Why do we fear the obvious? I would postulate that the current machine of contemporary performance bans the obvious. Too banal, this might be too obvious, too simple was a refrain I heard during the Erasmus Intensive. But obviousness is in everything. And everywhere. Everything ever performed on stage could be stated to be completely obvious. Unless you were looking at a life form composed of unknown elements that you have never encountered and you weren't sure you were asleep or you were on shrooms and all you know of reality was short chunks of time and your personality had dissolved and all you knew was that you were not in a vertical position and rings of colored morphing spinning shapes circled around you. This is what the Mayans saw you scream to yourself in your head. I understand everything. It is all so obvious and I love it. I see the leaves and I know that they are leaves and that they are the source of food and breath for the trees.
But then why do we fear the obvious? Is it because we are not satisfied with what we have now, with the information that our senses give us? Is our fear of the obvious our desire for God, for a mechanism that operates outside of our understanding and creates something satisfying? If I understand the operation, if it is obvious and apparent to me does the beauty disappear. If I understand the metabolic pathways that convert sugars to alcohol do I get any less drunk? If I know that looking at my daughter causes a surge of oxytocin in my body, do I love her any less? No. I love and embrace the obvious. I love the obviousness of sweating, curving, spiraling, weighted bodies. I love unison, I love shit my mind has gone blank and the inspiration for this composition that was improvised in the pattern of typing with thumbs has dried up. Maybe I should have stayed on the tram and gone with the flow, ride the current and improvise within the composition until it ran out.
The two paragraphs above are the answer to the questions that are below. The questions are from Boyan Manchev, a philosopher who has been working with us at the HZT. The short versions of my answers appear after each question. I read to above paragraphs to my cohorts while walking around the tables that we all were sitting at.
Do you fear that your work is obvious, that the meaning behind it will be too readily apparent? Fear people won't enjoy the obvious
Is fear ever a good thing? Yes for survival, but not for the artistic process/sharing
Are you improvising when composing? Do you formally define patterns of composition? -yes and yes
What I forgot to write/say is that the unobviousness is in the intention of the person creating the obvious events. It lies in ourselves when we try to understand that motives of another human being.
12.17.2011
12.12.2011
S.O.D.A Assessment 101 Feedback
Below are the feedback discussion points I received from my performance of The Range of Acceptable Outcomes as part of my MA dance studies. The text for the piece is here and the framing statement for the piece is here. I added the numbers for clarity when referring to those specific points.
I am confused by points 5, 6, and 7. I thought a "sense of assuredness, certainty, demonstration of expertise"(point 5) was a good thing in a performer, especially one that is doing a performance lecture.
I also do not understand how "control...of material prohibits interaction". The piece, though a lecture, was also a performance. Interaction in the proscenium format is inherently limited. This could, though, refer to mental interaction. But then again, I refer to the lecture aspect of this piece. The point is to disseminate information is a clear(ish) manner that people can think about during or after the event of dissemination. Maybe I was so engaging that my performance inhibited all thought. I wish that were the case. With that skill I would take over the world!
And point 7 - "too few moments of fragility" Why would I want fragility in a performance lecture? It is not an emotional event, it is a lecture.
As those three points were on the list of discussion points and from my reading, negative, I assume that those were part of the reason I did not get a perfect score. Maybe if I had written a better framing statement, I would have received a better grade. But as those points refer to the performance aspect not to the relationship with the framing statement.
Also point 11 - the piece lost "momentum" and stayed in the "same frame of reference". I admit that my performing lost steam. A question of craft, that. But, as I understand the "frame of reference" that I was referring to - a lecture - always stays in the same frame. People sit behind a table, a desk and speak with the same tone and energy for the whole lecture. Every lecture I have seen so far during the S.O.D.A. program has been in the same energy and tone. Maybe the lecturers did not lose momentum, but they stayed in the same register.
Maybe with this, too, I should have been more explicit in my framing statement.
ahh, the learning curve...
Andrew Wass
Grade: 2.5 Very Good
Assessment 101 Feedback Discussion Points:
1- Appreciated humor and mental ability (word plays/associations)
-2 Are you aware of historical precedence of the 'style' of performance – the rhythmically structured
talking? Is this an attempt at “Leading audience indirectly?”
3- What is your context of investigation of zero point?
4- Categorization of parts brings attention to what is not there – experience of own choices not
evident
5- Sense of assuredness, certainty, demonstration of expertise makes presentation not easily
accessible (as audience we feel tricked, or that there was riddle we were meant to solve..)
6- Too much control in manipulation of material prohibits interaction
7- Too few moments of fragility
8- Improvisation vs choreography – in what way is this important?
9- Need to go into more ludic quality of text to enter into profound relation with these issues
10- Art is assertion of form – formal takes over – Form doesn't support gathered matters of concern
11- Performance loses momentum, stays in same register (no cracks) stays in same frame of reference
12- Need to sharpen own perceptive tools with how improvisation can be developed
13- Freedom and constraint – the relation of these two need to be more thoroughly investigate
14- Some clear questions presented in framing statement –for example: “how much audience needs to
know to enjoy the work?” “individual parts don't last but whole remains in memory”
Examiners: Prof. Rhys Martin, Prof. Kattrin Deufert, Litó Walkey
Tweet
I am confused by points 5, 6, and 7. I thought a "sense of assuredness, certainty, demonstration of expertise"(point 5) was a good thing in a performer, especially one that is doing a performance lecture.
I also do not understand how "control...of material prohibits interaction". The piece, though a lecture, was also a performance. Interaction in the proscenium format is inherently limited. This could, though, refer to mental interaction. But then again, I refer to the lecture aspect of this piece. The point is to disseminate information is a clear(ish) manner that people can think about during or after the event of dissemination. Maybe I was so engaging that my performance inhibited all thought. I wish that were the case. With that skill I would take over the world!
And point 7 - "too few moments of fragility" Why would I want fragility in a performance lecture? It is not an emotional event, it is a lecture.
As those three points were on the list of discussion points and from my reading, negative, I assume that those were part of the reason I did not get a perfect score. Maybe if I had written a better framing statement, I would have received a better grade. But as those points refer to the performance aspect not to the relationship with the framing statement.
Also point 11 - the piece lost "momentum" and stayed in the "same frame of reference". I admit that my performing lost steam. A question of craft, that. But, as I understand the "frame of reference" that I was referring to - a lecture - always stays in the same frame. People sit behind a table, a desk and speak with the same tone and energy for the whole lecture. Every lecture I have seen so far during the S.O.D.A. program has been in the same energy and tone. Maybe the lecturers did not lose momentum, but they stayed in the same register.
Maybe with this, too, I should have been more explicit in my framing statement.
ahh, the learning curve...
Andrew Wass
Grade: 2.5 Very Good
Assessment 101 Feedback Discussion Points:
1- Appreciated humor and mental ability (word plays/associations)
-2 Are you aware of historical precedence of the 'style' of performance – the rhythmically structured
talking? Is this an attempt at “Leading audience indirectly?”
3- What is your context of investigation of zero point?
4- Categorization of parts brings attention to what is not there – experience of own choices not
evident
5- Sense of assuredness, certainty, demonstration of expertise makes presentation not easily
accessible (as audience we feel tricked, or that there was riddle we were meant to solve..)
6- Too much control in manipulation of material prohibits interaction
7- Too few moments of fragility
8- Improvisation vs choreography – in what way is this important?
9- Need to go into more ludic quality of text to enter into profound relation with these issues
10- Art is assertion of form – formal takes over – Form doesn't support gathered matters of concern
11- Performance loses momentum, stays in same register (no cracks) stays in same frame of reference
12- Need to sharpen own perceptive tools with how improvisation can be developed
13- Freedom and constraint – the relation of these two need to be more thoroughly investigate
14- Some clear questions presented in framing statement –for example: “how much audience needs to
know to enjoy the work?” “individual parts don't last but whole remains in memory”
Examiners: Prof. Rhys Martin, Prof. Kattrin Deufert, Litó Walkey
Tweet
Protocols of Hierarchy
From the New Yorker October 31st, 2011 review of Margin Call by David Denby -
"It's about corporate manners - the protocols of hierarchy, the difficulty of confronting flagrant habits of speculation of truth."
Makes me think of contemporary dance.
The protocols of hierarchy - famous people can get away with crap non-famous people would be booed off the stage for.
Speculation of truth - how nobody calls anybody on their so vague as to be meaningless and therefore inaccurate contextualisations of work.
Tweet
"It's about corporate manners - the protocols of hierarchy, the difficulty of confronting flagrant habits of speculation of truth."
Makes me think of contemporary dance.
The protocols of hierarchy - famous people can get away with crap non-famous people would be booed off the stage for.
Speculation of truth - how nobody calls anybody on their so vague as to be meaningless and therefore inaccurate contextualisations of work.
Tweet
12.11.2011
Sol LeWitt
According to Lord Polonius which statement is true?
1. Sol LeWitt wore heels.
2. Sol LeWitt was short.
3. Sol LeWitt had small feet.
please explain your reasoning
Tweet
1. Sol LeWitt wore heels.
2. Sol LeWitt was short.
3. Sol LeWitt had small feet.
please explain your reasoning
Tweet
12.08.2011
11.20.2011
Quoting Finley
I wonder if the lead vocalist of L7 was quoting Karen Finley -
from Wikipedia -
During their performance at the 1992 English Reading Festival, the band experienced "technical difficulties with their audio equipment" and were forced to stall their set. Quickly, the rowdy crowd grew restless and began throwing mud onto the stage. In protest, lead vocalist Donita Sparks removed her tampon on-stage and threw it into the crowd yelling "Eat my used tampon, fuckers!". Sparks has remained unapologetic about the incident.[1] This has been referred to as one of the "most unsanitary pieces of rock memorabilia in history".[9]
Tweet
from Wikipedia -
During their performance at the 1992 English Reading Festival, the band experienced "technical difficulties with their audio equipment" and were forced to stall their set. Quickly, the rowdy crowd grew restless and began throwing mud onto the stage. In protest, lead vocalist Donita Sparks removed her tampon on-stage and threw it into the crowd yelling "Eat my used tampon, fuckers!". Sparks has remained unapologetic about the incident.[1] This has been referred to as one of the "most unsanitary pieces of rock memorabilia in history".[9]
Tweet
11.04.2011
The Erasmus Intensive
The Erasmus Intensive
The Erasmus Intensive invervates misuses of sensitive manures taken from unassertive mines. In the ruminative sense the interim suaveness gained by the universe's inmates of this masseur intensive reinvents a misuse of me, a intrusiveness.
What is your reading of this paragraph?
Tweet
10.22.2011
A fashion show is a dance performance with an emphasis on costume.
A concert is a dance performance with an emphasis on sound.
A construction site is a dance performance with emphasis on set.
A play is a dance performance with emphasis on text.
A fireworks show is a dance performance with emphasis on lighting.
A dance performance is a dance performance with emphasis on movement.
A presidential debate is a dance performance with emphasis on performer.
Tweet
A concert is a dance performance with an emphasis on sound.
A construction site is a dance performance with emphasis on set.
A play is a dance performance with emphasis on text.
A fireworks show is a dance performance with emphasis on lighting.
A dance performance is a dance performance with emphasis on movement.
A presidential debate is a dance performance with emphasis on performer.
Tweet
10.21.2011
Assume Perfection
I would guess that every famous painter, dancer, author, i.e., artist was derided as terrible by some authority or the authorities of his or her time when s/he first came on the scene. "Howl" by Ginsberg was thought to be horrible and people tried to have it banned. Van Gogh never sold a painting in his lifetime. Elvis was hated by parents for his pelvis. The Rite of Spring caused a riot.
But now all of those artists are famous, lauded, canonized. The works haven't changed. The context changed.
Therefore, all work is worthy of praise and deserves to be canonized.
All that needs to be changed is the context.
Therefore, do whatever the %#!?+ you want and wait for everyone else to catch up.
And assume it's perfect!
Tweet
But now all of those artists are famous, lauded, canonized. The works haven't changed. The context changed.
Therefore, all work is worthy of praise and deserves to be canonized.
All that needs to be changed is the context.
Therefore, do whatever the %#!?+ you want and wait for everyone else to catch up.
And assume it's perfect!
Tweet
10.20.2011
The port de bras and the coolest new lift you just learned in contact class have just as much to with contact improvisation as the fist bump. All three can be done while in contact and while improvising.
All three events are small bit of choreography that can be done inside the larger frame of contact improvisation.
Tweet
All three events are small bit of choreography that can be done inside the larger frame of contact improvisation.
Tweet
10.12.2011
Choreo, Memory, and Impro
The more closely linked an event is to memory, the more choreographed it is. The less connected to memory, the more improvised it is.
Tweet
Tweet
Framing Statement
Framing Statement
for
The Range of Acceptable Outcomes
I call this piece a performance lecture because I have definite ideas that I want to transmit. I call this piece a lecture performance because I want to inundate the audience with a lot of information, maybe some new ideas and I am not so concerned that people follow and remember every word, but more that the words wash over them, giving them more of a feeling than an idea.
In a more strictly movement oriented dance performance every movement is seen and rarely can the viewers remember or recreate the movements. The constant onslaught of movement in such a performance overwhelms me, not allowing me to digest each individual movement, leaving me with a general sense of the movement quality. The movements in relationship create a feeling, a sense, an experience that stays with the viewer. The individual parts are lost but the whole is understood.
In this piece, The Range of Acceptable Outcomes, I am trying to create a similar experience with the words. Not all of the ideas will be remembered or immediately understood, but hopefully a feeling, a sense, an experience will stay with the viewers.
Using the concepts of the Three Stages of Creation and The Six Performance Elements, I aimed to create an event to question the need to know the process of the creation of a work. How much does an audience need to know to enjoy the work? Does the audience need to know whether or not a piece is set or scored? Does the audience need to know what material the artist is sourcing?
The piece itself was created with a talk about "cracks" that I had with Jeanine last semester in mind. We were talking about one of my showings. For her the piece had no cracks, no way in for the audience. The inundation of information in The Range of Acceptable Outcomes - "facts" about the spectrum of choreography and improvisation, the asides, the stutters, the reference how this piece should be viewed, the quotes of Mary Overlie, Deborah Hay, and A Chorus Line - is an effort to create "cracks". Maybe cracks is the wrong term. Maybe tendrils or rhizomes is more appropriate. Some of the information in the inundation might trigger a thought or a question, leading the viewer down a pathway not directly connected to what is happening on stage. Poetry, if you will.
Tweet
for
The Range of Acceptable Outcomes
I call this piece a performance lecture because I have definite ideas that I want to transmit. I call this piece a lecture performance because I want to inundate the audience with a lot of information, maybe some new ideas and I am not so concerned that people follow and remember every word, but more that the words wash over them, giving them more of a feeling than an idea.
In a more strictly movement oriented dance performance every movement is seen and rarely can the viewers remember or recreate the movements. The constant onslaught of movement in such a performance overwhelms me, not allowing me to digest each individual movement, leaving me with a general sense of the movement quality. The movements in relationship create a feeling, a sense, an experience that stays with the viewer. The individual parts are lost but the whole is understood.
In this piece, The Range of Acceptable Outcomes, I am trying to create a similar experience with the words. Not all of the ideas will be remembered or immediately understood, but hopefully a feeling, a sense, an experience will stay with the viewers.
Using the concepts of the Three Stages of Creation and The Six Performance Elements, I aimed to create an event to question the need to know the process of the creation of a work. How much does an audience need to know to enjoy the work? Does the audience need to know whether or not a piece is set or scored? Does the audience need to know what material the artist is sourcing?
The piece itself was created with a talk about "cracks" that I had with Jeanine last semester in mind. We were talking about one of my showings. For her the piece had no cracks, no way in for the audience. The inundation of information in The Range of Acceptable Outcomes - "facts" about the spectrum of choreography and improvisation, the asides, the stutters, the reference how this piece should be viewed, the quotes of Mary Overlie, Deborah Hay, and A Chorus Line - is an effort to create "cracks". Maybe cracks is the wrong term. Maybe tendrils or rhizomes is more appropriate. Some of the information in the inundation might trigger a thought or a question, leading the viewer down a pathway not directly connected to what is happening on stage. Poetry, if you will.
Tweet
Text for The Range of Acceptable Outcomes
Below is the text for my newest piece, The Range of Acceptable Outcomes, a lecture performance.
Please assume what you see here as zero. A zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero zero on a multi-dimensional co-ordinate system.
Let us say this costume is zero, not because it does not exist, but is zero in that we will measure the change in the costume during this performance from this point on. ΔCostume, if you will.
In fact performance can be seen as the measurement of the change, the Δ over time of the six performance elements. The one performance element that will not change in this performance is the performer.
Though that is debatable. I will get sweaty, some skin might rub off, I'll age a bit, though we will all age the same amount so that we can ignore that variable. You as audience might decide to watch something, someone else, authorizing a different performer for your performance.
But anyways, let's assume that everything you see here in this moment is the zero on a multidimensional grid.
Should I stop moving or be quiet?
No, as I will not stop reflecting light rays into your eyes, through the pupil, through the vitreus humor, activating your rods and cones, etc. on to your brain and as I will not stop being present in this spot.
Or yes, stop moving, talking and you close your eyes, cover your ears to create an even more truly empty zero point.
This piece, as I see, it is conceptually choreographed but executed improvisationally. To relate it to the three stages of creation, exploration, experimentation, and execution...
well, let me back up, what do I mean by "it"?
The word it is derived from the Middle and Old English word "hit". Hit is a neuter version of he. The neutral he that I refer to is the performance that I have, am, and will present to, for and with you today.
This piece is not completely improvised because I already know what realms, ideas, genres, and themes I will be presenting and roughly how I will execute those ideas. I will be using the human form, using gesture, movement, and sound to convey those ideas that have been predetermined by time spent exploring, one of the stages of creation.
Side note - it is easy to think that these stages happen in a linear fashion - first explore, then experiment, then execute. And you will be forgiven if that is how you see it.
For all of our talk of contemporary this and post that, we really haven't changed in 5000 years and all still want a refrigerator to keep our beers cold. Whether it's avocado or stainless steel in color, we just want a cold beer.
But let me back up again, as I feel that I would be remiss to not define what I mean by explore, experiment and execute.
Exploration is the search before the research. It is the hearsal before the rehearsal. It is the discovery of what exists around you, whether you are in the studio or sitting on the subway thinking about your project. It is the discovery/invention of what tools you will be using in your project.
Exploration is the, and this maybe more important, the rejection of tools. A work of art is more about what it is not than what it is. Granted all types of infinities exist some are just larger than others.
Experimentation is the second stage. Once the tools have been selected/created, their relationships can be investigated. How do the tools interact? What poetry, if you will, do they create?
The final stage is execution - when the work is presented before an audience. I did use the words second and final indicating a linear relationship to time. That is the more traditional relationship, or more choreographed. The further apart the moments of exploration, experimentation, and execution in time are, the more choreographed the work. The closer in time those moments are, the more improvised the work.
This brings me to the 6 performance elements - Costume, Lighting, Sound, Performer, Set, and Movement.
The lighting is choreographed, set or predetermined. It is this, what you see. I chose this because this piece is not about lighting. Because the decision about what lighting to use and the execution of the lighting are separated along the space/time spectrum, we can call the lighting choreographed. If I were to decide midstream to alter the lights or have someone do so with a lighting board or open and close the curtains, the lighting would be more improvised.
I could have choreographed someone to improvise the lights.
As of now the costuming is choreographed. I am wearing this. You could say that I am trying to represent the traditional contemporary western male caucasian urban outfit with slight preppy undertones.
What happens to the costume during the performance has yet to be seen. In the midst of the execution of the performance, I might decide, consciously or not, conspicuously or not, to explore and experiment with the costuming.
Sound - the sound of my voice and whatever parts of me happen to hit any surfaces with enough force to generate vibrating airwaves. The idea of what kind of sounds to use is choreographed as I have decided to not use saxophone or an iPod or a parrot. What has a greater distance between its execution and experimentation is what I will be saying. Therefore more choreographed.
How I will be saying what I will say will be determined in the moment. The three stages in very close proximity to each other. Therefore more improvised.
This brings me to the performance element of set. No set, unless you count the empty stage we have here as a set.
But, I could create a change of set by changing the location of my performance. Going outside for example, or entering the audience. Maybe entering the storage closet and continuing there. For all intents and purposes the set is set. The execution, exploration, and experimentation stages for set all have a different location along the space/time continuum. Set, interestingly enough, is an anagram of est.
Movement - choreographed as in I can only do what my teachers have taught me. The times of movement exploration, execution and experimentation are different, therefore I consider the movement to be choreographed. I consider, though, the movement in this piece to be improvised within that choreographed frame.
I do not know exactly where I will be, when I will be there, what level I will be at, what body parts will be still, which moving, etc. During the execution of this piece today, now...now is here is harmony, something I do, something I see in an audience member, an observer/participant, though more on the observer end, will probably trigger a question. Will open up an avenue for exploration. I then might begin experimenting with the variables discovered in that exploration.
But as you are witnessing/participating/observing my explorations and experimentations, could we not then say that it is at the same an execution also, collapsing all three stages of creation into a singularity? A singular moment in which what I am doing is what you are seeing, when we are discovering the same thing at the same time. We merge becoming essentially one, but opposite sides of that one singular sensation - improvisation.
Coming back to costume. What ΔCostume have we seen thus far? How are the pants? The shirt? The tie.
Talk about a loaded image.
The inherent meaning. Yes, the inherent meaning. We all carry our inherent meanings around with us for others to read us and how we read others. Biases and stereotypes. Our aesthetic biases.
Two performers on stage (and this relates to the performance variable of performer): two men - discord; many men - war; one male one female - love; two females - a man is bad; many females - war is bad; two females and a man love triangle and he is an ass and one chick's a bitch; two males and one female she is a slut, he is an ass and the other guy can't get it up; two heterosexual couples and a couch - an Arthur Miller play. Three couples and a couch - an American sitcom. Four couples, a large tunnel made of brown sticks, a dog house and a table...
But as you have not seen the process and the time that went into making this piece, you can not for certain say which performance elements fall where when in relation to the stages of creation. Whether or not it was choreographed or improvised. Does it matter?
Tweet
Please assume what you see here as zero. A zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero zero on a multi-dimensional co-ordinate system.
Let us say this costume is zero, not because it does not exist, but is zero in that we will measure the change in the costume during this performance from this point on. ΔCostume, if you will.
In fact performance can be seen as the measurement of the change, the Δ over time of the six performance elements. The one performance element that will not change in this performance is the performer.
Though that is debatable. I will get sweaty, some skin might rub off, I'll age a bit, though we will all age the same amount so that we can ignore that variable. You as audience might decide to watch something, someone else, authorizing a different performer for your performance.
But anyways, let's assume that everything you see here in this moment is the zero on a multidimensional grid.
Should I stop moving or be quiet?
No, as I will not stop reflecting light rays into your eyes, through the pupil, through the vitreus humor, activating your rods and cones, etc. on to your brain and as I will not stop being present in this spot.
Or yes, stop moving, talking and you close your eyes, cover your ears to create an even more truly empty zero point.
This piece, as I see, it is conceptually choreographed but executed improvisationally. To relate it to the three stages of creation, exploration, experimentation, and execution...
well, let me back up, what do I mean by "it"?
The word it is derived from the Middle and Old English word "hit". Hit is a neuter version of he. The neutral he that I refer to is the performance that I have, am, and will present to, for and with you today.
This piece is not completely improvised because I already know what realms, ideas, genres, and themes I will be presenting and roughly how I will execute those ideas. I will be using the human form, using gesture, movement, and sound to convey those ideas that have been predetermined by time spent exploring, one of the stages of creation.
Side note - it is easy to think that these stages happen in a linear fashion - first explore, then experiment, then execute. And you will be forgiven if that is how you see it.
For all of our talk of contemporary this and post that, we really haven't changed in 5000 years and all still want a refrigerator to keep our beers cold. Whether it's avocado or stainless steel in color, we just want a cold beer.
But let me back up again, as I feel that I would be remiss to not define what I mean by explore, experiment and execute.
Exploration is the search before the research. It is the hearsal before the rehearsal. It is the discovery of what exists around you, whether you are in the studio or sitting on the subway thinking about your project. It is the discovery/invention of what tools you will be using in your project.
Exploration is the, and this maybe more important, the rejection of tools. A work of art is more about what it is not than what it is. Granted all types of infinities exist some are just larger than others.
Experimentation is the second stage. Once the tools have been selected/created, their relationships can be investigated. How do the tools interact? What poetry, if you will, do they create?
The final stage is execution - when the work is presented before an audience. I did use the words second and final indicating a linear relationship to time. That is the more traditional relationship, or more choreographed. The further apart the moments of exploration, experimentation, and execution in time are, the more choreographed the work. The closer in time those moments are, the more improvised the work.
This brings me to the 6 performance elements - Costume, Lighting, Sound, Performer, Set, and Movement.
The lighting is choreographed, set or predetermined. It is this, what you see. I chose this because this piece is not about lighting. Because the decision about what lighting to use and the execution of the lighting are separated along the space/time spectrum, we can call the lighting choreographed. If I were to decide midstream to alter the lights or have someone do so with a lighting board or open and close the curtains, the lighting would be more improvised.
I could have choreographed someone to improvise the lights.
As of now the costuming is choreographed. I am wearing this. You could say that I am trying to represent the traditional contemporary western male caucasian urban outfit with slight preppy undertones.
What happens to the costume during the performance has yet to be seen. In the midst of the execution of the performance, I might decide, consciously or not, conspicuously or not, to explore and experiment with the costuming.
Sound - the sound of my voice and whatever parts of me happen to hit any surfaces with enough force to generate vibrating airwaves. The idea of what kind of sounds to use is choreographed as I have decided to not use saxophone or an iPod or a parrot. What has a greater distance between its execution and experimentation is what I will be saying. Therefore more choreographed.
How I will be saying what I will say will be determined in the moment. The three stages in very close proximity to each other. Therefore more improvised.
This brings me to the performance element of set. No set, unless you count the empty stage we have here as a set.
But, I could create a change of set by changing the location of my performance. Going outside for example, or entering the audience. Maybe entering the storage closet and continuing there. For all intents and purposes the set is set. The execution, exploration, and experimentation stages for set all have a different location along the space/time continuum. Set, interestingly enough, is an anagram of est.
Movement - choreographed as in I can only do what my teachers have taught me. The times of movement exploration, execution and experimentation are different, therefore I consider the movement to be choreographed. I consider, though, the movement in this piece to be improvised within that choreographed frame.
I do not know exactly where I will be, when I will be there, what level I will be at, what body parts will be still, which moving, etc. During the execution of this piece today, now...now is here is harmony, something I do, something I see in an audience member, an observer/participant, though more on the observer end, will probably trigger a question. Will open up an avenue for exploration. I then might begin experimenting with the variables discovered in that exploration.
But as you are witnessing/participating/observing my explorations and experimentations, could we not then say that it is at the same an execution also, collapsing all three stages of creation into a singularity? A singular moment in which what I am doing is what you are seeing, when we are discovering the same thing at the same time. We merge becoming essentially one, but opposite sides of that one singular sensation - improvisation.
Coming back to costume. What ΔCostume have we seen thus far? How are the pants? The shirt? The tie.
Talk about a loaded image.
The inherent meaning. Yes, the inherent meaning. We all carry our inherent meanings around with us for others to read us and how we read others. Biases and stereotypes. Our aesthetic biases.
Two performers on stage (and this relates to the performance variable of performer): two men - discord; many men - war; one male one female - love; two females - a man is bad; many females - war is bad; two females and a man love triangle and he is an ass and one chick's a bitch; two males and one female she is a slut, he is an ass and the other guy can't get it up; two heterosexual couples and a couch - an Arthur Miller play. Three couples and a couch - an American sitcom. Four couples, a large tunnel made of brown sticks, a dog house and a table...
But as you have not seen the process and the time that went into making this piece, you can not for certain say which performance elements fall where when in relation to the stages of creation. Whether or not it was choreographed or improvised. Does it matter?
Tweet
10.10.2011
10.05.2011
Experimentationalistic Dance
Experimentation is the sending before the presenting. Pre...before, or occurring before in time...experimenting is the sending before the before sending...do a little algebra and sending equals sending. There proven, put a fork in it. We're done here. Where is that avocado with the beer in it?!?
Experimentation is also the setting up, the creation of known conditions, knowing what elements you have in play and setting them free. Improvisation is experimentation, the only real form of experimental work. If someone has set/created/ossified something, they are not experimenting in their work. Unless of course they are forcing the experiment into/upon the viewer. Create something known, a choreography, for lack of a better word send it before an audience or present it to an audience, a somewhat known entity (No, you say...really...don't you keep seeing the same people at shows and everyone is pretty much dressed alike...). The experiment is then what happens between those two entities. The problem with many choreographers who call their work experimental is that they don't realize that their work isn't, it's just trendy and using the adjective du jour. It would actually be experimental if they were thinking of their relationship to the audience.
Tweet
Experimentation is also the setting up, the creation of known conditions, knowing what elements you have in play and setting them free. Improvisation is experimentation, the only real form of experimental work. If someone has set/created/ossified something, they are not experimenting in their work. Unless of course they are forcing the experiment into/upon the viewer. Create something known, a choreography, for lack of a better word send it before an audience or present it to an audience, a somewhat known entity (No, you say...really...don't you keep seeing the same people at shows and everyone is pretty much dressed alike...). The experiment is then what happens between those two entities. The problem with many choreographers who call their work experimental is that they don't realize that their work isn't, it's just trendy and using the adjective du jour. It would actually be experimental if they were thinking of their relationship to the audience.
Tweet
9.22.2011
Contact Improvisation gets big!
In the not so distant future, within 5 years I'd say, a contact improvisation duet will happen on a stage. It will receive great accolades and fanfare. Critics and arty folks with indeterminate European accents and thick black framed glasses will talk about the brilliance of the choreographer, how cutting edge and brilliant she or he is. The choreographer will be praised for discovering new ways of movement, and entering uncharted waters of aesthetics challenging what people think of as dance.
But, the piece will not be labeled as contact. Improvised, yes, as that is becoming more the trend here in Europe on the big money stages. And the choreographer will personally not have done contact improvisation. The dancers, maybe. Probably a few classes. I doubt that a really famous and funded choreographer would know any people who are really good at contact improvisation, that bastard child of the dance art world, and would have to use ballet-gone-release dancers who can partner.
Using language riddled with isms and dead French thinkers names, this choreographer will bring the tools of CI into the brighter wider better funded stage. Using words ending with "icity" and words with "post", "pre", and "neo" suffixes, the choreographer will dazzle us and amaze us with a new dance frontier.
Will it be Forsythe, or Le Roy? Bel, maybe. How about Wade? Sehgal?
Tweet
But, the piece will not be labeled as contact. Improvised, yes, as that is becoming more the trend here in Europe on the big money stages. And the choreographer will personally not have done contact improvisation. The dancers, maybe. Probably a few classes. I doubt that a really famous and funded choreographer would know any people who are really good at contact improvisation, that bastard child of the dance art world, and would have to use ballet-gone-release dancers who can partner.
Using language riddled with isms and dead French thinkers names, this choreographer will bring the tools of CI into the brighter wider better funded stage. Using words ending with "icity" and words with "post", "pre", and "neo" suffixes, the choreographer will dazzle us and amaze us with a new dance frontier.
Will it be Forsythe, or Le Roy? Bel, maybe. How about Wade? Sehgal?
Tweet
9.13.2011
National Debts
The population of Germany according to the CIA is 81,471,834 (July 2011 est.)
The national debt of Germany is € 1,895,561,620,931 according to nationaldebtclocks.com
The population of the United States according to the CIA is 313,232,044 (July 2011 est.)
The national debt of the United States is $ 15,091,192,666,470, also according to national debt clocks.com.
Dividing the debt by the population gives us a €23,266.47/German debt and a $48,178.96/American debt. Converting the Euros to dollars with an exchange rate of €1=$1.36, gives us $31,642.40.
This gives us a difference of $16,536.56, that each American owes MORE to whomever than each German owes.
What have you gotten for your $16,536.56?
Tweet
The national debt of Germany is € 1,895,561,620,931 according to nationaldebtclocks.com
The population of the United States according to the CIA is 313,232,044 (July 2011 est.)
The national debt of the United States is $ 15,091,192,666,470, also according to national debt clocks.com.
Dividing the debt by the population gives us a €23,266.47/German debt and a $48,178.96/American debt. Converting the Euros to dollars with an exchange rate of €1=$1.36, gives us $31,642.40.
This gives us a difference of $16,536.56, that each American owes MORE to whomever than each German owes.
What have you gotten for your $16,536.56?
Tweet
9.11.2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)