Portraits
Guilherme de Sousa & Pedro Azevedo
February
2023
Fri
17
About Já não sou a amar-te menos
Can we look at your piece as an autobiographical work? In what way? What do you think this performance can reveal about you both as artists?
We think it is essential to highlight that this performance is not autobiographical. At the time we thought about the project for the first time, there were several starting points that were familiar and close to us, but we soon decided that this would not be about us (even if it inevitably ends up being about us, as an artistic and authorial work). There are several issues and aspects that underpin the piece's internal dramaturgy, and they are indeed autobiographical. However, we used and gave these aspects another context. There is a universe that we think we are building as artists - the plastic dimension of our works, the theatre without "spoken text", the inspiration that comes from a cinematic universe and the beauty of "normal" life. At the same time, however, we do not want to be anchored in one thing either.
During your creative process, were you inspired by any autobiographical work or self-portrait?
There is always inspiration, there are always references and there are always quotes! Denying it is an act of hypocrisy, mainly because we live in an era in which every day we are bombarded with images. Sometimes it is difficult to find the right place to expose and point out these references (mainly because progressively one seeks to summarize, synthesize and erase communication paths parallel to the works, such as the information material on the performance, the publications, etc.), or simply do not want to quote their references – perhaps, in a naive logic of make good use of the believe in "I had this original idea". In this work, as previous ones, there are several authors who are always hovering over the creation process (although they are not necessarily autobiographical works): Yorgos Lanthimos, Roy Andersson, Nadia Lauro, Jean Dominique Bauby, Erwin Wurm, and so on. References are fundamental when making decisions.
How would be the ideal frame for the portrait of a relationship? What is left off-field?
We do not believe that there is "the" ideal frame for the portrait of a relationship. This frame should vary, depending on the different relationships, the "limits" of each (and each of the elements) and the moment when it becomes uncomfortable for someone inside it. The intimacy of each one is the intimacy of each one, and this will make what is transcendent in a portrait could be perceptible/transparent in a way, with more or less detail of that intimacy. In our case, the ideal frame for the portrait of our relationship is (literally) nebulous, unnoticeable, and partially fictionalized. What remains off-field should remain inconclusive.
Within the field, how do you both look from the inside? What do you look at? What do you portray? How do you play?
The exercise of “functioning in two” is quite fluid in our case. Doing this exercise of "looking from the inside" is a natural and common practice within our relationship. In this case, it is only a matter of deciding what we want or not to share, since gathering material itself is simple: what is left in this filtration, what we selectively use to insert in the work or wanders between the limits of the romantic and professional relationship, will be intentionally calculated. And in fact, we strengthen that this work is not tied to a direct idea of "self-portrait", but rather to an idea of assumption – "What if...?".
Can we look at your piece as an autobiographical work? In what way? What do you think this performance can reveal about you both as artists?
We think it is essential to highlight that this performance is not autobiographical. At the time we thought about the project for the first time, there were several starting points that were familiar and close to us, but we soon decided that this would not be about us (even if it inevitably ends up being about us, as an artistic and authorial work). There are several issues and aspects that underpin the piece's internal dramaturgy, and they are indeed autobiographical. However, we used and gave these aspects another context. There is a universe that we think we are building as artists - the plastic dimension of our works, the theatre without "spoken text", the inspiration that comes from a cinematic universe and the beauty of "normal" life. At the same time, however, we do not want to be anchored in one thing either.
During your creative process, were you inspired by any autobiographical work or self-portrait?
There is always inspiration, there are always references and there are always quotes! Denying it is an act of hypocrisy, mainly because we live in an era in which every day we are bombarded with images. Sometimes it is difficult to find the right place to expose and point out these references (mainly because progressively one seeks to summarize, synthesize and erase communication paths parallel to the works, such as the information material on the performance, the publications, etc.), or simply do not want to quote their references – perhaps, in a naive logic of make good use of the believe in "I had this original idea". In this work, as previous ones, there are several authors who are always hovering over the creation process (although they are not necessarily autobiographical works): Yorgos Lanthimos, Roy Andersson, Nadia Lauro, Jean Dominique Bauby, Erwin Wurm, and so on. References are fundamental when making decisions.
How would be the ideal frame for the portrait of a relationship? What is left off-field?
We do not believe that there is "the" ideal frame for the portrait of a relationship. This frame should vary, depending on the different relationships, the "limits" of each (and each of the elements) and the moment when it becomes uncomfortable for someone inside it. The intimacy of each one is the intimacy of each one, and this will make what is transcendent in a portrait could be perceptible/transparent in a way, with more or less detail of that intimacy. In our case, the ideal frame for the portrait of our relationship is (literally) nebulous, unnoticeable, and partially fictionalized. What remains off-field should remain inconclusive.
Within the field, how do you both look from the inside? What do you look at? What do you portray? How do you play?
The exercise of “functioning in two” is quite fluid in our case. Doing this exercise of "looking from the inside" is a natural and common practice within our relationship. In this case, it is only a matter of deciding what we want or not to share, since gathering material itself is simple: what is left in this filtration, what we selectively use to insert in the work or wanders between the limits of the romantic and professional relationship, will be intentionally calculated. And in fact, we strengthen that this work is not tied to a direct idea of "self-portrait", but rather to an idea of assumption – "What if...?".
© José Caldeira / TMP
