Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Composing 'the bubonic tourist' : an everyday creative and resistive tourist practice Moschopedis, Eric T. 2008-11-20

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata


24-ubc_2008_fall_moschopedis_eric.pdf [ 46.23MB ]
JSON: 24-1.0052253.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0052253-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0052253-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0052253-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0052253-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0052253-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0052253-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

 Composing ʻthe bubonic touristʼ: An Everyday Creative and Resistive Tourist Practice   by   Eric T Moschopedis     A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGRE OF   MASTER OF FINE ARTS   in   The Colege of Graduate Studies   (Interdisciplinary Studies)     THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  (Okanagan)   June 208     © Eric T Moschopedis, 208  ii ABSTRACT  I argue that the bubonic tourist is a resistive and reflexive everyday character. I hypothesize that the bubonic tourist can generate spatial and temporal transgresions that sanction increased social agency and thereby transform our sense of subjectivity. By apropriating, canibalizing, and carnivalizing social codes and modes of operation, I considered how comunities are created through performance. I argue that by departing and ariving from the centre to the margins of a per, social, and cultural genus—what Piere Bourdieu cals habitus—marginalized individuals can both destabilize and inform demarcated and delimited categories. By performing and feding back to social codes and norms experiences of the margins, the bubonic tourist creates fisures that engender self-reflexivity and meaning. I argue that, the bubonic tourist as a critical and creative practitioner can emancipate and empower the self and others. I considered how the bubonic tourist as an ethical individual is a member of a comunity that is created through performance. Finaly, I considered how creative interventions might engender someone to transmogrify into the bubonic tourist and how as a methodology the bubonic tourist could have practical aplication. This study, seks to outline the grounds in which instability can generate agency and a sense of self.  iii TABLE OF CONTENTS  Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………………..…... i Table of Contents ……………………….…………………………………………………………….. ii List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………...... iv Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………………... vi Dedication ………………………………………………………………………………………… vii 1. Introduction .............................................................. 1 1.1. A Departure: Taking Leave and Coming Home ................................ 3 2. Part I: The bubonic tourist as Multi-Sensual Tourist: An Everyday Relational  Art Practice .............................................................. 6 2.1. Multi-Sensual Tourism and the Carnivalesque ................................ 7 2.2. Relational Aesthetics and the Everyday .....................................1 3. Part I: The bubonic tourist as Critical Performance Autoethnographer ............17 3.1. The Reflexive Turn and Critical Performance Autoethnography .................. 19 3.2. Performing Pedagogy .................................................. 2 4. Part II: Is the bubonic tourist Ethical? ....................................... 25 5. Part IV: Der Head Café: A Project in Art and Social Engagement ……….………….. 3 5.1. Convergence: The Past Mets the Present .................................. 34 5.2. Sumer Songs/Winter Walks: Kelownaʼs Club of Urban Wanderers .............. 36 5.3. Walking With the Derly Departed ......................................... 38 5.4. Der Head Café: A Project in Art and Social Engagement ...................... 40 5.5. Der Head Café Postcard ............................................... 41 5.6. Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea and 10 Plastic Der/10 Invitations to Tea ......... 4 5.7. Your Asignment ...................................................... 46 5.8. The Café ............................................................ 49 6. In Closing ............................................................... 59 Works Cited ................................................................ 61 Appendices ................................................................ 64 Apendix A: Der Head Café Postcard Ful List of Sugestions ...................... 64 Apendix B: Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea Objects and Text ........................ 65  iv LIST OF FIGURES  Figure 1: Sumer Songs/Winter Walks Poster ...................................... 37 Figure 2: Walking With The Derly Departed ........................................ 39 Figure 3: Walking With The Derly Departed 2 ...................................... 39 Figure 4: Der Head Café Postcard Front .......................................... 43 Figure 5: Der Head Café Postcard, from Bokman .................................. 43 Figure 6: Der Head Café Postcard, from Unknown .................................. 43 Figure 7: Your Asignment Poster ................................................ 48 Figure 8: Artists In Residency Studio .............................................. 54 Figure 9: The Café ............................................................ 54 Figure 10: Tea Circle .......................................................... 54 Figure 1: Paper Bits .......................................................... 5 Figure 12: Kathy Reading Asignments ........................................... 5 Figure 13: Selection Of Found Plastic Der ......................................... 5 Figure 14: Participants Drinking Tea .............................................. 56 Figure 15: Participants Socializing ................................................ 56 Figure 16: Jay Drinking Tea ..................................................... 57 Figure 17: Kathy Drinking Tea ................................................... 57 Figure 18: Participant Holding Der ............................................... 58 Figure 19: Participant Holding Der 2 ............................................. 58 Figure A-1: Zero Candle ....................................................... 65 Figure A-2: Label Maker ....................................................... 65 Figure A-3: Clock ............................................................. 65 Figure A-4: Icing Set .......................................................... 65 Figure A-5: Mug With Birds ..................................................... 65 Figure A-6: Grandpaʼs Glases .................................................. 6 Figure A-7: Scisors ........................................................... 6 Figure A-8: Yelow Gogles ..................................................... 6 Figure A-9: Peper Seds ...................................................... 6 Figure A-10: Stapler ........................................................... 6 Figure A-1: Calculator ........................................................ 67 Figure A-12: Get Wel Globe .................................................... 67 Figure A-13: Bronze Medal ..................................................... 67 Figure A-14: World Atlas …………………………........………………...............…. 67  Figure A-15: Porcelain Owl ..................................................... 67  v Figure A-16: Slide Tray ........................................................ 68 Figure A-17: Medical Car ....................................................... 68 Figure A-18: BC Buton ........................................................ 68 Figure A-19: Cliford Bok ...................................................... 68 Figure A-20: Chalk Brush ....................................................... 68 Figure A-21: Cokie Tray ....................................................... 69 Figure A-2: Film Frame ....................................................... 69 Figure A-23: Teeth Buton ...................................................... 69 Figure A-24: Baby Fork ........................................................ 69 Figure A-25: Protractor Set ..................................................... 69 Figure A-26: Note Pad ......................................................... 70 Figure A-27: Can Opener ....................................................... 70 Figure A-28: Ump Counter ...................................................... 70 Figure A-29: Graduate ......................................................... 70 Figure 49: Shakers ............................................................ 70  vi   Acknowledgments  Although, Gerald Thurston has always insisted, “ideas are fre,” it would be strange to begin this work without recognizing the debt I owe to the many conversations he and I have shared during the last decade. It was in these conversations that many of the ideas I discus below began to percolate. While I employ my own metaphors and couch my project in a terain developed almost entirely during my graduate studies, there are times where I am uncertain where my thoughts end and Geryʼs begin. It is my hope that this project documents in large part our long-term colaborative and conceptual conversations.  I would like to especialy thank the folowing:  Mia Rushton who conceptualy colaborated with me on much of the creative work I undertok during my graduate studies and who was my interlocutor for hundreds of hours as I contemplated my research. Without this dialogue, I would not have writen a single word and my projects would have ben impoverished without it. Thank you for being loving and suportive.  My mother who taught me to be resistive and my father who taught me how to do this with compasion.  Dr. Brian Rusted who opened the dor to so much of the research I conducted.  And to the citizens of Kelowna and the wiling participants of Der Head Café.  Special thanks to the continued comitment and suport of my Thesis Advisor, Asociate Profesor Neil Cadger and my Supervisory Comite, Asistant Profesor Renay Egami, Asistant Profesor Denise Keney, and Dr. Daniel Keyes. Dr. Jenifer Gustar shared with me a pasion for reconsidering the production of knowledge and introduced me to ways of employing theory so that it has real world consequences. I am forever apreciative.  This research could not have ben posible without the initial suport of the University of Calgaryʼs Performance Studies Program. As such, I would like to ofer my gratitude to Dr. Peny Farfan who convinced me to enrol in graduate schol in the first place and whose generosity as  vi an instructor is galvanizing. Further thanks to Dr. Doug Brown, Dr. Susan Benet, Asociate Profesor Paul Wodrow, and Dr. Jim Dugan. Of course, a tremendous thanks to my loving, suportive, and talented coleagues, Melanie Benet and Richard Smolinski, both of who, never cease to inspire me.   Finaly, I want to thank Ethan Cole and Samuel Garigo Meza who were my creative partners during the tenure of Bubonic Tourist (the organization) and who remain two of my closest coleagues and colaborators today. It is because of the hard work, dedication, sher madnes, and shared blind optimism of these two artists that for seven years a foundation was laid making graduate studies even thinkable.  This research was funded in part by Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada and The Alberta Foundation for the Arts.  vii Dedication             To Mia Nicole Rushton  and  Gerald R. Thurston                     1 1. Introduction Tourism promises transformation into, or self-actualization of, a more authentic self by virtue of contacts or encounters with extraordinary phenomena. Like film to the surealists, it promises to lift the veil from our eyes, reminding us of the marvelous, intoxicating character of the world around us. It has the capacity to make ordinary things—walking, eating, sleping, loking at other people or the environment—strange, dificult, unfamiliar. (Bowman 125)  …we are tourists much of the time whether we like it or not. (Edensor, “Performing” 61)   This paper encapsulates and extends a methodology and a character I have ben developing since the late 190ʼs caled the bubonic tourist. In September 200, along with two other artists, I began working under the moniker of ʻBubonic Tourist,ʼ advancing a practice as cultural impresarios—creating, curating, facilitating, and educating—with the intention of generating comunity through performance. We questioned what it meant to create and present performance in theatres, galeries, found, and site-specific venues (garages, warehouses, basements, parks, underground-car-pay-lots, benches, boiler roms etc.), and what it meant to make the city strets an active participant in the creation of our work. We asked how thre selfish, privileged, midle clas white kids from Calgary—a Western Canadian colonialist setlement, turned oil-rich suburban spoiled brat—could posibly develop a pedagogy and methodology that was motivated by radical politics and was anti-racist, pro-feminist, and comunity oriented? Perhaps we sought to put the city, our bodies, and our identities into crisis by transgresing and transforming cordinates, turning them into spaces where myth, comunity, and identity could come into being, if only temporarily. Each event became an instance of articulation and an ocasion of bringing together disparate audiences and artists. We worked with and within what  2 we believed to be the margins of Western Canadian culture, creating and presenting works that were by their very nature seking to eradicate the borders betwen audience and artist, artist and environment, environment and audience. We blured the borders betwen disciplines, generations, and demographics. Nevertheles, after six years of seking to identify a mode of representation that didnʼt lok like ʻtheatreʼ (because we never acted like ʻtheatreʼ), we shut down. ʻBubonic Touristʼ (200-206 R.I.P) was les of an organization than it was, or had become a way of life (so cliché!). So admitedly, what I am atempting here is to recompose the ʻbubonic touristʼ as an avant-garde hybrid critical and creative character—a methodology and a model of cultural production, and a way of being in and “doing” the world.  While I do not deal specificaly with the numerous creative activities of the past decade, sufice it to say that my field experience as a curator, facilitator, educator, performer, and social impresario has laid the foundation for the hypothesis I am expresing here. My priority is to unveil the ways in which the bubonic tourist operates in the everyday as a resistive, ethical, and generous individual, how the bubonic tourist generates spatial and temporal transgresions that sanction agency and alter subjectivity, and how the bubonic tourist creates comunity through performance by apropriating, canibalizing, and carnivalizing social codes and modes of operation. I am determined, if only tentatively, to identify a way of theorizing the posibility of personal and social transmogrification and emancipation by means of performance and engagement—experiences that exced mere political advocacy and rhetoric by taking into acount the relativism of, and relation to, social, cultural, and geographical context.  I began this paper with two quotations that I hope wil alow me to imediately identify my position. First, that tourism can make the ordinary extraordinary within the everyday, that tourism can generate agency and alter subjectivity, and that in a post-structural paradigm that interogates and is suspicious of authenticity and identity, a sense of authentic self, as oposed to an authentic other (Harison 34), can be obtained, even if only temporarily; and second, that tourism has increasingly become a productive strategy to conceptualize how we experience, engage, and perform the everyday.  3  To facilitate the composition of the bubonic tourist, I have divided this work into four sections. The first, “The bubonic tourist as Multi-Sensual Tourist: An Everyday Relational Art Practice,” considers a move away from gazing as an epistemological trope and proposes multi-sensual engagement as a form of carnivalesque that disrupts dominate Western masculinized naratives. Folowing through with these ideas, I continue to explore engagement as a way to unsetle hegemonic aparatuses, while loking specificaly at Nicolas Bouriaudʼs Relational Aesthetics and Michel de Certeauʼs Practice of Everyday Life—wherein both view the individual as a participant in aesthetics practices. In “The bubonic tourist as Critical Performance Autoethnographer,” I propose that, as the bubonic tourist, an individual reflexively investigates their link to habitus and performs resistive relations to power. Furthermore, I contend that if critical performance autoethnography is pedagogical, and, therefore, educational, then performance can be a way of liberating oneself from habitus. In the third section, “Is the bubonic tourist Ethical?” I outline how departures or revolts not only generate agency and subjectivity, but also that through engagement, participation, and encounters, the bubonic tourist is an individual ethical character in the comunities it creates colaboratively through performance. Finaly, in “Der Head Café: A Project in Art and Social Engagement,” I explicate the development and implementation of a ten-day project I created in the winter of 207, that sought to test the methodology of the bubonic tourist.   1.1. A Departure: Taking Leave and Coming Home  As a brief preface to the discusion here, I want to identify how I am employing the metaphor of the tourist and how I view the bubonic tourist as a resistive character who operates in relation to social procedures in the everyday. The social procedures that I am adresing might best be regarded as habitus. Piere Bourdieu sugests that habitual and repetitive behaviors (or habitus) come to patern and define the everyday through normalized codes and modes of operation, that social principles produce and organize practices of representation, and that representations render and organize types of sociability by regulating inter-human encounters. By  4 internalizing and embodying social normativity, habitus makes history invisible. In this regard, Bourdieu is proposing that social, cultural, and per groups identify and signify the boundaries of tolerable behavior by its membership. The “everyday is thus a realm of repetition” (Edensor, “Performing Tourism, Staging Tourism” 61), that is performatively diseminated and made ʻstable,ʼ dictating a behavioral hegemonic order with the apearance of fre improvisation that produces practices or fields (Bourdieu qtd. in Schirato and Web 78). Habitus and its coresponding fields tyranicaly ratify the maner in which we should behave, what should be viewed, and how things should be done. The asembly of such parameters might be one way to understand how and why we perform in the everyday; but habitus positions, or casts one, more as a ʻlocalʼ then it does as a ʻtouristʼ—at the centre, rather than the margins of habitual social practices. This would sem to deny Edensorʼs statement that “we are tourists much of the time whether we like it or not” (“Performing” 61); so how might we conceptualize tourism if it is bound to the everyday?   Edensorʼs statement refers specificaly to John Uryʼs proclamation that in a spectacular society—one that is inundated by mediated signs and spaces, marked and unmarked places—tourism, through our increasingly virtual and physical mobility has become a position from which to conceptualize how we experience, engage, and perform the everyday, and how our susceptibility to travel is governed by external operations. Edensorʼs study considers the tourist destination as an ideological stage that is managed by an industry and includes the behaviors and misbehaviors of tourists upon these stages. Edensor states, “despite the prevalence of codes and norms, tourist conventions can be destabilized by rebelious performances, or by multiple, simultaneous enactions on the same stage” (“Performing” 60). If we were to extend the metaphor of the stage and tourist protocol to Bourdieuʼs habitus, or as I have sugested, the local, then malperformance—acidental or intentional—might be considered a departure or an excursion from normalized social and cultural codes and modes; for example, a performance wil either reify or dispute authority and jurisdiction. In this regard, as a departure point for the discusion here, the resistive practices of the bubonic tourist might be considered the transgresion and return to  5 oneʼs habitus or system of signification (I say return, because tourists are only tourists on acount of their return, hope to return, or their being bound up with home/habitus). In this maner, the bubonic tourist in the everyday is continualy adhering to and revolting against, moving towards and moving away from, cultural normativity—a movement I shal later designate, borowing from Mikhail Bakhtin, as carnivalesque.   6 2. Part I: The bubonic tourist as Multi-Sensual Tourist: An Everyday Relational Art Practice  As Bakhtin observed: ʻThe most intense and productive life of cultures takes place on the boundaries.ʼ (Carlson 191)   Bakhtinian principles sugest that ʻartistic form and meaning emerge betwen peopleʼ; it is ʻdialogic relationshipsʼ that give encounters meaning” (emphasis in original, Harison 46)  Art is born betwen individuals and comunities and cultures in the proces of dialogic interaction. Creation takes place not within the sufocating confines of Cartesian egos or even betwen discrete bounded cultures but rather betwen permeable, changing comunities. (emphasis in original, Shohat and Stam 56)    The resistive character that I am proposing—the bubonic tourist—is formulated in large part by the combination of two practices, multi-sensual tourism and the carnivalesque and is situated within the everyday. In this section, I want to begin by further articulating what I mean by both ʻtouristʼ—that is, which ʻtouristʼ—and ʻbubonicʼ. I want to consider how in combination ʻbubonicʼ and ʻtouristʼ generate transgresions and departures from the centre to the margins of habitus and begin to outline how aesthetic and participatory engagement creates temporary comunities through performance in the everyday. In this section, I am particularly concerned with the generative posibilities of the bubonic tourist regarding social relationships, apropriation, and knowing by means other than distanced and distancing forms of perception.     7 2.1. Multi-Sensual Tourism and the Carnivalesque  In “Beyond the Text: Toward a Performative Cultural Politics,” and “Performance Studies: Interventions and Radical Research,” performance studies scholar, Dwight Conquergod, levels a critique against Cartesian egos for advantaging a mode of engagement that is cerebral and ocular. As a means of producing knowledge and comprehending experience of the self and other, the rest of the body has ben discounted under this Western epistemological trope. Conquergod has described this separation betwen gazing and embodied knowledge, as knowledge apartheid (“Performance Studies” 320), recognizing that embodied knowledge is often relegated to the feminine as “old wives tales,” as oposed to gazing, which is reserved for masculine naratives (“Beyond the Text” 17). Like Conquergod, Shohat and Stam, in “Narativizing Visual Culture: Towards a Polycentric Aesthetics,” recognize that while the visual is an important strategic way of understanding the world, the visual is contaminated by the other senses—smel, touch, hearing, and taste (5). The masculine and phalocentric mode of comprehending and engaging the world, that Conquergod and Shohot and Stam adres, is reductive and fragmentary. It privileges sight and the esentializing gaze, over a multi-sensual, embodied, experiential, and participatory epistemology.1 These critiques provide a tremendous oportunity to reconsider the ʻtouristʼ as more than simply a sight(site)ser that is relegated to a position of disembodied hovering eye. Tourism and leisure studies scholar, David Crouch—equaly suspicious of gazing as an esentializing trope that defines and demarcates perceptions and behaviors—has considered a way forward for the tourist. In his paper, “Places Around Us: Embodied Lay Geographies in Leisure and Tourism,” Crouch recomends that tourism is an embodied and experiential proces through which individuals come to grasp, engage, make sense of and encounter the world. Crouch locates this asesment in an alternative type of perception; one in which there is not visual detachment, but engagement through a multi-sensual awarenes of space, place, and others. In this way, the tourist comes “to know about the world in new, more complex ways” (65),                                                 1 Similar critiques have ben leveld against the Western masculine gaze. I am thinking here in particular of the pionering work of Laura Mulvey, John Urry, and Edward Said.  8 by constantly negotiating “the world in terms of relationships, emotions and felings” (67); or as Hare has described, “the feling of doing” (qtd. in Crouch 68). Tourist knowledge that is obtained afectively is not a mater of expertise, per se, but is perhaps more acurately described as, “ʼparticipatory knowledgeʼ” (Shoter qtd. in Crouch 67); a knowledge that is acquired betwen individuals and comunities—relationaly, sensualy, experientialy, spatialy and by practice, trajectory, and dialogue. In regards to the bubonic tourist as a resistive practioner, the discusion of multi-sensual engagement identifies a tourist practice that does away with disembodied, ocularcentric, and monologic masculine naratives. Instead of the body being excluded and closed from the production of knowledge, the body of the tourist is pried open and splayed out by aesthetic, embodied, multi-sensual, and participatory practices. By taking leave of the visual tyrany, the bubonic tourist opens up posibilities for demarcated knowledges to be unsetled and the privileged body to be brought into contact with the self and other.  The open, grotesque body and multi-sensual engagement are critical characteristics of the carnivalesque as theorized by Makhail Bakhtin, and are a complementary way of engaging and combating normativity. The carnivalesque is a discursive, counter-hegemonic, heteroglosic, and heterogeneous practice that is both a site of resistance and a rehearsal of posible futures; it is the “negation of uniformity and similarity" (Bakhtin 39). The carnivalesque is not homogeneous, esentializing, nor a monoculture, but instead violates “natural” boundaries (Bakhtin 40), by creating temporary comunities and utopia(s)—or heterotopias2—that are pregnant with contradiction, social negotiation, social-relations, co-implication, and participation. Borowing from Stuart Hal, the carnivalesque could be regarded as “articulated” in both senses of the term (qtd. in Grosberg 53). The carnivalesque is both the temporary adjoining or linking of two or more discourses, and an instance of spech or an uterance. As an intervention, the carnivalesque is both generative and performative (a ʻdoingʼ) and operates in the slash betwen                                                 2 Heterotopia is a concept put forward by Michel Foucault describing a marginal space “where transitional identities may be sought and imaginative experimentation indulged, and the Western hegemonic power/knowledge axis bewildered and chalenged” (Edensor, "The Culture" 219).  9 performance/everyday (Pearson and Shanks 15). By ingesting social codes and modes of operation through the open body, the carnivalesque apropriates and aestheticaly excretes the formalities and decorum of aesthetic, political, and social hierarchies (Shohat and Stam 47). The body, “unfinished and open” begins to shed demarcation and “clearly defined boundaries” (Bakhtin 26-27), making one “aware of their sensual material bodily unity and comunity” (Bakhtin 25).  The ʻbubonicʼ in this project might apear as contentious because of its conection to the plague and iminent death. On the contrary, as a metaphor, the delirium the bubonic plague caused, and the efects and afects it had on the body, I would argue are also some of the finest features of the carnivalesque: madnes and the grotesque. Bakhtin himself states, “death is included in life, and together with birth determines its eternal movements. Even the strugle of life and death in the individual body is conceived by grotesque imagery as the strugle of the old life stubornly resisting the new life to be born as the crisis of change” (50). Furthermore, I think here of Antonin Artaudʼs first chapter in The Theatre and Its Double, “Theatre And The Plague” as an argument for “The Theatre of Cruelty” and the demand for a total asault of the senses in performance. While diferent in tone, but similar in nature, tourist scholar, Tim Edensor has defined tourism as a practice that confronts al of the senses, not just sight. Lastly, it was Wiliam S. Buroughs who declared “language is a virus,” and if language is inded a virus and language is performative, then performance is always already contaminated and infectious.  While my understanding of the carnivalesque functions in the realm of metaphor, as oposed to the often-limited view of the carnivalesque as festival or carnival, I take my lead directly from Bakhtin—liberaly aplying my own interpretation to his theory. In regards to the bubonic tourist, I read in Bakhtinʼs texts a posibility, one that alows for a multi-sensual epistemology based on relationships and engagement generated by instances of the carnivalesque. In Rabelais and His World, Bakhtin sugests [t]hese truly human relations were not only a fruit of imagination or abstract thought; they were experienced. The utopian ideal and the realistic merged in this  10 carnival experience, unique in its kind…. This temporary suspension, both ideal and real, of hierarchical rank created during carnival time a special type of comunication imposible in everyday life … permiting no distance betwen those who came in contact with each other and liberating [them] from norms of etiquete and decency imposed at other times. (emphasis aded, 10) This ʻspecial type of comunication,ʼ that exists in the interstices, or as an intervention into, the everyday, and where there is ʻno distance,ʼ can be regarded as multi-sensual engagement and participation. In this regard, ʻhuman relationsʼ that are not abstract, but ʻexperienced,ʼ indicates the carnivalesque can be any ocasion of multi-sensual perception that ruptures the Western masculine gaze as a way of producing knowledge about the self or other from an embodied, multi-sensual, dialogic, and relational perspective.  During instances of carnivalesque, therefore, not only are geographical and emotional terains traversed, transgresed and (re)negotiated, but also cultural codes and modes of operation, or ʻnorms of etiquete and decencyʼ—what I have refered to above as habitus. Thus, the transgresions of the bubonic tourist have real world efects and afects. More specificaly, the carnivalesque “rejects conformity to oneself” (Bakhtin 39-40). So while the bubonic tourist departs from a site within the system of signification, they must return from the margins to the centre of habitus. The bubonic tourist arives ʻhomeʼ with memories and rehearsals, changed and liberated “from the prevailing point of view of the world, from conventions and established truths … [with] a new outlok on the world” (Bakhtin 34). As such, the bubonic tourist can claim a measure of agency and altered subjectivity that might not have existed prior to the excursion.  In this regard, if being the bubonic tourist is a temporal drama—acting and (re)acting, entering and exiting, or a perpetual in and out-of-jointnes—then oneʼs relationship to cultural codes and norms is relational and dialogic—a departure from habitus feds back to habitus the experiences of an excursion.3 The bubonic tourist is generative and creative because the bubonic tourist is a trajectory, an oscilation, or a dance that destabilizes hegemony. Or as performance                                                 3 I wil adres this more fuly in “Part I: the bubonic tourist as Critical Performance Autoethnographer”.  11 studies scholar Michael Bowman has sugested of tourism, it is an aesthetic and ethnographic practice (16), where through engagement and transgresion of (multiple) borders—the physical, as wel as the cultural, social, and political—knowledge, self-reflexivity, and temporary comunities are produced. The bubonic tourist, then, might be considered a grotesque, infectious and contagious character, who by ʻtravelingʼ—departing to the margins of habitus—diseminates (spreads) a counter-hegemonic or resistive disposition (plague).  This problematization of teritory—social and cultural—temporarily turns atention away from representation, semiotics, the search for ʻauthenticity,ʼ and gazing, toward investigating the bubonic tourist through performative modes of engagement and participation. Comunity and agency are based on multi-sensual experiences and individual interactions with landscapes, locals, and other tourists. Considering this, Crouch recomends that it might be more acurate to understand places not as simply the text of a producer/promoter, but as “something through which and with which lives are lived and identity and myth made” (64). Moving forward, I want to explore how the bubonic tourist is both an everyday resistive, relational, and aesthetic character, and how the bubonic tourist creates comunity through performance.   2.2. Relational Aesthetics and the Everyday  In his bok, Relational Aesthetics, Nicolas Bouriaud advanced a new ay to acount for the visual and performative artwork—relational art—that emerged during the 190s and contributes to contemporary art today. Relational art, as defined by Bouriaud, is distinguished by the fact that it takes “as its starting point human relations and their social context, as oposed to autonomous and exclusive art” (17). Relational aesthetics, consequently, is “an aesthetic theory consisting in judging artworks in terms of the inter-human relations which they show, produce, or give rise to” (17). What Bouriaud has proposed is that instead of art being an object that can be shutled around from galery to galery, or museum to museum, and subsequently, spectator to spectator, the work is entirely beholden to the fortuity of its situation and audience—an audience that is thought of as a relational, self-generating, and a temporary comunity. In Bouriaudʼs  12 relational aesthetics, participation and proces moves beyond the comodified art object, shifting the emphasis from gazing to the audiencesʼ performance and participation. As a result of the artistsʼ intervention into the everyday, the work of art is co-created by, and consequently is, the audience, simultaneously. In this regard, the work of art is perpetualy in flux, never-ending, unwriten, and imersed in the everyday. The meaning is created colaboratively through engagement (Bouriaud 18), rather than in the privatized place of individual consumption or disembodied gaze of the traditional galery or museum-goer (Bishop 54).  Many criticisms have ben leveled against Bouriaudʼs Relational Aesthetics. Most prominent among the critics is Claire Bishop, who contends that Bouriaudʼs theory and its aproach to temporary utopia, comunity, and democracy is to subtle and homogeneous. In her paper, “Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics,” Bishop argues that the participant/audience of relational works are largely composed of existing players in the art market: artists, curators, art industry afiliates, and sympathetic patrons. Rather than being criticaly engaged, Bishop insists, conversations among participants are at best idle chitchat about whether the work they are experiencing is art or not. As the title of her paper implies, Bishop—inspired by Laclau and Moufe—is proposing that antagonism is a necesary ingredient to generating heterogeneous social relations. I believe Bishop is acurate in this regard—that for comunities and democracies to emerge, even temporarily, they must be authored from ultiple positions. To use a Bakhtinian concept, they must be heteroglosic. Piere Bourdieu has similarly sugested that there canot be genuine democracy without genuine oposing critical powers (qtd. in Giroux 8); there must be friction. Bishopʼs criticism, from y understanding, is that the works Bouriaud includes as ilustrations of relational art in his bok—such as Rirkrit Tiravanija Untitled (Stil), wherein Tiravanija transformed New Yorkʼs 303 Galery into a makeshift kitchen, serving Thai Curies to visitors—are either por examples, self-promotional, or just to palatable.   Bouriaud, for his part, has invited this criticism by mandating that relational works must be considered not only for their aesthetic qualities, but also for their political and ethical significance (64). Ergo, from Bishopʼs perspective, works such as Tiravanijaʼs Untitled (Stil) do  13 not apear to be political or demand an ethical engagement. Unfortunately, in Bishopʼs sprint to provide beter examples that are antagonistic by the nature of their intervention, she fails to recognize the other half of the relational art equation. That is to say, Bishopʼs heavy emphasis upon intervention does not consider what is intervened upon—the everyday—and it is precisely the everydaynes and the interstices of the everyday that Bouriaud is concerned with politicaly and ethicaly because, it is in the here and now that fisures and ruptures ocur; it is here that instances of the carnivalesque discursively emerge temporarily unsetling hegemonic forces.   To fuly understand how Bouriaud adreses the everyday as a site of political, ethical, and aesthetic negotiation in relational aesthetics, and to weave a thread back to the bubonic tourist, it wil become important to consider and unpack a model of the everyday that arguably Bouriaud is employing. Relational aesthetics can be read through French sociologist Michel de Certeauʼs important work, The Practice of Everyday Life.4 In general, de Certeau seks to iluminate the “everyday practices, ʻways of operatingʼ or ʻdoing thingsʼ” (xi), that generate spaces, but otherwise apear as an uninteligible backdrop to social activity. He is proposing that the dominant order or hegemonic forces of a society do not produce pasive spectators (or consumers). Instead, the urban dweler is an active agent, who through ʻusageʼ or consumption (or beter yet, carnivalization, apropriation or canibalization)5 of dominant representations or topographical systems is resistive and counter-hegemonic. That is, their everyday activities poach and trespas on the ʻpropertyʼ of others, making escapes while stil remaining in the system of places of power. In Bakhtinian terms, the opresed ingest the codes and modes of operation that demarcate behavior and spit them out as a ridicule of hegemony.  Michel de Certeau frames and situates these delinquent activities as ʻtacticsʼ that generate temporal ʻspacesʼ. In brief, he posits that, “space is a practiced place” (17). Place, de Certeau contends, is “the law of the proper” (17), or the geometric cordinates of a social, economic, and physical infrastructure, where oneʼs own place and the otherʼs is clearly delimited                                                 4 See also, Dezeuze for a rather diferent employment of de Certeau in regards to Relational Aesthetics and the everyday.  5 se Shohat and Stam 47-51.  14 and demarcated. It is a strategicaly and syntacticaly ordered, fixed, and hegemonic ʻtextʼ writen and read from a distance by a dominating gaze (what we in our discusion might consider habitus).ʻTacticsʼ or human actions upon these cordinates, on the other hand, generate what de Certeau refers to as space. Space, in contradistinction to place—like the carnivalesqe—is temporal, temporary, interactive, fragmented, frictional, and relational and has “none of the univocity or stability of a ʻproperʼ” (17). Space—generated by tactics—insinuates “itself into the otherʼs place, fragmentarily, without taking it over in its entirety, without being able to kep it at a distance” (xix). That is to say, relational participants or the bubonic tourist are resistive in the house of the opresor, in the margins of habitus. Consequently, space and place are reciprocal, matrixical, and interelated and are composed of multiple proceses, power relations, and influences.  Bouriaud, like de Certeau, views these tactical and resistive acts as hiden and creative—poesies, not miesis; art here does not imitate life, but iritates it. So while the gait of the urban dweler cuts up the ʻtextʼ of the city like the scisors in ʻhow to make a dadaist poemʼ or a Situationist Parisian map, the participant of relational art insinuates themselves both into the galery and the work, using and mis-using both in tandem—creating temporal and temporary spaces. Both figures—the urban dweler and the relational participant—flagrantly jetison Aristotelian verisimilitude—begining, midle, and end—disrupting and tearing open the tightly woven fabric of the everyday by introducing an eratic or random ovement into the system that seks order and fixity (de Certeau x). The participantsʼ actions, trajectory, kinesis—or beter yet, multi-sensual engagement—with the city or work of art debunks and destabilizes decorum, comodity, and linear plot. In short, de Certeau is proposing the death of the author and the urban dweler as cultural producer. He is proposing another system of creating knowledge that is participatory, fet-on-the-ground and relational. A knowledge that is spoken, enunciated, utered, and not writen; because as de Certeau explains, it is only from a distance, through disengagement, and gazing that the writen—“a graph…which the eye can master” (xi)—may be read. Or as Bakhtin states, "carnival is not a spectacle sen by the people; they live in it” (7).  15  To bring de Certeauʼs theory of the everyday, back to relational aesthetics more fuly then—works of relational art are temporal and temporary spaces, reliant on and generated by usage and consumption. Relational art works are not read or viewed at a distance like a painting or theatrical production, but are experienced afectively and multi-sensualy by its participants. The tactical activities of the audience/participants, in relational works insinuate themselves into the proper places of the galery or museum, while canibalizing, apropriating, misusing, and ultimately carnivalizing the intentions/production of the author (the hired artist). Relational art works, as stated above, are not only created by the audience, but are the audience, their interactions, usage, and consumption. It is the employment of tactics and the interstices of the everyday that Bouriaud has located relational art. Therefore, the carnivalesque is a useful way to understand that what everyday relational art does is create fisures, social negotiations, and heteroglosia in the hegemonic modus operandi.  To consider the bubonic tourist through this relational lens liberates the conversation from ʻauthenticityʼ and ʻcomodificationʼ of a destination (the art or the stage) and, instead, shifts it to the experience of the audience (the bubonic tourist) as creating meaning upon that stage, with the temporary comunity that is created ultimately becoming the destination itself (the work of art). As such, what the bubonic tourist does amounts to practice and performance. If, as a resistive, relational, and aesthetic character, the bubonic tourist is creating places—social codes and modes of operation (habitus)—anew through carnivalesque and by traversing the cordinates of the destination and engaging with others in dialogic and discursive practices, then the bubonic tourist is a social agent, an artist, a colaborator, co-creator, spect-actor, and co-performer; and therefore, being the bubonic tourist becomes a mater of proces, practice and ʻdoingʼ. The bubonic tourist engages and generates instances of carnivalesque whereby she/he breaks through into performance (Hymes) and transgreses rather than transcend normative meanings and traditions “plunging [themselves] back into the cortices of political strugle” (Conquergod, “"Beyond" 3). For, as Michel de Certeau has so eloquently claimed, “what the map cuts up, the  16 story cuts acros” (129), sugesting the dialogic and discursive tactics of the bubonic tourist generate embodied, relational and self-reflexive comunities through performance.  17 3. Part I. The bubonic tourist as Critical Performance Autoethnographer  Performance ofers a new authenticity, based on body knowledge, on what audiences and performers share together, on what they mutualy construct. As a form of cultural exchange, performance ethnography encourages everyone present to fel themselves as both familiar and strange, to se the truths and the gaps in their cros cultural embodiments. In this exchange, we find an authenticity that is intuitive, body-centered, and richly ambivalent. (Jones 14)  The theme of madnes is inherent to al grotesque forms, because madnes makes [people] lok at the world with diferent eyes, not dimed by ʻnormal,ʼ that is by comon place ideas and judgments. In folk grotesque, madnes is a gay parody of oficial reason. (Bakhtin 39)  The pedagogical as performative in this work does not merely provide a set of representations/texts that imparts knowledge to others—it also becomes a form of cultural production in which oneʼs own identity is constantly being rewriten, but always with an atentivenes to how culture functions as both a site of production and a site of contestation over power. (Giroux 16)    In the last section, I considered how the bubonic tourist is not simply a sight(site)ser, but rather a practitioner. I contended that sensory, emotional, and spatial engagements as carnivalesque, coupled with relations to others, can produce the site of relational art in the everyday. I loked at how the bubonic tourist generates instances of carnivalesque through relational and embodied engagement and how these aesthetic, resistive, and tactical  18 actions/performances create spatial and temporal departures from the centre of habitus to the margins of social and cultural aparatuses. I concluded that a destination/comunity is generated simultaneously as it is performed in the interstices betwen performance and the everyday. In this next section, I want to lok at how the bubonic tourist can produce and diseminate meaning and knowledge through reflexivity as a critical performance autoethnographer, while ocupying the margins of habitus. To begin, I want to consider two types of knowledge that Bourdieu has outlined as a means of engaging in embodied practice, practical knowledge, and reflexive knowledge.  For Bourdieu, practical knowledge alows one to comprehend habitus and the rules that govern competition within oneʼs field. This knowledge, gained by repetitive ʻnegotiationʼ and ʻimprovisation,ʼ alows one to “determine which practices, discourses, moves or forms of capital [cultural, social, symbolic] are apropriate to the moment” (Schirato and Web 256). When the social and cultural codes and modes of operation that govern behavior become obvious or noticeable, displaced or transgresed, practical knowledge, as Bourdieu sugests, is enlarged through reflexivity or reflexive knowledge (Schirato and Web 25). If reflexive knowledge, or reflexivity, is instigated as a result of estrangement from habitual practices—what we might consider an everyday Brechtian verfremdungs-efect—then as Schirato and Web indicate regarding Bourdieuʼs theory, individuals become “aware and evaluative [of their] relation to oneself and oneʼs context” (256). Though Bourdieu conceptualizes reflexive knowledge as always in relation to habitus and sanctioned by oneʼs field (Bourdieu is thinking specificaly of the social sciences), it is this sanctioned distancing from hegemonic fields and habitus that, not unlike Bakhtinʼs carnivalesque, one can reflect on the “ʻunthought categories of thoughtʼ” (Bourdieu and Wacquant qtd. in Schirato and Web 26). Reflexivity, therefore, criticaly exposes the social modes and codes of operation, the ʻunthoughtʼ habitual paterns of practical knowledge that govern efects and afects. Finaly, if reflexivity criticaly exposes habitus and practical knowledge, then it also “provides a means of moving beyond what the subject already knows on a practical  19 level, and ofers the advantages […] of transposable knowledge” to negotiate not only “acros societies and cultures but acros […] cultural fields” (Schirato and Web 268-269).  In Julia Harisonʼs Being a Tourist: Finding Meaning in Pleasure Travel, she quotes one of her research participants who sugests that, travel can iluminate “atitudes and asumptions that [we] cary and which would remain unknown to [us] in familiar suroundings. But, by being in a diferent place, by being in a foreign place, [we] have the oportunity to learn about [ourselves]” (86). What Harisonʼs respondent regards as atitudes and asumptions, we might consider practical knowledge with familiar suroundings being habitus. If travel for the tourist proper or the transgresions of the bubonic tourist do expose habitus and the limits of oneʼs practical knowledge, then not only does the oportunity to become cognizant and critical of habitus arise, but so to, does the posibility of dialogue betwen subjectivity, agency, and others; and dialogue betwen subjectivity and historical and social structures of culture emerge. This discursive space wherein individuals come to reflect on habitus and identity could be considered the margins of habitus as outlined in the previous section. Keping Bouridieuʼs notion of reflexive knowledge at hand, it is here then that I want to introduce critical performance autoethnography as a reflexive, resistive, and relational practice. This wil alow me to articulate how the bubonic tourist produces and diseminates meaning and knowledge.  3.1. The Reflexive Turn and Critical Performance Autoethnography  Like tourism, early ethnography was born of modernity, the quest for the other, the exotic, and authentic and was integral to imperial and colonial projects. By the mid-20th century, the ethnographerʼs ability to remain dispasionate and objective, pasive and gazing, came to be understod as a superficial—in fact, imposible—position. Feelings, emotions, ethical and moral stances, previous and imediate experience, participation and reflections were acknowledged as fundamental dimensions of ethnographic work. Ethnographers, whose historical and traditional role was to record and gather data objectively through gazing, came to acknowledge themselves efected and afected personaly by displacement, fragmentation, and encounters with others and  20 comunities. As a result, the boundary betwen the author, its objects of study, and reported data eroded as colaboration, participatory experience, and personal narative bled into otherwise objective and pasive observation. Consequently, as a genre of enquiry, the contemporary ethnographerʼs biographical experience has ben deployed reflexively in ethnographic analysis (Denzin 3). As a methodology then, autoethnography seks to investigate the personal—oneʼs subjectivity and agency—and oneʼs dialogue or articulation with history and social and culture structures, including race, clas, gender, and ability. This reflexive turn, coupled with a post-structural and post-colonial paradigm, resists conclusion or closure by interogating, transgresing, and de-centering esential and normative representations of culture and self; authorizing autoethnographers to do away with an authoritative and positivist voice. Autoethnographers, therefore, employ reflexive knowledge and a personal perspective that seks to make “sense of the autobiographical past” in the present (Alexander qtd. in Denzin 15). As Norman Denzin has stated, the autoenthographer utilizes lived experience and personal history as a site/cite of cultural investigation, “turning the ethnographic gaze inward on the self (auto), while maintaining the outward gaze of ethnography, loking at the larger context wherein self experiences ocur” (Denzin qtd. in Trujilo 27).    Reflexive knowledge coupled with a performative paradigm, that insists on what Victor Turner regards as “making, not faking” and Homi Bhabha as “breaking and remaking,” shifts the emphasis of cultural and autoethnographic practice from “invention to intervention” (emphasis in original, Conquergod, “Beyond” 32). As a radical cultural intervention, performance alows the autoethnographer to comprehend experiential phenomena through kinesis and engagement, rather than simply through viewing. The performance autoethnographer comes to know as a result of “doing” (Alexander 415), the “act of doing” (Grosberg qtd. in Alexander 425), or like the multi-sensual tourist, ʻthe feling of doingʼ. Performance autoethnography is an experiential participatory practice, wherein the researcher is situated in, and is an active agent of, the production and critique of cultural representations and meanings (think relational art and the carnivalesque). As such, performance autoethnography becomes a “civic, participatory, [and]  21 colaborative project”; one where the projectʼs ownership and interpretation is shared with members of the comunity (Denzin 17). As an embodied practice, performance autoethnography, therefore, problematizes the performing body, subjectivity, and history of the researcher and the audience. In this regard, both come to know others and the self through an experiential participatory epistemology. As a political and counter-hegemonic project, critical performance autoethnography, like Bourdieuʼs conception of reflexive knowledge, works to “expose the ways in which power and ideology [the unthought categories of thought] shape self, desire, and human consciousnes in concrete institutional and interactional sites” (Denzin 3). The critical performance autoethnographer, therefore, like the bubonic tourist seks to problemitize and carnivalize habitus while simultaneously rehearsing posible futures and producing alternative relations to power.  To consider the bubonic tourist as an everyday critical performance autoethnographer provides an exciting oportunity to imagine how, by way of a critical disposition, practical knowledge, habitus, and the self can be efected and afected. If the bubonic tourist reflexively uncovers oneʼs relationship to habitus and relations to power through instances of embodied carnivalesque, then I want to propose—folowing Lawrence Grosberg—that the bubonic touristʼs intervention into the everyday enables the bubonic tourist to behave strategicaly and counter-hegemonicaly, so as to alter their relationship to power and habitus (qtd. in Giroux 7). That is to say, the bubonic tourist, like the critical performance autoethnographer, must recognize that their behaviors are entangled with and ultimately maintain or resist the hegemony of habitus.   Reflexivity, therefore, alows one to criticaly adjust oneʼs behavior and produce new meanings and knowledges about the self and culture. This adjustment becomes performative (a doing) and a creative act—poiesis, not mi esis, making, not faking—confirming Denzinʼs asertion that if the world is representation, than to “change the world, we must change how e write and perform it” (78). The bubonic tourist, therefore, becomes a cultural (secret) agent wielding the weapon of identity, experience, colaboration, generosity, compasion, intuition, and transgresion. By crosing borders, and operating in the margins, identity becomes a trajectory,  22 making the project of the bubonic tourist in part, smugling pasports and granting self-citizenship. By distancing “ourselves from the disciplined mobilizations of every day life in order to rearticulate the sites of our afective investment,” Peter McLaren sugest, “we can ʻrenter the strategic politics of the social formationʼ” altered by (qtd. in Alexander 425), or rather armed with, new reflexive and rehearsed knowledges. This does not mean that space and place cease to be, but rather, the demarcations established by habitus become porous and unstable (Giroux 6). As a cultural agent and cultural producer, the bubonic tourist operates in the realm of the relational and the aesthetic, but also, in what Henry Giroux cals, the “sphere of the social” (6). The bubonic touristʼs development of agency and an alteration of subjectivity, therefore, becomes political and the political, as performative, is pedagogical.  3.2. Performing Pedagogy  In “Walking in the City: Pedestrian Spech Acts,” published as part of Practice of Everyday Life, Michel de Certeau states that walking has an ʻenunciativeʼ function: it implies relations among diferentiated positions, that is, among pragmatic ʻcontractsʼ in the form of movements (just as verbal enunciations is an ʻalocution,ʼ [walking] ʻposits another opositeʼ the speaker and puts contracts betwen interlocutors into action). (emphasis in original, 98)   What I find particularly instructive about this pasage by de Certeau is that movement, trajectory, and kinesis are inherently performed in the presence of an other, an interlocutor. This could mean a colaborator, co-creator or more broadly, habitus. [D]e Certeauʼs pasage, then, becomes a valuable place to set about considering how the critical performance and the autoethnographic practices of the bubonic tourist are pedagogical. To begin, if during instances of transgresion and carnivalesque, the bubonic tourist becomes reflexive and subsequently alters her or his behaviors acording to inward and outward investigation of cultural and social aparatuses, then, I would propose that not only is the bubonic tourist performing, but that these performative acts  23 are public. The bubonic tourist, by criticaly performing alternate relations to power, is publicly declaring subjectivity and agency, while simultaneously making habitus visible. Giroux regards this public performative act as an opositional intelectual practice (16). An intelectual and performative practice, I would contend, that forfeits authority and democratizes intelectual activity, giving way to the transformation of social life by knowing or doing the world diferently.6  In his bok, Ethno-Techno: Writings on Performance, Activism, and Pedagogy, Guilermo Gómez-Peña, states that his role as a cultural practioner and performance artist, is to open up a temporary space—what I have defined as the margins of habitus—in which “meaningful and ʻradicalʼ behavior and progresive thought are alowed to take place” (24). Gómez-Peña hopes that by publicly performing alternative relations to power, he might embolden his audience to reases their own relations to the social codes and modes of operation that govern their lives and alter their behaviors acordingly. The hope that Gómez-Peña employs it is a politics that drives many radical pedagogical projects (Friere; Denzin; Giroux; Gómez-Peña; Thurston), and one that I to share. That said, there is a complementary aproach to understanding how and why critical performance autoethnography can be political and pedagogical. Folowing performance creation profesor Gerald Thurston, the generation of new or counter-hegemonic representations is not only a political practice, but also an infectious practice. Thurston, echoing the field of critical pedagogy, has pointed out that education—with “educe” as its rot—has as its potential, the ability to evoke or draw out an individualʼs latent capacity to understand or “do” the world diferently. That is to say, the bubonic tourist, by criticaly performing her or his self in relation to habitus, ofers a participatory experience to an interlocutor. This experience ofers the promise of displacement, alowing the bubonic touristʼs colaborator space and the oportunity to uncover habitus and practical knowledge through reflexivity. This is a reciprocal, horizontal, and emancipating proces, where there are no leaders or hierarchs, nor are there folowers. Instead,                                                 6 I am thinking specificaly here of Antonio Gramsciʼs declaration that everyone is an intelectual, while remaining cognizant that every “relationship of ʻhegemonyʼ is necesarily an educational relationship”; i.e. education as a cultural practice is not inocent, but makes us subjects of and subjects to habitus and relations of power (in Giroux 13).  24 there are only colaborators, co-creators, and co-performers. Each person is “working together to develop new lines of action, new stories, new naratives in a colaborative efort” (Denzin 240). It is here then, that we return to the thread that runs throughout this research, creating comunity through performance.   25 4. Part II: Is the bubonic tourist Ethical? What is at stake in both political strugles and revolts of imagination is renewing a sense of agency that alows each person to create meaning for themselves. (Oliver 173)  It is the systematic proces of discovering personal referents by deconstructing the image(s)in/a(c)tion of the culture and by manipulating and utilizing comon referents, [that] creating a meaningful and relevant statement for the performer and audience [becomes posible]. (Thurston, “Fil” 6)  Because it is a distortion of being more fuly human, soner or later being les human lead the opresed to strugle against those who made them so. In order for this strugle to have meaning, the opresed must not, in seking to regain their humanity (which is one way to create it), become in turn opresors of the opresors, but rather restorers of the humanity of both. (Friere 28)    Up til now, I have ben afirming that social modes and codes of operation—habitus—can be canibalized, apropriated, or carnivalized by the bubonic tourist as a form of resistance. In this last section, I continue to consider the role of engagement and encounter, while shifting the discusion towards the bubonic tourist as an ethical member of a comunity. Certainly, in tourism proper, there are grave concerns with how one can engage the other respectfuly and without being exploitive. I do not pretend to answer these questions as it is not the direct focus of my research at present, but rather I sek to theorize “the tourist” as formative in agency and subjectivity and, therefore, of symbolic import. As the bubonic tourist is one who travels to the margins of cultural, family, and per habitus, there is rom in this discusion to formulate some  26 form of ethical practice in instances of excursion and return. Hitherto, I have made claims that by taking flight and coming ʻhome,ʼ individuals develop a sense of agency and an altered subjectivity. These departures have ben framed as antagonistic to habitus, but I want to clarify at this point, as I near the end of this discusion, that the bubonic tourist is not a nefarious character, but quite the oposite. It is here then, that I would like to develop further how departures or revolts not only generate an enhanced sense of agency and subjectivity, but also how through engagement, participation, and encounters, the bubonic tourist is an individual ethical character in the comunities it creates colaboratively through performance. To facilitate this discusion, I return to relational aesthetics, briefly considering the maner in which Bouriaud adreses the isue of ethics in relational art. Folowing through on Bouriaudʼs asesments, I wil then introduce two homologous concepts of agency and subjectivity as relational and ethical practices—those proposed by Kely Oliver in the Colonization of Psychic Space and Giving an Acount of Oneself, by Judith Butler.  In Relational Aesthetics, Bouriaud advocates a model of evaluation that considers not only the aesthetic, but also political and ethical merit of a relational artwork. Bouriaud is not a solitary voice in this recomendation. Other contemporary art critics have also postulated that contemporary and relation works have ethical implications. For instance, in his evaluation of documentary as being bound to human-rights or bio-politics, Okwui Enwezor has argued that contemporary artists are hybridized betwen activism and aesthetic practice—an asesment not much diferent than the one I have considered in “Part I”. By drawing on Levinasian ethics, Enwezor positions the contemporary artistʼs subjectivity (and their audiences) as ethicaly bound up with the other: “the central concern for the other, the being-for-the-other [therefore,] is the ground [in which intersubjectivity] governs the comunicative principle of exchange betwen two people” (24-25). Bouriaudʼs own asesment is not drasticaly diferent from this dialogic positioning of individuals, but he is aprehensive of the aproach put forward by Lévinas. Bouriaud asks, “don't ethics have a horizon other than this humanism which reduces inter-subjectivity to a kind of inter-servility?" (23). Bouriaudʼs interogation of ethics is grounded in his  27 discusion of form, wherein he proclaims, forms are generated by the digresion and chance encounter of hitherto related constituents—in relational art, these constituents, of course, are people. In relational art, Bouriaud sumarizes, form is relegated to the field of encounter and, as such, form generates the conditions for subjective exchange. Form is dialogic, and henceforth, a field of ethical reciprocity (24); for Bouriaud, unlike Levinas, the genesis of ethics is the compulsion for acknowledgement, not the forestaling of violence or competition. Bouriaud demonstrates this desire for acknowledgement, by aluding to psychoanalysis, “the work [or the interlocutor] tries to catch my gaze, the way the new-born ʻasks forʼ its motherʼs gaze” and vice versa (23). While Bouriaudʼs discusion of ethics is extremely brief, his undeveloped reference to a Lacanian psychoanalytical subject positioning and desire for adres might wel be the new horizon that Bouriaud is soliciting. Unfortunately, he fails to pursue his own line of thinking. That said, however, the implications this ethics has on the theoretical development of the bubonic tourist are exciting, because first, it means that encounters and exchanges can be grounded in both humility and generosity, not violence; and second, the introduction of psychoanalysis wil enable us to reconsider how the subject operates in the matrix of power relations.  In Giving an Acount of Oneself, Judith Butler seks to identify how the fragmented, contradictory, and unsteady post-structural subject might operate ethicaly and responsibly beyond humanism—unpacking, coincidentaly, the new horizon that Bouriaud has caled for. By employing several discordant theorists—Foucault, Adorno, Lacan, and, Levinas, among others—Butler argues that the inability of the post-structural subject to give a totalizing and comprehensive acount of oneself does not deny that subjectʼs ethical responsibility in the postmodern. Rather, by arguing that the self is always already entrenched in systems of signification—i.e. we are implicated in and interpelated by language and the codes and modes of sociality as an “I”—then “the very terms by which we give an acount, by which we make ourselves inteligible to ourselves and to others, are not of our making” (21). We do not create language, rather it creates us; our subjectivity is opaque and we canot recal our emergence into the social realm, our caling out (read: Lacanʼs miror stage). As a result, any narative acount— 28 a discursive asembly of the self—is incomplete, because the ability for one to provide a narative acount of oneself is entirely beholden to the social realm in which the self is conditioned. Language, therefore, interupts and incompletes us; and as a result, we wil never be able to provide a ful acount of ourselves because, we are incapable of knowing our pre-symbolic and presumably whole self.  Why does this mater? Butler advises that, the “I” requires the other for emergence and subjectivity; that “I am y relation to you, ambiguously adresed and adresing, … without whom I canot be and upon whom I depend to survive” (emphasis in original, 81). Butlerʼs conclusion, therefore, is that the “very meaning of responsibility must be rethought on the basis of this [self] limitation; it canot be tied to the conceit of a self fuly transparent to itself” (83). Instead, she maintains, “my very formation implicates the other in me … my own foreignes to myself is, paradoxicaly, the source of my ethical conection with others” (84). It is in this ʻspaceʼ of relation, then, that we can become ethical and responsible subjects because, if the “I” can never be fuly present to itself—not even through a narative or critical performance autoethnographic acount—then a “new sense of ethics” can arise from the “wilingnes to acknowledge the limits of acknowledgement itself” (42).  Humility, therefore, becomes the foundation of Butlerʼs proposed ethics, wherein the subject provides a constant critique of the norms, codes and modes of operation that bring the subject into being: “How are we formed within social life, and at what cost” (136). If Butler is acurate in her asesment, then her theory is not grounded in humanist self-determination and violence, but rather in codependence and acknowledgement of, and from, the other. Butler ultimately indicates, we must recognize that “ethics requires us to risk ourselves precisely at moments of unknowingnes, when what forms us diverges from what lies before us, when our wilingnes to become undone in relation to others constitutes our chance of becoming human” (136). “To be undone by another,” Butler continues, “is a primary necesity, an anguish to be sure, but also a chance—to be adresed, claimed, bound to what is not me, but also to be moved, to be prompted to act, to adres myself elsewhere, and so to vacate the self-suficient ʻIʼ  29 as a kind of posesion” (emphasis aded, 136). In regards to the bubonic tourist, then, the codes and modes of operation—habitus—that might ʻbindʼ us to a social group that is ʻnot me,ʼ or to a normative centre, is also the site/cite of departure, wherein one is ʻmovedʼ or ʻpromptedʼ to transgres habitus. As a result, one can adres themselves ʻelsewhereʼ (on ʻvacateʼ-ion and in the margins of habitus) and subsequently, critique or move against the interpelated “I”; the “I” we poses as our own centre, but an “I” that does not “stand apart from the prevailing matrix of ethical norms and conflicting moral networks” (7).  Butler ends her bok by stating that, if we “speak and try to give an acount from this place [of dislocation and transgresion], we wil not be iresponsible, or, if we are, we wil surely be forgiven” (136). That is to say, we must asume ful responsibility for our actions, recognizing humbly, that we, like the other, can only in part comprehend our motivations. Responsibility, therefore, is simultaneously forgiving others for their subconscious actions or adherence to habitus. If, as Butler sugests, we do not acept responsibility for our actions, then the habitus—and its inhabitants that we have transgresed—must equaly forgive us because, again, we canot be fuly aware of our subconscious desires. Responsibility and forgivenes, then, become esential to understanding how the bubonic tourist transgreses habitus, not as an intentionaly egregious act, but instead as a search for altered subjectivity and agency that canot be established apart from its social context; i.e., as a member of a comunity. It is here then that I would like to draw our atention specificaly to how, methodologicaly, the bubonic tourist is an ethical member of a transitory comunity in posesion of both agency and subjectivity. As such, I wil to lok at Kely Oliverʼs important work The Colonization of Psychic Space: A Psychoanalytic Social Theory of Opresion.   Sufice it to say, for our discusion here, that Oliver develops a homologous theory of ethics to the one proposed by Judith Butler—humility, acknowledgement, codependence, and forgivenes. Oliver, however, advances this thesis by unpacking how and why, as Butler sugests, we are moved to act and transgres. Oliver argues that alienation and marginalization generated as a result of transgresion and enforced by opresion and colonization can be  30 transformed into agency and subjectivity through a proces of sublimation and idealization. While Oliver deals specificaly with self-loathing individuals and groups that are subjugated at the moment of their arival into, or relation with a culture by racist and sexist opresion, her theory can prove fruitful if we were to consider habitus as a colonizing aparatus (which surely it is). Oliver sugests that colonization and opresion maintain power and stability by dividing behaviors into normal/abnormal, centre/margin, “proper/improper, pure/contaminated, god/evil” (198). These hegemonic and delimited actions or values are imposed upon the opresed—and I would also argue, the opresor—to the extent that each become “ʼinfectedʼ with the dominate values” of a culture (198). The colonization of psychic space, therefore, is not only the result of ownership, but also the repeated internalization of hegemonic signification. This internalization, therefore, acts as a self-governing or panoptic gaze that produces “alienation, shame, and melancholy” (198), leaving the marginalized feling “empty, depresed, and pasive, without a sense of their own agency” (172). Read another way, for habitus to afirm normativity or a centre, the extraordinary must be systematicaly efaced or abjected. By perpetuating the homogeneous and hegemonic characteristics of a habitus, the social can authorize and sanction the expulsion or disbarment of an individual from participating in meaning making. Hegemony as habitus seks to erase or supres the unconscious drives that motivate us to act or transgres and, therefore, develop agency. In regards to the bubonic tourist then, Oliverʼs discusion wil alow us to further configure, proceduraly, how as an ethical individual who might be castigated and alienated for revolting, carnivalizing, or transgresing habitus can equaly generate a “sense of itself as an agent who belongs to the comunity” (174).  Oliver is explicit in her consideration of how an opresed person or group can become ethical meaning makers and social agents. To begin with, Oliver seks to identify how our singularity, the inarticulate and unique configuration of every individualʼs unconscious desires, moves us to transgres social codes and modes of operation. Oliver contends that singularity, our “ecentricity, odnes, and strangenes along with uniquenes” (174), canot be signified or represented. Rather, it can only be “transfered or translated into . . . symbolic systems  31 [representation] through the imaginary” by way of sublimation (174). Unlike Freud, however, who favors the male libido and limits sublimation to the creation of works of art or intelectual activities, Oliver aserts that, singularity can also be translated into afects (emotions or iner dispositions). This is critical to Oliverʼs theory of social opresion because it involves both the ability to conceptualize and generate cognitive images as “separate from perpetual experience [habitus] and an ability to idealize someone or something as beyond the self [… making] movement betwen these two worlds [the sanctioned and the ideal] posible” (emphasis aded, 158). This becomes a psychic rehearsal of sorts and the genesis of liberation and emancipation. “Only through the realization of their singularity,” Oliver states, can “marginalized people begin the decolonization of psychic space” (163). By creating meaning from a personal perspective by virtue of sublimation, the individual as singular is established, positioning themselves within the homogeneity of language and signification. As such, through sublimation, idealization, and imagination, marginalized people can identify new horizons that enable the transference of corporeal afects into systems of signification through images, action, ideas, or objects7. As Thurston points out, “to fre the imagination by exploring how it is structured by experience, education, culture, and society and how that structure draws on comunaly acepted interpretations” alows the individual to engender a sense of agency and subjectivity that makes revolt and, therefore, comunity and comunication, achievable (8).  Furthermore, Oliver sugests that since the post-structural subject is unstable, then dominant representations that have ben internalized by marginalized individuals or groups can also be redirected against representations itself, making them odes of resistance. As such, the self-confidence of marginalized individuals “becomes a form of resistance, which empowers them to asimilate cultural clichés in order to make them their own and, in the proces, transform them” (154)—speaking as individuals that are in relation to culture as singular. The asimilation,                                                 7 In my own performance practice, I canot separate or rather do not view image, action, idea, or object as separate. Instead I view them as image/action/idea/object; al as one thing, but that is for another paper. While it wil not change the outcome of this paper, I figure it is worth noting at least to provide the reader with some sense of how I interpret the world!  32 carnivalization, and transgresion of social codes and modes of operation, therefore, not only “inaugurates subjectivity but also transforms the social through the transgresion or revolt necesary for asimilation and sublimation” (17). Oliver aserts, therefore that, “through idealization and then sublimation, the individual enters the realm of meaning as a meaning maker, as an agent. […] but insofar as one does so through prexisting forms of signification and meaning, one also belongs to a comunity of meaning and to a comunity of meaning makers” (156). Negotiation betwen individual and singularity provides a sense of agency and thus an individual who belongs to a comunity (Oliver 174).  In sum, Oliver contends that departures in the everyday by means of extraordinary and affectual procedures “begins to decolonize psychic space and fres the imagination from the restrictions of tradition [habitus]” (161). This proces, however, requires as we have explored above, reciprocal and relational humility, acknowledgement, codependence, and forgivenes. By departing the centre of habitus to the margins, the bubonic tourist develops, in the distance, a sense of agency and self-hod, while generating and becoming a member of a comunity.   33 5. Part IV: Der Head Café: A Project in Art and Social Engagement  Perhaps it starts like this: the first thing you se is your breath in the morning air and through it a der siting next to you at the bus stop. Your cofe is already cold, but the der is colder in your hand as you pick it up to read: “helo. you have found what i have lost. please return to Der Head Café…”  Or perhaps it starts like this: forty-five minutes remain in your lunch break, so you decide to walk to the lake. What first loks like a duck turns out to be an atlas of the world. You flip it open to Canada and dream of somewhere hoter just as a note fals out: “please return to Der Head Café…”  Or maybe it starts like this: you are standing in line at the Bean Scene cofe house when you notice a poster that says, “your asignment: colect 5 [sic] leaves of matching size.” Or you are walking to the store when you notice afixed to a post “photograph yourself holding hands with a stranger,” or “take a picture of the lake” and you canʼt help but oblige purely out of curiosity—a sense of wonder. (from Der Head Café Pres Release)   In this next and final section, I begin to consider how it is posible to destabilize a personʼs habitus through creative interventions. I speculate that by interupting an individual in mid-stride one might metamorphize into the bubonic tourist—a critical and creative, reflexive and ethical individual. To facilitate this discusion, I wil explicate the development and implementation of a ten-day project I created in the winter of 207 caled, Der Head Café: A Project in Art and Social Engagement.  As a relational event, Der Head Café, was divided into two interelated sections, public interventions and The Café. The public portion of the project was composed of asignments  34 posted around town encouraging creative civic engagement, self-adresed postcards inviting people to write on a variety of themes, and ʻlostʼ household items and plastic der that people could find and return to The Café, where participants were invited to share tea and cokies with myself and other patrons. Situated within Kelownaʼs Cultural District and in the Artist in Residence Studio at the Alternator Galery for Contemporary Art, Der Head Café was an experiment in how the bubonic tourist, as a methodology, could be employed. Der Head Café sought to create the context in which locals or transient residents of Kelownaʼs city centre could criticaly and reflexively engage with the city and their own habitus as the bubonic tourist. It was my intention with Der Head Café to engender individuals as active agents, participants, co-performers and colaborators in the creation of a temporary comunity.   5.1. Convergence: The Past Mets the Present  When I arived in Kelowna to study tourism through the lens of performance, my atention was focused largely on walking, finding, and colecting as an alternative and performative tourist practice. It was my intention to identify a “Kelowna” that operated outside of the mythology prepared by industry and government, and what we might consider hegemony. I was obsesive and repetitive. My hypothesis, that identity, place, and comunity (habitus) could be put into crisis through a practice of walking, finding, and colecting and that identity and knowledge production was a kinesthetic proces, haunted me. So to inform this proposition, I decide to walk. I would spend my evenings and early mornings walking the strets, aleys, and pathways of the city. I would cut acros parks and empty lots, seking to encounter strangers. I would scour the ground for lost notes, photographs, and other bits of detritus—al of which I hoped might interupt my habitual behavior and the narative I had constructed of both Kelowna and myself. And in al of this walking, I began to find things (bots, leters, people, memories, stories, cats, dogs, broken ber botles, empty lots, nuts, the smel of roting aples, a favorite restaurant, aley plums, soft hands, long lines, huge trucks with huge sounds, basebal diamonds, beach fucking, grafiti, broken hearts, demolished houses, photographs) and I began colecting and cataloging them as  35 signifiers of my time in the city and as mementos that chalenged normative notions of the tourist souvenir.  During the first many weks of my tenure in Kelowna, I translated these experiences of walking, finding, and colecting into art objects. This practice, I came to recognize was not only disatisfying but also failed to fuly acount for the ephemeral fragments and multi-sensual phenomena that colectively made up my ever-shifting understanding of Kelowna. I came to understand, that my practice was always already documented through a colection of blisters, slivers, handshakes, scufed shoes, phone numbers, found objects, lumber scented jackets, bird shited on hats, bad techno, hamering, honking, riped jeans, blody fences, stained scarves, ber botles, gumed-up soles, pine nedles, maple leaves, photographs, nuts, sketches, and memories. I came to realize that the experiences I was colecting could not be efectively translated into solitary and autonomous art objects. Instead, a model of re/presentation that could remain temporary and dialogic was required, a model that alowed the conversation I was already having with Kelowna to continue, a model that remained grounded in the comunity that produced it in the first place, and a model that refused any authority I might have as a researcher. I then remembered what I had long atempted to forget—my work with the organization “Bubonic Tourist”. And like any tourist, I arived back where I had started (though slightly altered and with a diferent vocabulary), understanding that creating comunity colaboratively through performance is what and how I “do” the world. I realized that by employing my curatorial and facilitating skils, I could construct relational events that would embolden audiences as participants—transforming them into the bubonic tourist. So I set out imediately to do just that.        36 5.2. Sumer Songs/Winter Walks: Kelownaʼs Club of Urban Wanderers  Before I began any work on Der Head Café I initiated, along with visual artist Mia Rushton, a project caled Sumer Songs/Winter Walks: Kelownaʼs Club of Urban Wanderers. The purpose of Sumer Songs/Winter Walks was to create temporary comunity and space through a shared sense of event. We solicited members using a poster (Figure #1). As ʻclub membersʼ moved en mas throughout the strets, we located new places and people of interest. Through walking and talking we became colaborators in creating a shared “Kelowna”. More often than not we were self-reflexive—interogating our identities by sharing with others, through spech and action, who we were. We shared our memories, asked questions, identified diferences, argued, tok the lead or receded to the back. We wondered why we did not walk more, dug through piles of ruble, toured a twenty-four hour badminton club, and danced with the seniors who organized a wekly concert by an acordion practice society. We stod among toples and sweating kickboxing champions, snuck into abandoned buildings, suported striking apple juice factory workers, and scraped dog shit from our shoes; al the while criticaly performing ourselves in relation to others and our suroundings. ʻClub membersʼ simultaneously dislocated and displaced their identities and the city through trajectory and engagement, and it was here that we became tourists in our everyday lives and in our own town.  Often times, we would stumble acros someoneʼs old haunt, a place that held significance for one person or another—an area of town, a park, an ex-lover, or a house. These places were mnemonic devises (postcards or souvenirs) that would spur stories and remembering. We were archeologists who loked for the past in the present. On one such ocasion, club member Josh8, tok us through his old neighborhod. He showed us the previous location of an IGA that would give fre cokies to children on Sundays before it was torn down and replaced by milion dolar condos. He tok us down the stret he lived on in the late 80ʼs, pointing out the house with a chery tre in the backyard, the house that had always had a limo parked in front of it, and where “the twins lived.” He showed us the field he used to play in and his                                                 8 This is a pseudonym.  37 old house. We asked the curent homeowner for a tour and he welcomed us in without hesitation and introduced us to his daughter. Josh pointed out things that had changed in the house and told the home owner a number of diferent memories he had of the place—where he used to do science experiments, where his sister slept, and that his dad made them do dishes using tongs. Our walking did not just become interventions into the public, but into the private as wel. Our maping and the performance of ourselves and our memories in the moment were also haunting the places of significance for others. We continued to transgres our habitus and cros borders into comunities. We caried pasports fashioned out of consideration, compasion, generosity, and respect—al principles of a radical performance pedagogy that is inherent to make up of the bubonic tourist.   38 5.3. Walking With the Derly Departed  In late November, I purchased a stufed and porly mounted der head from High Browse Boks adjacent to Kelownaʼs main stret.9 I did not initialy plan to incorporate the dead der into my practice of walking, finding, and colecting. It was simply meant to hang on the wal in my apartment above my desk. Without a shoping bag large enough to cover the dead der, however, I had no other option but to cary it the thre blocks to my apartment in ful view. In this short distance, I was photographed thre times by cel-phone cameras (to show people back home, or to remember it later, or whatever tourist metaphor you want to use). With this acidental intervention, I had turned those on the stret into gawking tourists, but because of my aversion to gazing I knew that I wanted to rectify this pasive practice. I began walking around town with the dead der in my arms (Figure #2; Figure #3), using it to presure normal social codes and to encourage people to engage with me beyond gazing. I used the dead der as an icebreaker, striking up conversation with strangers, alowing them to hold it, to hold hands with me while being photographed with the dead der, or to stroke its fur. I removed the distance betwen others and myself, generating instead a shared event and a moment of carnivalesque. This creature in its death, to quote Bakhtin, was “not a negation of life” but instead was “the condition of . . . [a] renewal and rejuvenation” (50); a birth of social engagement. With the experiences                                                 9 Taxidermied animals have long ben an integral part of my performance work. In the winter of 200, while living in England, I created my first animal work, a dead rabit orchestra. Because the university I was atending was located forty-five minutes on fot from the city, I would spend many drunken evenings walking back to my dorm rom. The early morning hilsides were always scatered with rabits chewing on lush gras. I would spend hours colecting—quite literaly—field recordings, atempting to capture the sound the rabits made when eating. I was fascinated by the near silence of these creatures. Quite coincidentaly, after spending the evening reading about Joseph Beuys, I found a rabit that had ben hit by a car and I knew imediately that if the rabits would not alow me to come close enough to record their munching when alive, then I would use their corpses as violins. I have devised numerous other dead animal works though rarely did any of them ove beyond conceptualization as I have found it dificult to identify a festival curator or galery operator who realy wants a thre hundred pound dead pig pushed acros their flor.  39 generated by Walking With the Derly Departed, Sumer Songs/Winter Walks and my general practice of walking, finding, and colecting the impetus for Der Head Café arose.      40 5.4. Der Head Café: A Project in Art and Social Engagement   You wil recal that at the start of this study, I sugested that I was composing the bubonic tourist as a way to do the world diferently. With this in mind and with the momentum generated by several months of creating smaler events in hand, I sought to devise a project that would create a space where reflexivity, creativity, social negotiation, antagonism, and generosity could play itself out, even if only temporarily. I wanted to conect and precipitate personal relationships betwen others, and myself and in turn to instigate engagements that would interogate ideologies, cultures, histories, dispositions, gender, clas, race, age, and ability diferences. It was my intention to create a relational project wherein participants could actively engage in the co-creation of an event and to create a space where individuals could rehearse posible futures by reflecting on their past in the present. Der Head Café was a site of carnival and operated in the interstices betwen performance and everyday life. Der Head Café was about constructing a scenario where my own and otherʼs habitus, or way of operating in the world could be displaced, destabilized, put into question or afirmed. I set out to intervene into the lives of otherʼs with the hope that these interventions would return the same and intervene in mine, making Der Head Cafe dialogic, heteroglosic, articulated, and heterotopic. As such, I defined a number of colaborative projects that invited discourse with the citizens of Kelowna—transforming them from audiences to active participants, co-creators of an event/comunity, and finaly, into the bubonic tourist. These projects, that ocured both in public and at The Café included, Dear Head Café Postcard, Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea, 10 Plastic Der/10 Invitations to Tea, Your Asignment, and The Café itself.  41 5.5. Der Head Café Postcard I met Judy today. For seventen years she has ben a comunity-based artist, cuting the hair of Kelownaʼs women and men at Pete's Barber-Stylists. We discused economic inequality (the widening gap betwen the rich and the por), the politics of squating (aparently last year two hotels on Lakeshore Road sat empty awaiting demolition, providing fre acomodation for those without any), and her family. I told her I was born at the Foothils Hospital in Calgary and am here to study tourism and performance. She imagined me playing the role of a hotel manager and laughed. And she is right, it is funy, because we are either playing the role of the tourist or the local al the time. I tiped two-dolars, bought a dead der stufed to the ears with foam from the neighboring bokstore, and walked up Bernard to my apartment pretending I was important enough to manage a hotel. (from Der Head Café Postcard)   Upon my arival in Kelowna, I imediately began writing short, descriptive, self-reflexive, and personal texts, or “postcards” to the city: “in Rutland—we met Depak…” or “Dear Kelowna Rapist…” These postcards spoke of my experience as a tourist in town, as a researcher walking, finding, and colecting, and as the bubonic tourist scouring the city in search of multi-sensual engagement or instances of carnivalesque. Der Head Café Postcard developed out of this exercise but moved beyond the format of a monologue. Instead of a single-sided corespondence, I devised the postcard in such a maner that individuals might be encouraged to respond to me. On the front of the card, along with a photograph of me holding the dead der (I had started to become recognized by this time for luging the thing through the strets), I wrote my text to the city (Figure #4). On the back, I adresed the postcard to my apartment in Kelowna and wrote a list of topics or questions people might adres should they not know what to do or write. For instance, I encouraged people to “Introduce yourself to a stranger and write about it,”  42 “Draw a map from your house to work,” “Write a leter to the editor of the local newspaper,” “Be the sailor in love with the sea,” and among many others, “Why doesnʼt your mother cal you anymore?”10 Not unlike Flux-kits created in the 1960s by artists who belonged to the Fluxus movement, Der Head Café Postcard sought to relinquish artistic authority and democratize creative activity by inviting everyone to be an artist. Finaly, I afixed a stamp to the postcard with the intention of eliminating any financial barier that might prevent somebody from participating.  As a means of disemination, I left the cards at cofe houses, restaurants, social asistance centres, tourist bureaus, senior citizen comunity hals, art galeries, municipal buildings, or handed them to individuals personaly. It was my intention with Der Head Café Postcard to intervene in the daily lives of strangers with a personal story—an anecdote—but one that playfuly and subtlety articulated my atitude regarding social injustice, my own social status as a white, Western born, university educated individual, and, echoing Tim Edensor, that “we are either playing the role of the tourist or the local al the time”. I sought to autoethnographicaly perform y identity in relation to my habitus and my suroundings. It was my hope that as a performative and pedagogical practice, Der Head Café Postcard would displace and then encourage participants to criticaly reflect on their identity, race, clas, gender and habitual social and cultural codes or modes of operation.  Of the one hundred Der Head Café Postcards diseminated throughout Kelownaʼs cultural district, nearly twenty-five percent were mailed back to me (Figure #5; Figure #6). The content of the postcards ranged from drawings by children, maps from home to work, complaints about romates, descriptions of walking past the cement factory, and feling sadnes on the aniversary of a parentʼs death. The postcards articulated peopleʼs playfulnes, depresion, memories, time spent in the city, and daily routines. Whether participants were reflexive and critical canot be quantified. What I can speak to, however, is that as a recipient of these cards, my narative of Kelowna as a homogeneous entity, was interupted. I was fascinated, inspired, and afected by the creativity and generosity of the responses. I was moved to ases my habitus                                                 10 Se Apendix A for a complete list of Der Head Café Postcard sugestions.  43 in relation to others experiences. Opening my mailbox became an event beyond routine. These postcards became an intervention into public and private places.    44 5.6. Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea And 10 Plastic Der/10 Invitations to Tea  The second and third public components of Der Head Café were Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea and 10 Plastic Der/10 Invitations to Tea. With these projects, I intentionaly lost, with the hope that they would be returned, 10, one-inch plastic der and fifty “personal” objects (boks, utensils, figurines, a sports medal, a protractor set, sunglases, and among others objects, a cake decorating set) in the city. Atached to each of these objects and to the der were brown packaging tags that encouraged participants to return the found items to the Artist in Residence Studio at the Alternator Galery for Contemporary Art where The Café was located. These items, like the Der Head Café Postcard, sought to initiate a conversation with strangers. Unlike the postcard, however, where people could simply drop them in the mail, participants were encouraged to return the item in person. To facilitate this invitation to met me at The Café, I wrote that the participant had “found what I had lost,” provided information of where and at what times they could “please return” the item, and that there would be “fre tea and cokies and stories and encounters”.  In adition to the invitation to tea that was afixed to the plastic der and personal objects, a short autobiographical narative acompanied the lost personal objects in Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea. These naratives reflexively identified the significance of the personal object to my life and sought to autoethnographicaly perform y identity. For instance, I wrote of a used “0” candle from y tenth birthday that, Dan spils Orange Crush on the carpet and I begin to cry. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that my mother worked hard to prepare this day for me, or that this is a new house and new carpet and a new decade. I cal him a “fucking idiot” and tel him to leave. I celebrate my tenth birthday angry and eating cold piza in my bedrom. Or, as was atached to the package of gren peper seds I lost outside of the post ofice, “My grandfather was an avid and organic gardener just outside Calgaryʼs city limits. I canʼt help but think about death when I think about seds”.  45  These lost item stod in for my actualy being there and became interventions into the city and peopleʼs lives.11 The purpose of Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea and 10 Plastic Der/10 Invitations to Tea was to create walkers and colectors of the finders. I wanted to recreate a similar efect of displacement and afect in the participant that I had experienced by locating lost items through my own practice of walking, finding, and colecting in Kelowna. By puting personal objects and the plastic der into the city and choreographing encounters with strangers, I was hoping to create instances of carnivalesque. I wanted to generate ocasions where participants could transgres their habitual daily paterns. By engaging with the lost item, handling it, reading its related text and invitation, and then rerouting their behavior to return the personal object or plastic der to The Café, I imagined participants would—to borow from Del Hymes—break through into performance. In this space of carnivalesque—folowing Mike Pearson and Michael Shanks—the finders as psudeo-archeologist and performer worked to “negotiate identities, of people and things” through the presence of heterogeneous elements (54). By transgresing their everyday routines, finders would become colaborators, co-creators, and co-performers of meaning, knowledge, and The Café itself.  Though not al of the items were returned to The Café, none of the items remained on the stret. During the ten days of Der Head Café I would regularly check on the status of the personal objects and plastic der to se if they had ben found and al were located and picked up by somebody. While this might be read as a shortcoming of the project, I have another interpretation. In regards to the lost personal objects, many of them had utilitarian value. For instance, I lost a pair of scisors, a bowl, a can opener, a mug, sunglases, a bok, and among other items, crayons. While I canot identify who found these items and what became of them, I like to imagine that many of these objects are stil in use. That someoneʼs cat eats from the bowl, that a homeles individual cuts their friendsʼ hair, or that a child draws pictures of the sky. In this way, Get Lost: An Invitation to Tea might have created encounters that remained external to the project, while providing a social service by distributing esential items to others. While the                                                 11 For more examples se Apendix B.  46 personal objects, as wel as, many of the plastic der did not return to Der Head Café, they remain in someone elseʼs home, as plague riden and mnemonic devises, reminding the finder of a transgresion in their daily routines—the time when they bent over to pick something up.12  5.7. Your Asignment  Fluxus artists first employed instructions to initiate creative practice in the 1960s. The last few years have sen a renaisance in instruction art, due in large part to the publication of Do It, a colection of instructions for art or events by contemporary artists, and the groundbreaking work, “Learning to Love You More” by Miranda July and Harel Fletcher. In 202, July and Fletcher, initiated “” that listed asignments (instructions) that the general public could complete and upload to the site that operated like a do-it-yourself galery. The intention of the asignments, as posted on, is “to guide people towards their own experience” (July and Fletcher). Your Asignment, as included in Der Head Café, was largely inspired by July and Fletcherʼs project, but focused on local, not international participation.  Afixed to posts and hung in store windows through out Kelownaʼs cultural district were five asignments people could complete and return to the café (Figure #7): “Take a picture of the lake,” “Describe the sounds you hear at night,” “Write advice to yourself in the past on a napkin,” “Take a photo of yourself holding hands with a stranger,” and “Colect 5 [sic] leaves of matching size”. The objective of Your Asignment was to encourage new experiences and generate creative and reflexive, personal and civic, engagement. Many of the asignments were designed to thwart gazing as a dominant mode of perception. As a result of colecting leaves, holding                                                 12 I stil met people today who found one of the personal objects or plastic der. Anecdotaly, many of these people explain that they simply wanted a reminder of the experience of finding one of these items. I also received a phone cal from one of the social service centres in Kelowna teling me that many of the tags had made their way into the shelter, but that the objects were nowhere to be sen.   47 hands with a stranger, or listening carefuly to the sounds that resonate in the night, the emphasis from sight, I hoped, would shift to multi-sensual engagement. Equaly, by advising yourself that, “When ʻthis is a bad ideaʼ goes through your head folowed by ʻwhateverʼ…stop folowing up with ʻwhateverʼ because itʼs not ʻwhateverʼ. You efect more than yourself and youʼre [sic] hurtful and you fel like bird guts after,” is reflexive and performative. Walking to the lake to take a photograph might initiate a new apreciation for the natural landscape that surounds the cultural district and alter oneʼs behavior acordingly. Each of these asignments, like the lost items and postcards described above, sought to transform citizens into participants. By engaging the city and performing, participants created spaces where critical and reflexive knowledge could be developed. By puting into practice elements of the bubonic tourist, participants publicly and pedagogicaly enacted an alternative relation to habitus that might instigate another to estimate how such actions fit into their own naratives.  48   49 5.8. The Café  In Nicolas Bouriaudʼs Relational Aesthetics, he articulates that the priority of relational work is to generate and interogate “ways of living and models of action within the existing real” (13). It was my intention to create a multi-sensual and interstitial zone that operated in the everyday. As a site where transgresive behaviors could manifest and where individuals could strugle with and negotiate habitus, The Café was a safe, but consequential environment. For ten days in early December, 207, the “neutral” Artist in Residence Studio (Figure #8) was physicaly transformed by bright yelow als, a brown peg board flor, a comunal circle of Okanagan valey tre branches, mason jars ful of lake water, video documentation of Walking With the Derly Departed13, and people (Figure #9; Figure #10). In The Café, I brought together the detritus I had colected while walking (Figure #1), completed asignments (Figure #12), found “lost” items (Figure #13), natural elements, myself, and of course, participants—creating a miniature and ever shifting “map” of Kelownaʼs cultural district.  As Crampton and Krygier indicate in their article, “An Introduction to Critical Cartography,” maps wield power, interpolate subjectivities, are ideologicaly informed, and have real world consequences. Maps, Crampton and Krygier contend, produce—and I would argue, perform—places, geographies, teritories, and political identities; and though they can be imperious, maps can also be counter-hegemonic and “a powerful means of promoting social change" (15). By creating an open and heteroglosic “map” that employed local, reflexive, critical, and personal knowledgeʼs, The Café became a site where both Kelownaʼs cultural district and participants identities could be contested and negotiated. The Caféʼs potential to proliferate social change existed in the performative and pedagogical interactions betwen strangers (live or with a completed asignment that stod in for another). As a dialogic “map”, The Café could not be read or viewed in a privatized maner because, participants were colaboratively “doing” the “map” of Kelowna and rehearsing posible futures/“maps”, simultaneously. In this regard, The Café was perpetualy in flux, never-ending, and was rearanged with each new articulation—each entrance                                                 13 Okanagan video artist Joane Gervais recorded and edited this documentation.  50 and exit—and was, therefore, dialogic and antagonistic. As a series of heterogeneous encounters and a site of carnivalesque, The Café was a forum—to borow from Mike Pearson and Michael Shanks—where critical reflection, interogation, and transgresion of everyday rituals or habitus could be enacted with actual efect and afect. The Café was a “place where identities [could] be created, shaped, contested and changed, where new agendas [were] set” with each multifarious encounter (28). Inded, it was here, in the site of multi-sensual engagement and carnivalesque that individuals transformed into the bubonic tourist.  As host of The Café, it was my role to engender and facilitate encounters and engagements betwen participants, others, and myself.14 This forced me to ocupy a precarious position betwen being the “artist,” who had to ensure the welbeing of patrons, and a participant, who wanted to remain comunicable and genuinely engaged with others. By performing this reflexive role, as Melanie Benet describes in her article, “Please Return to the Der Head Café: How Kelownaʼs Comunity was Lost and Found,” I became “an actor in the public sector” (2). Forfeiting my “artistic vision” and abdicating the traditional role of “sovereign artist”, positioned patrons and myself as colaborators and co-creators. When participants arived to The Café I would imediately welcome them, describe the contents of The Café, and invite them to join others and myself for a pot of tea. These engagements were entirely beholden to the fortuity of The Caféʼs participants and had very litle agenda beyond enquiring where participants had located a lost item, thanking them for completing an asignment, or enquiring what their role in Kelownaʼs cultural district was. While some participants were hesitant to engage with others and myself, many more acepted. On average participants would stay for upwards to forty-five minutes, if not longer, siting on a cushion in the comunal circle of tre branches, drinking tea, eating cokies, and conversing about literaly anything (Figure #14; Figure #15; Figure #16; Figure #17). Each engagement had its own direction and created its own articulated comunity.                                                 14 That said, however, once participants came to recognize that The Café was a colaborative environment and that they were co-creators, they would often facilitate the engagement betwen, themselves, others, and new arivals. And so the plague spreads!  51 Many people reflexively meditated on their lives in Kelowna, comparing the city to other cities in the world they had lived in, or cities they had traveled to. Some spoke about their romantic lives, social customs, and marital practices. Others wanted to talk about politics, the war in Iraq, philosophical problems, art, drug use, homelesnes, social inequality, and heartache. Others stil wanted to hold the dead der (Figure #18; Figure #19).  One of the more memorable engagements I had while in The Café ocured late on the third day. Moments after a number of exchange students left The Café, a woman in her mid-twenties named Sarah arived15. She had ben atracted by the asignment, “Take a picture of yourself holding hands with a stranger,” and she had come to The Café to have her photo taken with me or another participant. After spending nearly ninety-minutes discusing her dificulty making friends and describing her ideal partner, she admited that she had come to The Café hoping to met somebody who was single. As she was leaving The Café, she noticed that one of the asignments was “Colect 5 [sic] leaves of matching size”. The next morning when I arived at The Café there was a smal box wraped in silver foil waiting for me at the dor. Inside the box was a gold covered leaf that Sarah had ben wearing around her neck the previous day. The other four leaves matched perfectly in size and shape, but were cut from a newspaper. On each leaf was a marital statistic: single, maried, divorced, and never going to mary. Sarah had not only reflexively performed aspects of her identity, but also carnivalized and apropriated the asignment, making the project whole unique to her individuality.  Wild Bil, who had nicknamed himself, was another individual that I had the great pleasure of engaging with. Wild Bil arived at a time when The Café was nearly ful. He wanted very litle to do with other patrons and wanted even les to sit in the comunal circle. Instead, he invited me to sit with him in the corner and acros the rom from the others. He clearly wanted to talk about economic disparity and his life in Kelowna. Wild Bil had ben a volunter fire fighter some years ago and was a carpenter by trade. While helping a friend move a piano up a flight of stairs twenty years before, Wild Bil had severely injured his back. Since then he has ben living                                                 15 This is a pseudonym.  52 on the strets of Kelowna. He told me that Der Head Café was acurately named because, nearly every day at four in the morning, two der descend from Knox Mountain that borders Kelownaʼs downtown and walk through the cultural district. Wild Bil had found several of the plastic der and was wearing them in the ribon of his cowboy hat. He refused to return them.  Participants sought to engage and share stories as one way of making sense of adverse moments or epiphanies that had ocured in their lives. As participants dealt with their pasts in the present, reflexively and criticaly engaging in chitchat or earnest conversations, The Café became a site of archeology. By talking to others, being intimately located to someone else, and drinking tea, participants—who had already rerouted their daily routines by ariving at The Café—were at times presented with extraordinary phenomena (cultural diferences or alternative relations to power) that had the potential to destabilize their practical knowledge and initiate reflexivity. In these instances, participants and myself would be forced to criticaly and reflexively contextualize our behaviors in relation to the cultural codes and modes of operation that paterned our everyday lives. By reafirming or transgresing habitus we would transmogrify into performers—autoethnographicaly situating and performing ourselves in relation to a habitual cultural context.  These public, pedagogical, and comunicable performances created new ruptures in habitus and had the potential to displace interlocutors, teasing them into the margins and promising them a space where they could reflexively reveal their habitus as both familiar and strange. As the bubonic tourists, participants and myself, entered reflexively into these familiar and strange encounters. We would pair our biographical information and experiences with the social codes and modes of others while transgresing our own. By transgresing habitus, individuals, it was hoped, could develop a sense of agency and comunity, even if only temporarily while in The Café. By colaborating in the creation of the The Café as a “map,” participants became cultural (secret) agents, whose weapon was identity, experience, colaboration, generosity, compasion, intuition, and transgresion.  53  Although I suspect many people did not view herself or himself as the bubonic tourist, performing, or breaking through into performances. Many did, however, recognize that they had abandoned their daily routine and were, simultaneously, both in Kelowna and not in Kelowna. As one participant described it, The Café was a third-space, a hybrid location that existed in the everyday.  54  55   56  57    58   59 6. In Closing  In her esay, “Bridging Haunted Places: Performance and The Production of Mostar,” Sonja Arsham Kuftinec states, “who we are intimately conects to where we are” (emphasis in original, 84). It was my intention in this project to consider ʻwhere we areʼ in relationship to geography and habitus, and to imagine how transgresing both develops agency, an altered sense of self, and comunity. In this last section, I want to consider how composing the bubonic tourist has altered my experience in, and thinking of, creating original inter-disciplinary performance. At every turn, the work I conducted sought to inspire, inovate, initiate, investigate, identify, interfere, influence, and interogate my own perceptions of performance, and by extension, my way of life. By developing a way in which to conceptualize the transgresion of habitus as both liberating and ethical, has alowed me to enhance, enlarge, and develop a personal perspective of performance and comunication that insists on an experiential participatory epistemology. Performance as a relational and comunicable method of intimately transfering information, experience, and inteligence has become my priority. I believe strongly in the power of personal comunication and pedagogical performance to emancipate individuals and groups. My role as an artist has always ben about creating an environment of permision and forgivenes for myself and for my interlocutors–who are both my colaborators and co-performers. It is in these environments that participants locate and identify themselves as creators, performers, and initiators of personal expresion and personal culture. It was my intention to create a methodology and a pedagogy that insists on colaborative, creative, and conceptual performance.  As I come to the end of this project, I am wel aware that this is only a departure for what wil inevitably dominate the critical and creative research I undertake in the future. It was my hope to begin envisioning how the bubonic tourist as a methodology might destabilize the social and cultural aparatuses that underpin our everyday behaviors and social engagements. There is no shortage of what I would consider hope and “blind” optimism for the bubonic tourist as a methodology, but I undertok this research with the conviction that, even if only temporarily, the  60 eyes neded to be removed from the equation, alowing the rest of the body to be privileged as a site of knowledge production. As a methodology, the efects and afects of the bubonic tourist are imposible to fuly quantify and for this very reason I am ost pleased. It is my belief that the aproach of the social sciences, and equaly, arts funding bodies, that continue to require quantifiable data regarding ephemeral encounters is absurd. Our culture is structured around consumable results. Instead, folowing Dwight Conquergod, I believe we ned a participatory epistemology, wherein social engagements should be alowed to resonate and percolate in the individual. It is in the percolation that individuals become critical and reflexive and of course pedagogical. In this regard, I hope to, that this study here acts as an ephemeral encounter, a site of engagement, and only the begining of a comunicable dis-order.  Above al, folowing Michel de Certeau, it is my hope that by rethinking the posibility of performance as a model of political and intelectual authority, I can continue to conceptualize a maner in which everyday practices can be employed as both resistive and creative. By composing the bubonic tourist, I hope to ofer a methodology and pedagogy that consumes and carnivalizes habitus, creating instead a counter-hegemonic disposition that refuses the sanctioning aparatus of authority. The bubonic tourist, I hope, wil ofer a practice in which peopleʼs lives and experiences can be continualy invigorated, transgresed, performed, and reflexively re-imagined, even if just a litle, and even if only temporarily. I do not claim to imagine the bubonic tourist as producing pure or perfect individuals; instead, individuals who reflexively and infectiously implicate themselves in the creation of flawed, articulated, and colaborative comunities. In this regard, my project is a political one because it is a personal one, but also a comunal and comunicable one. The bubonic tourist, is never inocent, but is always forgiven and forgiving, for both hers and his transgresion and adherence to habitus. The bubonic tourist is imbued with a politics of hope and the rehearsal of posible futures, al the while being entangled in a habitus that partly shapes and defines the authority being transgresed. The bubonic tourist drinks tea. The bubonic tourist holds hands. The bubonic tourist colects leaves. The bubonic tourist believes in progresive and modest social change.  61   Works Cited Alexander, Bryant Keith. "Performance Ethnography: The Reneacting and Inciting of Culture." The Sage Handbok of Qualitative Research. Ed. Denzin N. and Lincoln. 3rd Ed. London: Sage Publications, Inc., 205. Artaud, Antonin. The Theatre and Its Double. New York: Grove Pres, 1958. Bakhtin, Mikhail. Rabelais and His World. Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Blomington: Midland-Indiana UP, 1984. Benet, Melanie. "Please Return to the Der Head Café: How Kelownaʼs Comunity Was Lost and Found." Calgary, AB: University of Calgary P, 208. Bishop, Claire. "Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics." October Magazine 10. Fal (204): 51-79. Bouriaud, Nicolas. Relational Aesthetics. Les Preses du Réel, 202. Bowman, Michael S. "Loking for Stonewalʼs Arm: Tourist Performance as Research Method." Opening Acts: Performance in/as Comunication and Cultural Studies. Ed. Judith Hamera. London: Sage Publications, 206. 102-13. Butler, Judith. Giving an Acount of Oneself. New York: Fordham UP, 205. Carlson, Marvin. Performance: A Critical Introduction. New York: Routledge, 196. Conquergod, Dwight. "Beyond the Text: Toward a Performative Cultural Politics." The Future of Performance Studies: Visions and Revisions. Ed. Sheron Dailey. Anandale VA: National Comunication Asociation, 198. 25-36. ---. "Performance Studies: Interventions and Radical Research". Performance Studies Reader. Ed. Henry Bail. Vol. 1: Routledge, 203. 31-2. Crampton, Jeremy, and John Krygier. "An Introduction to Critical Cartography." Acme: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 4.1 (206): 1-33.   62 Crouch, David. "Places around Us: Embodied Lay Geographies in Leisure and Tourism." Leisure Studies 19.2 (200): 63-76. de Certeau, Michel. The Practice of Everyday Life. Trans. Steven Rendal. Berkely: U of California P, 1984. Denzin, Norman K. Performance Ethnography: Critical Pedagogy and the Politics of Culture. Sage Publications, Inc, 203. Dezeuze, Ana. "Everyday Life, 'Relational Aesthetics' and the Transfiguration of the Comonplace'." Journal of Visual Art Practices 5.3 (206): 143-52. Edensor, Tim. "Performing Tourism, Staging Tourism: (Re)Producing Tourist Space and Practice." Tourist Studies 1.1 (201): 59–81. ---. "The Culture of the Indian Stret." Images of the Stret: Planing, Identity and Control in Public Space. Ed. Nicholas R. Fyfe. London: Routledge, 198. Enwezor, Okwui. "Documentary/Vérité: Bio-Politics, Human Rights and the Figure of ʻTruthʼ in Contemporary Art." Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art 5.1 (203): 1-42. Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Opresed. Trans. Myra Bergman Ramos. 15 ed. New York: Seabury Pres, 1970. Giroux, Henry A. "Cultural Studies as Performative Politics." Cultural Studies - Critical Methodologies 1.1 (201): 5-23. Gómez-Peña, Guilermo. Ethno-Techno: Writings on Performance, Activism, and Pedagogy. New York, NY: Routledge, 205. Gramsci, Antonio. "Hegemony, Intelectuals and the State." The Cultural Studies Reader: Second Edition. Ed. Simon During. London: Routledge, 193, 1971. Grosberg, Lawrence. "On Postmodernism and Articulation: An Interview with Stuart Hal." Journal of Comunication Inquiry 10.2 (1986): 45-60. Harison, Julie. Being a Tourist: Finding Meaning a Pleasure Travel. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Pres, 203.   63 Hymes, Del. "Breakthrough into Performance." Folklore: Performance and Comunication. Ed. Dan Ben-Amos and Keneth S. Goldstein. Belgium: Mouton, 1975. July, Miranda and Harel Fletcher. "Learning to Love You More". 208. May 1 208. <>. Kuftinec, Sonja Arsham. "Bridging Haunted Places: Performance and the Production of Mostar." Opening Acts: Performance in/as Comunication and Cultural Studies. Ed. Judith Hamera. London: Sage 206. 81-101. Mulvey, Lara. "Visual Pleasure and Naravite Cinema." Scren 16.3 (1975): 6-18. Obrist, Hans Ulrich, ed. Do It. New York: e-flux/Revolver, 205.  Oliver, Kely. The Colonization of Pyschic Space: A Pscyhoanalytic Social Theory of Opresion. Mineapolis: U of Minesota P, 204. Pearson, Mike, and Michael Shanks. Theatre/Archaeology. New York: Routledge, 201. Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon, 1978. Schirato, Tony, and Jenifer Web. "Bourdieuʼs Notion of Reflexive Knowledge." Social Semiotics 12.3 (202): 25-68. Shohat, Ela, and Robert Stam. "Narativizing Visual Culture: Towards a Polycentric Aesthetics." The Visual Culture Reader: 2nd Edition. Ed. Nicholas Mirzoef: Routledge, 202. Thurston, Gerald. "Fil in the Blanks." Calgary, AB: University of Calgary, 198. ---. "Personal Conversation." Calgary: University of Calgary, 201-207. Trujilo, Nick. "In Search of Nauny's Grave." Text and Performance Quarterly 18.4 (198): 34-268. Ury, John. The Tourist Gaze. London: Sage, 190.       64 Appendices Appendix A: Der Head Café Postcard Ful List of Suggestions Send me your stories. Tel me about your day. Introduce yourself to a stranger and write about it. Draw a map from your house to work. Make a list of “my favorite things to do.” Make a list of “things I believe in.” Make a list of “why I couldnʼt say god-bye to you.” Describe the sound that keps you awake. Tel me where you are from. Lie about yourself. Describe in detail your bedrom. Answer the folowing question: Is that finger on your temple the barel of my raygun? Mistake me for a stranger. Mistake me for a member of the family. Using a camera and a glue stick send a photograph of your lover. Ask your neighbor a list of questions and record their answers. Write something encouraging. Describe the last time you traveled. What is that sound again? Why does this place smel like home? Why does this place smel like sumer? Why doesnʼt your mother cal you anymore? Be the sailor in love with the sea. Write the leter for the botle that never hit the water. Make a list of “questions I hope you answer.” Invite me to diner. Write a leter to the parking authority pleading your case. Describe how Christmas diner tastes. Write a leter to the editor of the local newspaper. Walk to the video store, rent your favorite movie, and then review it. Interview a war vet and transcribe the conversation. Tel your high schol crush that you are finaly over them. 65  66  67  68  69  70  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items