijikata Tatsumi and UK-based artist, Marcus Coates. In a recent essay, Leonard Lawlor has described our contemporary moment as one in which ?a kind of war is being waged against animal life? (Lawlor 2008: n.p.). Certainly in the UK ? where the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition have either delayed or scrapped entirely the implementation of multiple, vital animal welfare initiatives supported by the previous government - there is currently little evidence of concern for the actual lived experiences of non-human animals. In contrast, I will suggest that the work of Hijikata and Coates acknowledges and responds to ?the need to open ourselves affectively to the actuality of others? ? and especially, to animal affects (Mullarkey 2003: 488).
In the first section of the essay, I provide a clear exposition of Deleuze?s account of affect. Influenced primarily by Spinoza, Deleuze insists upon a distinction between affect and emotion, insofar as he construes the latter as ?a subjective content, the sociolinguistic fixing of the quality of an experience which is from that point onward defined as personal? (Massumi 2002b: 28). Whereas emotion, for Deleuze, is related to the formation of subjects, affect throws subjectivity into disequilibrium, cracking our sense of self. In the process of identification that Deleuze links to emotions and feelings, the subject enfolds the threatening outside into its own internal world (as ?introjection?), whereas affect acts upon the subject like an arrow (or ?projectile?), forcing us to relate to the otherness of the outside, rather than suppressing its heterogeneity through identification (Deleuze and Guattari 1988: 400). Above all perhaps, Deleuze insists that affect precedes those who are affected; ?it is from affects that distinct beings are formed? (Colebrook 2002: 61).
Secondly, I will address the links between this notion of affect and that of ?becoming-animal? ? a concept which, along with ?becoming-woman? and ?b

Cull L (2011) On Philosophy and Participation, Performance Research: a journal of the performing arts 16 (4) pp. 1-142 Routledge
The aim of this issue of Performance Research
is to instigate reflection and to debate on
the relationship between performance and
philosophy from the perspective of the contested
concept of ?participation?. The issue examines
the ways in which modes of participatory
performance engage philosophical concepts,
raise philosophical questions and, vice versa,
how various philosophical approaches to
the theme of participation have engaged art
and performance. The intention has been to
investigate the points of intersection, dialogue
and dissonance between a wide range of
participatory performances and philosophies
of participation, thus facilitating encounters
between concepts and discourses on the idea of
participation that arise from within performance
practice, performance studies and philosophy.
Cull LK (2012) Performance as Philosophy: Responding to the
Problem of ?Application?,
Theatre Research International 37 (1) pp. 20-27 Cambridge University Press
This article begins from the premise that a ?critical turning point? has been reached in terms of the relationship between performance and philosophy. Theatre and performance scholars are becoming increasingly engaged in philosophical discourse and there are growing amounts of work that take philosophy ? from the work of Plato to Heidegger and Deleuze ? as their guiding methodology for performance analysis. However, this article argues that we need to go further in questioning how we use philosophy in relation to performance, and that theatre and performance scholarship should attempt to go beyond merely applying philosophical concepts to performance ?examples?. One way to do this, the article suggests, is by questioning the very distinction between performance and philosophy, for instance by exploring the idea of performance as philosophy. The article concludes by drawing from the work of figures such as Allan Kaprow, Henri Bergson, François Laruelle and John Mullarkey to argue that philosophers and performance scholars alike might extend their conception of what counts as thinking to include not only activities like performance, but embodied experiences and material processes of all kinds.
Cull LK (2013) Performance Studies, pp. 59-66 Routledge
This companion entry summarises the key concepts and methodology of the discipline of Performance Studies.
Cull LK (2012) Theatres of Immanence: Deleuze and the Ethics of Performance, pp. viii-291 Palgrave Macmillan
Theatres of Immanence: Deleuze and the Ethics of Performance is the first monograph to provide an in-depth study of the implications of Gilles Deleuze's philosophy for theatre and performance. Engaging with a wide range of interdisciplinary practitioners including Goat Island, Butoh, Artaud, John Cage, the Living Theatre, Robert Wilson and Allan Kaprow, as well as with the philosophies of Deleuze and Guattari, Henri Bergson and François Laruelle, the book conceives performance as a way of thinking 'immanence': the open and endlessly creative whole of which all things are a part.

Theatres of Immanence builds upon Deleuze's emphasis on immanence, affect, change and movement to provide new approaches to five key topics in theatre and performance: 1) authorship and collaboration, 2) voice and language, 3) animals in performance, 4) audience participation and 5) time or duration. The book provides an accessible introduction to Deleuze's ideas and draws attention to the ethical dimensions of performance, asking: 'what good is theatre, and particularly immanent theatre, anyway?'

Cull LK (2013) Guattari, Deleuze, performance et « folie », Chimères (80) 6
This article is in two parts. The first part gives a broad outline of the ways in which Deleuze and Guattari engage with what Angela Woods has called that ?quintessentially twentieth-century psychopathology?: schizophrenia (Woods 2011a: 48), providing a very brief exposition of their concept of schizophrenia (as distinct from its conventional clinical definitions) before moving on to address some of the problems or concerns that their celebration of ?the schizo? as an emancipated and emancipating figure might be understood to raise. In the second part, I explore some potential connections between these ideas and the area of theatre and performance, thinking in particular about the ethics and aesthetics of what we might name a ?schizo-theatre?. Here, my own concern is less with explicit representations of schizophrenia, psychosis, madness or mental distress in theatre and performance. Rather, my research interests lie in the production of a Deleuzian account of theatre and performance that rethinks the nature of the performative event through largely non-representational concepts of affect, becoming, and encounter, exploring the relationship between Deleuze and Guattari?s concept of schizophrenia and performance, but also examining what relationship, if any, these might have to the wider field of mental health.
Cull LK (2009) Deleuze and Performance, Edinburgh University Press
Was performance important to Deleuze? Is Deleuze important to performance; to its practical, as well as theoretical, research? What are the implications of Deleuze's philosophy of difference, process and becoming, for Performance Studies, a field in which many continue to privilege the notion of performance as representation, as anchored by its imitation of an identity: 'the world', 'the play', 'the self'?

Deleuze and Performance is a collection of new essays dedicated to Deleuze's writing on theatre and to the productivity of his philosophy for (re)thinking performance. This book provides rigorous analyses of Deleuze's writings on theatre practitioners such as Artaud, Beckett and Carmelo Bene, as well as offering innovative readings of historical and contemporary performance including performance art, dance, new media performance, theatre and opera, which use Deleuze's concepts in exciting new ways. Can philosophy follow Deleuze in overcoming the antitheatrical tradition embedded in its history, perhaps even reconsidering what it means to think in the light of the embodied insights of performance's practitioners? Experts from the fields of Performance Studies and Deleuze Studies come together in this volume and strive to examine these and other issues in a manner that will be challenging, yet accessible to students and established scholars alike.

Cull L (2014) ?Performance Philosophy?, pp. 91-100 Palgrave Macmillan
This chapter outlines the emergence of the new field of Performance Philosophy, going on to argue that performance constitutes its own form of philosophical thought.
Cull LK (2013) An education of attention: The perception of change in Bergson and performance, Peter Lang
A number of thinkers across the disciplines have referred to the notion of an ?education of attention?, including William James, JJ Gibson and more recently Tim Ingold. In this chapter though, I focus on what this concept might imply for both Henri Bergson - in the context of his broader conception of philosophy as involving an extension of the faculties of perception ? and for the (un-)artist Allan Kaprow, particularly in relation to the 1970s participatory events he referred to as his ?Activities? (as distinct from his better known ?Happenings?). In terms of the book's theme of ?visual learning?, the chapter reflects on both Bergson and Kaprow?s discussions of the relationship between seeing and doing, juxtaposing Bergson?s concern for the utilitarian and limited nature of a perception bound up with action, with Kaprow?s attempt to think beyond a spectator/participant binary in his evaluation of the specificity of ?watching in the midst of doing?. Throughout though, I think less in terms of the visual as a discrete realm, and more in terms of attention and learning as fundamentally embodied activities. In turn, drawing from Deleuze as well as Bergson and Kaprow, I will be concerned with art and philosophy as (potentially continuous) instances of education, where learning is understood less as a transition from non-knowledge to knowledge mediated by recognition and common sense, and more as an encounter with change, difference or the new.
Cull LK (2015) ?Doing Performance Philosophy: attention, collaboration and the missing ?&??,
In this talk I provide a series of reflections on the emerging area of study known as ?Performance Philosophy?. But rather than doing this by providing a definition of performance philosophy ? or indeed, either of its constituent terms ? I will explore what happens if we begin with a kind of performative contradiction; namely the hypothesis that: ?Not knowing what performance philosophy is, is the only valid starting point from which to do it?. Starting from here I will go on to examine what might be at stake in the at once seemingly banal and potentially radical idea that ?performance thinks? - with attention and collaboration as two possible modes for this thought that does not merely apply existing philosophy but does philosophy, performs it, in new ways.
Cull L (2015) Performance Philosophy, Performance Philosophy 1 pp. 1-281 Open Access / OASPA
Cull LK, Daddario W (2013) Analogue 0: Manifesto Now! (Again!), pp. 3-20 Intellect
This is a co-authored introduction to the edited book Manifesto Now! The introduction provides an in-depth discussion of the notion of the contemporary manifesto in the context of existing literature on the 'golden age' of the manifesto - Modernism. The introduction argues that contemporary artists and philosophers are increasingly (re)turning to the manifesto as a form, including exploring the notion of performance and activism as forms of manifesto in their own right.
Cull LK (2015) From Homo Performans to Interspecies Collaboration: Broadening the Spectrum to include Nonhuman Performance, pp. 19-36 Palgrave Macmillan
The primary aim of this chapter is to look at how we relate to nonhuman behavior and to what extent we are willing or able to include it in our concept of performance. Given this aim, the chapter begins by focussing on the ambivalent way in which nonhuman animals figure in one of the prominent theories of performance: namely, Richard Schechner?s ?broad-spectrum? account. Here, I draw from the definition of performance and its relation to the nonhuman as outlined by in his influential work Performance Theory (1977/2003). Schechner?s landmark book was first published in 1977, though Schechner recalls that he had been working on its contents from the late 1960?s onwards. Of particular relevance to our own concerns is that during this time, Schechner was reading Darwin?s book The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, and engaged with the work of ethologists such as Huxley, Lorenz and Eibl-Eibesfeldt ? influences that can be felt throughout the final text. In what follows, I also make some brief, preliminary links between the broad-spectrum and the work of the contemporary French theorist François Laruelle, whose insistence on the need to expand our understanding of what counts as thought (from a non-standard philosophical perspective) has been recently shown to extend to a demand to rethink the relation between the human and nonhuman. Next, the chapter examines the emerging, interdisciplinary field of artistic practice known as ?interspecies collaboration?, suggesting a link between these and what John Mullarkey calls ?complete anthropomorphism? (where anthropomorphism is no longer a pejorative term). Here, our interest lies in the notion of performance not only as a way of seeing ? which would be to reassert the human tendency to focus on vision ? but as a mode of existence or lived stance that can give the ?benefit of the doubt? to nonhuman life as we do, every day, in our relations with humans (Mullarkey 2012: 53). Can performance operate as a site in which those currently defined as human and nonhuman can open themselves to the affects of the other and develop a felt understanding of their continuity and difference? Can interspecies collaboration in particular open us up to new understandings of performance and, as such, to new concepts of the human as well? In summary, then, this chapter shows how the broad-spectrum thesis goes so far as to extend the definition of performance to allows animals in as performers ? according to an openness or inclu
Cull L (2013) Schizo-theatre: Guattari, Deleuze, performance and ?madness?, Erès
This essay explores the concept of ?schizo-theatre?: as a mode of approaching both the production and spectatorship of performance, as a way of rethinking the term ?schizophrenia? and its relationship to performance and philosophy, and as a means to conceive anew the relationship between theatre and the ethics of its encounters with those who have lived experience of mental illness. In the existing literature (eg. Roberts 2007), readers of Guattari and Deleuze have rightly insisted upon a distinction between the conventional clinical definition of ?schizophrenia? and the reinvention of the term in works such as Anti-Oedipus (1972). However, this emphasis has allowed an artificial separation of the philosophy from its clinical context, specifically Guattari?s radical work at La Borde. As such, this essay attempts to interrogate the specific relationships between 1) the hospitalized schizophrenic (who tends to be presented as a tragic figure by Guattari and Deleuze); 2) the joyful ?schizo? (whom they present as closer to ?the beating heart of reality? than the Oedipalized subject) and 3) a process they call ?schizophrenia? which is defined as ?the process of the production of desire?. Having established this theoretical grounding, the chapter will then aim to question how these relationships might play out in the context of a performance practice that seeks to re-evaluate the role of theatre in relation to ?schizophrenia? as Guattari and Deleuze define it, but also to mental health service users and their lived experiences of mental illness. Can a schizo-theatre make these experiences communicable to others, in all their singularity? Might such a theatre prompt or support positive changes in the provision of mental health service and the ways in which ?madness? figures in the public imagination?
Cull L (2012) Schizo-theatre: Guattari, Deleuze, performance and ?madness?,
This paper will explore the concept of ?schizo-theatre?: as a mode of approaching both the production and spectatorship of performance, as a way of rethinking the term ?schizophrenia? and its relationship to performance and philosophy, and as a means to conceive anew the relationship between theatre and the ethics of its encounters with those who have lived experience of mental illness. In the existing literature (eg. Roberts 2007), readers of Guattari and Deleuze have rightly insisted upon a distinction between the conventional clinical definition of ?schizophrenia? and the reinvention of the term in works such as Anti-Oedipus (1972). However, this emphasis has allowed an artificial separation of the philosophy from its clinical context, specifically Guattari?s radical work at La Borde. As such, the paper will attempt to interrogate the specific relationships between 1) the hospitalized schizophrenic (who tends to be presented as a tragic figure by Guattari and Deleuze); 2) the joyful ?schizo? (whom they present as closer to ?the beating heart of reality? than the Oedipalized subject) and 3) a process they call ?schizophrenia? which is defined as ?the process of the production of desire?. Having established this theoretical grounding, the paper will then aim to question how these relationships might play out in the context of a performance practice that seeks to re-evaluate the role of theatre in relation to ?schizophrenia? as Guattari and Deleuze define it, but also to mental health service users and their lived experiences of mental illness. Can a schizo-theatre make these experiences communicable to others, in all their singularity? Might such a theatre prompt or support positive changes in the provision of mental health service and the ways in which ?madness? figures in the public imagination?
Cull LK (2013) What is Performance Philosophy?,
What is Performance Philosophy? This paper will reflect on the idea that we are currently witnessing the emergence of a new field: Performance Philosophy. Performance Philosophy, I will suggest, is not just a 'turn' within Theatre and Performance Studies, but potentially a rich interdisciplinary field involving philosophers and researchers from a wide range of disciplines. As well as outlining this recent development, the paper will also question to what extent we might wish to consider performance as a philosophical activity in its own right: not as the mere illustration of extant philosophy ideas nor according to a predetermined definition of philosophy (such that performance is called upon to produce logical arguments, rational deductions and so forth), but more as a practice that thinks in its own way, and indeed in ways that might equally call upon philosophers to reconsider what counts as philosophy. Drawing from the notion of non-philosophy (or non-standard philosophy) outlined by François Laruelle, as well as from relevant work in the field of Film-Philosophy, I will endeavor to articulate some of the myriad ways in which we might say that performance thinks.
da Silva K (2017) Unconcealing experience : Heidegger, Stanislavski and the creation of ?truthful? characterisations in dance.,
Abstract

Throughout the thirty years I have been watching and participating as a dancer in UK dance theatre, I have become increasingly aware of the ways in which female characters are frequently portrayed through limited representations of women. This research begins by acknowledging that this is a problem and proceeds to look at some of the ways in which such limited representations come about and subsequently how the individuality of the person is overlooked. The main objective of this research is to address this problem by offering a new choreographic approach to creating character in dance works. This has been done through an amalgamation of Stanislavskian and Heideggerian processual accounts of truth which intrinsically account for the Being and subjectivity of the performer and character. Through Practice as Research I have developed a new method of choreographing character which intersects dance practice, Heideggerian phenomenology and Stanislavskian approaches to acting. A principal aspect of my original contribution to the field of knowledge lies within the intersection of these practices. I propose that a key attribute towards resolving the problem is through taking time to ?get to know? the character; an idea at the heart of social psychological propositions towards resolving problems of social stereotyping. I conclude by making a call for choreographers to consider using techniques from theatre such as the one I outline in this research when creating and presenting female characters within their work. The implications of this research are that approaches from theatre and phenomenology are not merely ideas that can be applied to the body but in fact are practices which can be done and danced. Rather than resorting to limited and sometimes tired representations of women?s experience, the individual lived experience of the character can emerge and drive the creation and performance process to produce a choreographed character whose subjectivity and lived experience is clearly accounted for.

Cull L (2017) Equalizing Theatre and Philosophy: Laruelle, Badiou, and gestures of authority in the philosophy of theatre, Performance Philosophy 3 (3) pp. 730-750 Open Access / OASPA
In this article I engage François Laruelle?s notion of ?non-standard? aesthetics to provide a critical perspective on Alain Badiou?s various pronouncements on the philosophy of theatre. Whilst in works such as In Praise of Theatre (2015), Badiou initially appears magnanimous in relation to theatre?s own thinking, and indeed to demote the function of philosophy in relation to an ontological privilege now accorded (by him) to set theory, I will argue that this very benevolence, from a Laruellian perspective, constitutes another form of philosophical authoritarianism. That is, whilst Badiou famously describes theatre as ?an event of thought? that ?directly produces ideas? (Badiou 2005a, 72), this article draws from Laruelle to suggest that he ultimately positions himself as the authority on what ?counts as theatre properly speaking? (Badiou 2013, 109); performatively positioning his own thought as normative exception and as the gatekeeper to that exception.
Cull L (2018) "Notes Toward The Philosophy of Theatre" in David Kornhaber and Martin Middeke (eds.), 'Drama, Theatre, and Philosophy'. Special issue., Anglia. Journal of English Philology 136 (1) De Gruyter
This article draws from the contemporary French thinker, François Laruelle to perform a ?non-philosophical? analysis of recent literature from the analytic or Anglo-American philosophy of theatre. Much of this literature, I argue, suffers from the problem of application, namely: non- or extra-theatrical assumptions are both brought to bear upon and remain unchallenged by the philosopher?s encounter with theatre ? particularly in the form of assumptions as to the nature of philosophy or the role or position of philosophy with respect to other forms of thought, such as theatre and performance. Having sought to articulate some of the problems arising from the conception of the philosophy of theatre as a definitional project, the article then considers ? via Laruelle - what kind of ?stance? a philosophy of theatre might need to occupy in order not to impose its thought on theatre but to be open to theatre?s thoughts.
Cull L (2018) From the philosophy of theatre to performance philosophy: Laruelle, Badiou and the equality of thought, Labyrinth: An International Journal for Philosophy, Value Theory and Sociocultural Hermeneutics. Heretical Challenges and Orthodoxy (Part 2): A Special Issue on the Occasion of the 80th Birthday of François Laruelle 19 (2) pp. 102-120 Axia Academic Publishers
This article draws from François Laruelle?s non-standard philosophy to locate gestures of philosophical ?authority? or ?sufficiency? within recent work in the philosophy of theatre ? including material from contemporary Anglo-American philosophical aesthetics, and texts by Alain Badiou, such as In Praise of Theatre (2015). Whilst Badiou initially appears magnanimous in relation to theatre?s own thinking - famously describing theatre as ?an event of thought? that ?directly produces ideas? (Badiou 2005: 72) - I argue that this very benevolence, from a Laruellean perspective, constitutes another form of philosophical authoritarianism. In contrast, I indicate some affinities between Laruelle?s non-standard aesthetics and the emerging field of Performance Philosophy - one aim of which, as distinct from the philosophy of theatre, would be to allow performance to qualitatively extend our concepts of thinking and/or to be attentive to the ways in which performance has already provided new forms of philosophy.