Urban Theatricalities, A Communicational Claim. Reading of the Scenic Performances of the City of Jijel (Algeria)

The interaction between public space and the theatre is not new. Since the Greek era, the theatre has constantly reproduced the staging of urban conflicts (Lamizet 2002), and public space has always carried in its bowels stages of the theatre and spectacle (parties, games, carnivals...). Just like the combination city/cinema (Jousse, Paquot 2005), the public space/theatre has a long history of subtraction, addition, substitution and distinction from one to the other. The city and its public spaces are a big theatre, and the theatre is a city, while each part contributes to the construction of the other.

The theatre, with its values of building belonging, identity and social cohesion has transmitted its codes to the city (Freydefont 1997). On the other hand, public space did not hesitate to borrow dramaturgy and the art of staging from theatricality. Public spaces will gradually acquire scenes, acts and landscapes as sequences of spatial perception. The public space becomes exposed and exhibited like a spectacle where actors and spectators mingle under the curtain of urban life. Fiction then mixes with reality until it becomes ‘urban reality’.

Theatricality gives life to the city through urban texts. This is how the transition from the ‘text-city’ was made: texts and novels that built images of cities or neighbourhoods from an imaginary cartography (Montalbàn 2002) towards ‘the texts of the city’: a story and a dramaturgy through the architectural space and the sensitive dimensions that accompany it.

Theatricality in its profound definition is this “thickness of sign” (Barthes 1981: 45) responsible for the sustainability of the theatre and its evolution through the ages. The psychic structures and mental constructions that accompany the theatre make it the living expression of representations of men (Ionesco 1991). These representations wanted to break out of their walls and conquer the city: the theatre, no longer restricted by physical limits, intervenes then in urban life and public spaces. It explores other stage boards and discovers dimensions beyond the 4th wall (Cormann 2005). The curtain is urban, the show is the city and the theatre is urban theatricality.

The substantive theatricality carries different meanings and dimensions. The former attached to the urban translates two worlds of scenic representations: one is an instrument, the other is an instinctive game. If these two representations approach one another based on their composition, they remain heterogeneous and distinctive.

The first conception considers urban theatricalities as an aesthetic instrument and scenic practice. It is referred to by authors such as Meyehold or Mikhaïl Tchékhov (Pavis 2007) for whom theatricality is the theatre outside the theatre, with the primacy of the director or of the text over scenic productions or actors (Goetschel 2005). These theatricalities are responsible for urban staging and theatricality in the sense of the conscious use of the scenic tool in public space for performance purposes. This is what creates festivals, theatrical objects and urban scenography in the sense of stage and show. These theatricalities also lead to the visual arts, and to artistic and aesthetic urban performances.

The second conception makes theatricalities the continuity of daily life, or as Evreinov calls it a “theatre as such” (Carnicke 1981: 97), which means leading to instinctive theatricalities that everyone exercises to the point of becoming imperceptible. Theatricality is then ‘life’, ‘in life’, and provokes ‘life’: “The dramaturgic analyst conceives the individual as a ‘performer’ whose activities function to create the ‘appearance’ of ‘self’– a ‘character’– for an ‘ audience’[…], he conceives the individual as‘ staging’ fundamental qualities: aspects of self-taken for granted with intimate other’ (Messinger et al. 1990: 78).

Goffman (1956) presents a theatrical model overlaid on the daily life, a form of ‘theatrical’ life where the city (the world) is a theatrical stage and individuals its actors with roles and representations. In this case, the urban theatricalities are bodies and actors, behavioural manifestation and instinct: “Nothing exists except the actor. Everyone must play, everyone, in fact, naturally plays a role in everyday life” (Carnicke 1981: 100). These theatricalities can lead to the street arts and urban performances in the sense of ‘practical space’ and transcription of ‘lived experiences’. These are the theatricalities in which this article is interested. Unconscious, spontaneous and continual physical experiences like an improvised game: “we unconsciously play roles in everyday life, since it is an instinct. We don’t choose to play the comedy, we play it, that's all” (Evreinov quoted by Carnicke 1981: 103). The urban theatricalities analysed in this paper are spatial experiences staged by the urban user-actor. It is the spectacle of daily life, the staging of its practices and the dramatisation of its experience. In this case, the user-actor is a scenic object “I am a scene” (Carnicke 1981: 107), and he transforms public space into an improvisation scene. The texts are spontaneous or voluntary, they represent the affirmation of the actor's imagination materialised in urban scenes because “All the world's a stage” (Shakespeare 1997: 83).

The spatial shell is invested by theatricalities, they are demanding, communicative, expressive, visible and sayable (Clouard, Leibovici 2019).

To study ‘GOFFMANIAN’ urban theatricalities is to study the tangible and invisible, physical and ideal spatial dimensions on which society has built the spectacle of its daily life. It is through relations such as ‘society/urban’, ‘practice/space’, ‘theatricality/public scene’ dealing with ‘spatial dimensions of social facts’ that theatricalities fall de facto under the logic of both social geography and urban geography which themselves are heirs of human geography and echoes of social sciences.

Whatever the scale is: city, urban or public space, the study of spatial maps (spatial floors) through social sciences is necessarily part of the foundation of social geography, because: “even if the claim of geography as a social science is not unanimous, it is in fact society, in its relations to space, that is today considered by the majority of geographers as an object of the discipline” (Ripoll et al. 2008: 130).

Our socio-spatial maps, called urban theatricalities, then represent any human and social phenomenon staged on the urban floor through experiences, uses, practices, appropriations, productions, projections, attachments, etc., causing the ‘social transformation’ of the public space and the ‘scenic transfiguration’ of the urban.

In the end, this orchestration between the city and the society, the space and its users, the conceived and the lived, the container and the content, the stage and the theatricality will make: from society the actor appearing in the show, from public spaces the theatrical scenes, and from socio-spatial realities the scenarios and scripts of everyday life. The poetics of the city (Sansot 2004) welcomes the poetics of space (Bachelard 1994) and the theatre/public space combination makes it its socio-urban tragedy.

The public spaces of this city cannot be entirely identified in terms of quantity. Therefore, this study will be established by choosing representative samples based on a classification of ‘urban forms’ where three major ‘areas of spatial diversity’ are identified: ‘axes, avenues and streets’, ‘boulevards and coasts’, and ‘areas of neighbourhoods’.

These areas of spatial diversity guarantee the variety of the corpus and its representativeness; they are large urban structures (urban portions) which are in themselves the support of a typological, morphological and hierarchical variety. They include public spaces ranging from squares to gardens, from vegetal to mineral, with different shapes and functions.

Ten sites were chosen for each type of spatial diversity on which a polar diagram study (multi-criteria analysis method) was carried out. Each pole represents an indicator that reflects the reality of theatricalities. These evaluation criteria emanate directly from the conceptual scenes, they are: diversity of urban forms, staging and theatricalities, urban identities, imageabilities (Lynch 1998), frequentations (attendance) and appropriations (Fig. 1). Each criterion is evaluated according to three degrees, the more the poles are open (3rd degree), the more the space is rich in its indicators.

Fig. 1

Through these evaluation choices, the selected public spaces are those attended most for political demonstrations, socio-cultural practices and exchanges, gatherings, walks, exhibitions, urban and illicit markets, music concerts, etc.

Six zones were selected (two from each category of urban spaces); they are the sites with the largest polar opening in their diagram: Emir Abdelkader avenue, Kaoula Mokhtar road, Zighoud Youced boulevard, Rouibah Hocine boulevard, the city centre and village Moussa.

Ultimately, these public spaces, which are representative of the city of Jijel, carry the theatricalities of daily life that vary from commercial practices to artistic manifestations, including political, economic, social and identity claims. They are performed spontaneously, instinctively, continuously, in any place, solo or in groups, by heterogeneous actors, such as women, men, young, old, artists, academics, unemployed, users, passengers, extras and all communicators of the urban scene, and these performances were studied daily throughout the year 2019.

This work is based on the technique of observation, supported by semi-directive interviews carried out with a random sample of 32 actors (men, women, elders, youths, etc.) taken directly from the six selected sites (Table 1). The methodological course is summarised as follows:

Theatricalities with political claims are those in which the emergence of public opinion is stated (Habermas 1988). Two types of political theatricalities stand out: a succession of stage captures and an urban proscenium.

Scenes, staging and urban landscape: The pictorial voice

Certain urban theatricalities seem to carry on claims that are shared massively to the point where they become an exhibition. They are experienced and narrated through the ‘pictorial stage captures’ they produce during their staging process. One example of that is the result of political demonstrations due to the presidential elections imposed on Algerians on December 12, 2019. To express their dissatisfaction, some citizens staged in public space a fictitious election that ends with ballot trash boxes (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2

The refusal to participate in what they call ‘the political masquerade’ was stated through a scenic parade.

The analysis of this theatricality suggests the spatio-theatrical structure unconsciously staged by demonstrators, with actors, spectators, sound effects, sets and even scripts (Table 2).

Table 2

Spatio-theatrical script design and composition of acts.

Acts	Theatrical description	Acts conception	Spatial description
First acts	Exposition: presentation of actors and the piece's context	Unstable country, constitutional void, spontaneous popular movement	Grouping in public space
Central acts	Knots and conflicts	Military control of country, presidential election setup	Presentation of facts through demonstrations, slogans and chants
	Climax	Refusal to vote by demonstrators and mobilisation of citizens
Last acts	Denouement	Forced voting via trash cans instead of ballot boxes	Go to fictitious ballot boxes

This is an act-by-act scenic evolution on a chronological scale and following theatrical structures, from the exposition to the denouement through the central acts and the climax. These theatricalities are accompanied by chants, shouts, flags, banners, drums and choreography. They are applauded by all, and memorised by photographs or videos, live or via social networks.

Users-directors who are looking for democracy have used their staged visibilities as means of lobbying politicians. This is the ‘glorification of visibility’ as the structure and the marking of these claims. The allegation of images is responsible for this model of theatricality which allows messages to be carried out further than a simple protest or demonstration; it is a question of making their voices heard by a pictorial and scenic performance.

From the backstage to the proscenium

Further, in the metaphorical expressions, the actors-directors of the political demonstrations consider the street as a tribunal stating judgments against politics. The origin of this metaphor is to be found in the stadium, where spectators devote part of their space to be called the ‘tribunal’ in which the ultras and the groups

Ultras and groups are categories of supporters and organisers of football matches.

settle and manage theatricalities like a maestro composer of political claims symphony.

It is these theatricalities (of the stadium) that are transferred to public space like scenes rehearsed in the backstage and played in the urban proscenium. Sifeddine (24 years old) explains

… In the stadium, the demonstrations have always existed, not only beginning on February 22 but long time before that… on the streets we do the same thing (as in the stadium) because we already know the codes and chants.

There is a migration, a mutation and a clear transfer of political claims taking place from the stadium to the streets.

These theatricalities with claiming characters are maturing from the stadium to the public sphere passing by the street (Fig. 3). It is during this nidification that the signs evolve and transform from a simple totemic witness to claiming theatricalities.

Fig. 3

In this context, public space is the political plural space of opinion, debate, demonstration and expression, it endures ‘behavioural shifts’ from the backstage towards the public sphere.

Existential claims are theatricalities reflecting the needs of existential expression and are nurtured by public space and its dimensions. To exist is to be different, to be distinguished and above all to be in the spotlight. Individuals express themselves giving their plural communicational or constructive identities to become a candyfloss: “attached, entangled, like candyfloss, becoming then the sticky substance to which still other biographical facts can be attached.” (Goffman 1963: 74–75).

Two cases arise: bodies as physical existence and distinguished images as physical-anthropological existence. Because the bodies of human beings, their gestures, strolls, outfits, social properties, ways of gathering or others are markings of public space (Ripoll, Veschambre 2005) and thereby its staging.

Bodies and presences: Avant-garde actors

The actors themselves are theatrical representations produced by their bodies, movements, looks, and the ‘ritual rules’ (Goffman 1971) that they produce. The corporal gestural and style expressions carry within them intentions and statuses that the actors convey. The latter reflects a behavioural, expressive, significant, and mostly claimant mark. Their presence is staged, embellished, exaggerated, to the point of exhibition, and they display themselves as a shop window reflecting the spirit of the wearer (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4

The social constructions that are built around the internet are mainly responsible for the new statutes and roles which structure urban theatricalities. These role plays depend on the degree of influence and addiction to the digital world. The latter creates pictorial boiling and alters customary codes to visual codes on the web.

People live in the virtual not the actual, Saïd (24 years old).

The representation then passes by the projection of the virtual world's structures on the real world, and since reality merges with the virtual, actors find themselves obliged to invent characters and roles that allow them to live and exist in these new realities. This projection is then the link between the virtual and the pictorial representations.

These ‘body’ theatricalities are then marks and distinguished social objects. The roles they play come to life through each person's expressions and personality: hairstyle, clothing, way of standing, walking, musical instrument or camera in hand, hat or turban. The distinction makes identities, and the spatial sphere takes the image of affirmed signs. All these signs create images of existential affirmations of belonging to a social, cultural or artistic status that give the actor an ‘IN’ role in the urban scene. These are the ‘corporal theatricalities’ of the avant-garde actors of the 2.0. world.

The distinguished image

In this panoply of urban theatricalities that the city endures, some highlight ideas, designs, positions, intentions and constructed imaginations (Fig. 5). If the city allows writing over its public spaces, it is to transcribe memories, imaginations and emotional projections that structure its users. This therapeutic writing is the spatial transcription of what society or users live.

Fig. 5

It is how symbolic constructions and mental images are born; they migrate towards public space to express themselves in acts. Combined with the need to be seen, to look good, to be marked, valued or distinguished, the user becomes the director of his own image.

The distinguished image is then exhibited and publicised to become the emblem of urban theatricalities. It is affirmed and valued mostly because it represents the DNA of the constructed imaginary. Lamia (63 years old):

… When I see Patrick Poivre D’Arvor who said that Algerian people deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, I get goosebumps and I am proud, I am proud, a feeling of pride!

Affirmation scales somewhat similar to nesting dolls that allow the plurality of behavioural heritage to be inscribed on interpretive urban theatricalities. The affirmation of the image in these cases is the plural framework of behavioural stratifications nidified on urban theatricalities.

The observation indicates mutations in public spaces. The latter, previously dominated by men (Navvarre, Ubbiali 2018), is increasingly claimed by women to become a right:

… I don’t want to lose space in public space”, Amel (24 years old).

Between feelings of exclusion and the weight of historical, social and cultural customs, women struggle to have the right to the street the same way they do in the world of work or politics.

Note that the public space is experienced by women in Algerian cities as the place where one ‘veils’ and ‘reveals’ according to established standards and the fluctuations that affect them (Dris 2004). Women's expectations and aspirations have changed; they are no longer internalised like fatal silence. The emancipation of women seems to go through the public space and its staging. In fact, if the city makes her free (Semmoud 2012), the public space contributes to it through the practices that it allows. This is how urban performances were born to demand more visibility and consideration (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6

Scenic readings of urban theatricalities show the need for women of all ages to be visible and to take over public spaces while affirming a new image. They take pauses, restore their images, and seek being captured. They assume their identity as women who have long been under the shadow of patriarchy, because ‘Jijilian’ women have always known how to fade in the presence of males: in markets, public gardens or coffee shops that are forbidden to the point where they change their itinerary to avoid walking on the cafe's sidewalk.

The woman seems to disturb society, and it looks as if she understood it. She, therefore, uses her presence to claim her existence as a response to the rejection she endured and continues to endure. Feminine urban theatricalities appear to be reaching a crescendo, they reflect a revenge towards the public space:

... I pass in front of it and it doesn’t bother me... Each time I pass in front of them, I pass in front of them! That's it!

Amel (24 years old) explains that she walks past cafes even if social barriers prohibit it, she does it and she assumes full responsibility for it.

The recapture of public space brings a feminisation of the spatial image that the frequency analysis of the interviews confirms. In fact, the synthesis of lexical occurrences brings out the word ‘woman’

In the synthesis of the frequency analysis, the word ‘woman’ is in the medium zone of the curve. Above this zone, we find the most frequent words such as pronouns, conjunctions, propositions etc., while below it, the rarely used words.

Fig. 7

It is the imposed non-image that has created the social revenge that these ‘new women’ convey through their theatricalities. Waael (27 years old) talks of revenge against society by performing unusual new behaviour or utter rejection of codes:

The law that does not apply to everyone does not deserve to be respected.

It is a matter of non-compliance with codes and habits as a means of social revenge.

The affirmation of the new role and status of women is a confirmation, consecration, attestation and recapture of public space, it is mainly a revenge against its imposed anonymity.

They are mainly urban theatricalities structured by popular culture the origins of which are found in the media, audio-visual, web culture, geek culture, video games, cinema, fashion, technology and even the slang. This culture is ingested, appropriated, adopted and cultivated like a contemporary bible uniting 2.0. fanatics.

The virtual or audio-visual world absorbs its users and converts them to be its soldiers and avatar representatives: this has been done/followed on the web, such programme was the highest-rated show, that (Youtuber) has gone viral, etc., and we have to rally, share and forward events. All these notifications become later the algorithms of visual references transferred to the real world through the fifth screen

The five screens are cinema, television, desktop PC, mobile phone and public space stage.

Giving voice to a wall becomes borrowing, reproducing, or even duplicating scenes, contexts, claims or affirmations of those who inspire. The affirmation of belonging to the popular culture and participating in its spreading becomes an inscription in the contemporary world. Scenes, activities, claims, performances or challenges become the logical follow-up of this journey, to the point of transcending contemporaneity.

Beyond the symbolic aspect of these reproductions, the actors-directors represent by their adhesion to these ‘visual algorithms’ the intermediaries of the 2.0. space tag; because they are the symbolic mediators between 2.0 culture, and the urban space of Jijel. Their stage languages are the clusters connecting their intrinsic needs to theatricality.

Whatever the needs of these directors, they have the art of capturing signs, symbols, figures, or totems and translating them scenically in public space. The frescoes of ‘la casa de papel’ are a good example of the urban paintings depicting the allegory of rebellion, anti-capitalism and anarchy that affected the city of Jijel during the political demonstrations mentioned before (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8

It is the influence of film culture that inspires stage directors in this case, in a way that they project themselves into it by doing their own reading and reinterpretation in public space according to the conjuncture they face. The film becomes urban reality, through images, ideas, senses, claims, and expressions that translates into cinematic metaphor.

The pictorial virtual spaces are another gateway to the projections that directors use in their urban theatricalities. The latter makes it possible to duplicate realities, multiply inspirations and go beyond their multiple existences to reach their scenic inscriptions in contemporaneity. It is about the strong need for affiliation with the contemporary world that is structuring 2.0. staging, shared and claimed through theatricalities.