Yoko Ono sits in the stage, not moving at all and not showing much emotions. An audience member comes up on stage, picks up a pair of scissors that is left by her side, and cuts a piece of her clothing off. The audience then leaves, usually taking the piece of clothing with him or her, while another member comes up and repeats the process. One of the audiences tries to cut her bra off, and is berated by the audience for doing so.
The first time I watched this I didn’t have audio (because my speakers at home were busted) and I didn’t understand why other actors were cutting Yoko Ono’s clothing. After watching it again with audio I was able to understand it much better.
I think the key thing in this piece is that the audience does the cutting, and not someone part of the performance. I assume the audiences were given instructions to only cut her clothing, but that was the only restriction. This is important because the cuts are spontaneous, and everybody is acting out of their own accord. If they were part of the act then the meaning would be completely different.
This piece is about trust and social responsibility. Each audience is given the power of destroying Yoko’s clothing, and they can use (or abuse) that power any way they see fit. When they stepped on stage, they became the center of the performance. Yoko was transforming her show into the audience's show. Most of the members were modest and only exposed a small piece of her body at time, but the young man in white dress shirt clearly abused his power and responsibility. The crowd reaction was the key in this part – the hissing and disapproval they displayed. The man had the power – the stage was his unless someone threw him off, and Yoko, though clearly frustrated, seemed to be trying her best not to interfere - but he stopped because of the crowd reaction. Because it was his stage, his performance, his own free will, he was responsible for his what he did, and the public let him have it for it.
I think this performance wouldn’t be as powerful as it is without the young man who got called “cornball”. If everybody had acted modestly, then it would have a completely different meaning. Because Yoko was not going to interfere, she had to rely on the audience to decide what was appropriate and what was not. It reminds me of the broken window theory – that if something is damaged or not well taken care of, someone will take advantage of the situation and completely vandalize it. It also got me thinking of the Stanford Prison Experiment, as they both deal with the issue of power and responsibility.
As it is, the piece is very thought provoking. I don't think Yoko knew what to expect when she did this, and there is lies the beauty of it. She had to completely trust the audience to make it for her. I would be interested in knowing what kind of instructions the audience were given in the beginning, and seeing what they would have done if they were free to do whatever they could.
