Clowns: In Conversation with Modern Masters by Ezra LeBank and David Bridel (review)

Clowns: In Conversation with Modern Masters, by Ezra LeBank and David Bridel, provides interviews with twenty-one contemporary clowns from a wide variety of training backgrounds. Structured as nineteen conversations and bookended by a preface, introduction, and conclusion, the two authors interview a “who’s who” of contemporary clown practitioners, from Russian Circus clown Oleg Popov to American actor/clown Bill Irwin. Each interview starts with a brief bio and picture and is then divided into four sections: the origins of the clown, their inspirations, their techniques, and finally their philosophy. In some interviews the authors’ questions are reprinted, while others are presented in a more monologic form. While not a manual of any sort, the authors emphasize their role as teachers and hope that by presenting a variety of voices, they may help their students answer a fundamental question: “How do clowns pay homage and do justice to their lineage while remaining true to themselves and their own idiosyncratic vision—their own inner clown?” (9).

At the same time, they often ask questions that situate clowning historically and philosophically, supplemented by the authors’ own brief narrative of clown history in the introduction. While the authors are right to point out a lack of academic attention to contemporary clowning (exceptions like Joel Schechter and John Towsen aside), their book adds to a growing conversation about clown history (for example, Jon Davison’s Clown, reviewed in Theatre Topics [24.1, March 2014]) and clowning manuals (Eli Simon’s The Art of Clowning, reviewed in Theatre Topics [20.2, September 2010]). The wide variety of views in Clowns: In Conversation with Modern Masters should interest historians, theorists, and practitioners alike because by embracing the voices of so many clowns, the authors are able to explore the various and often conflicting ideas on the “modern masters.”

The “Origins” section in each chapter proves useful to scholars and practitioners wishing to understand the various paths that contemporary clowns have taken. Interviewee Bello Nock, for example, comes from a long family line of circus practitioners and can remember performing professionally from age 3 (137). Conversely, Angela de Castro claims that “I was a rather serious child” and that her father encouraged her to pursue dance, which she did, until a friend redirected her toward clowning (12). Finally, David Shiner was working in construction in Boulder, Colorado, until he came across Samuel Avital’s mime troupe and soon moved to Paris. The various influences, such as circus, other arts, or seeming random inspiration, will provide scholars with the artists’ personal backgrounds, hence enabling an understanding of the pathways and subtle influences that define the form.

“Inspirations” is another useful section for scholars, but practitioners will also find it valuable source material. The latter group might pay special attention to the various recorded inspirations. Charlie Chaplin looms large, as do other early screen and television comedians. Bridel reflects that “I wasn’t expecting the sheer magnitude of Chaplin’s influence” (181). Other key influences are the old circus families and the city of Paris itself, home to Philipee Gaulier, Marcel Marceau, and Jacques Lecoq. Irwin acknowledges the early screen clowns, but makes a deeply personal observation when he notes: “This is the interesting thing about our parents. They may not be the kind of influences you were asking about. But they are influences nevertheless” (169). The “Inspirations” sections provide both essential viewings for aspiring clowns and a sense of the most influential teachers.

The “Technique” section is by no means a manual, but it provides insights into major stylistic diversities. Some clowns, such as Avner Eisenberg, emphasis the physical preparation while still maintaining a need for an audience relationship through breath: “[Y]ou breathe in for new things. You breathe out when you’re in stasis or comfort” (61). David Konyot also empathizes preparation, stating that “I don’t put myself in a situation where I can fail” (110). This emphasis on training and precision contrasts with de Castro, who has clowns that...