This week is about running performance modes to determine elements for a score that I can work from over the coming weeks and probably into the performance itself.
yesterday was experimenting with types of projections onto my body to see which ones might work easily and effectively in an improvised performance. clips of interesting ones here. This clip is also scattered with another random echoing which I can get to 3 layers (2 video and 1 live) when it's dark and stormy outside! otherwise it's too bright in the studio.
Today I'm going to try and run at least a 1 hour long performance.
Tomorrow I will be adding a second projector and third monitor.
Showing posts with label process. Show all posts
Showing posts with label process. Show all posts
Wednesday, 6 August 2008
Wednesday, 30 July 2008
Anna Parkina performance.
I went to the Wilkinson Gallery last night to see an intermedia performance by artists Anna Parkina. Need to check out what other people are doing in my interdiscipline.
At any rate, I wasn't in love with the performance, but it was worthwhile to put a couple of things in perspective about my own practice.
The performance involved a video projection, a cello player, some ambient crowd/commuter train sound, and Parkina doing what can only be described as "interpretive dance" in the most gaudy and stereotypical sense. (please note that I'm not saying this to be catty, judging from the playfulness of her other work that I glimpsed, she'd probably agree.) The video was a mirror image of itself where figures would pop out of the seem between the two images and make an interesting shape. There were times when either her live body or her shadow (or both) were beautifully complementing the form that the recorded mirror bodies were creating. I felt that could have been the whole piece right there.
I saw in her performance, that while she clearly has done work in video before, she's still struggling with the big challenge of working across disciplines: you get kinda overwhelmed with all the cool stuff that's at your fingertips and it's really really hard to edit it down into a cohesive whole. And even when you think you have, it's still too much.
The question this raises, which I think I'm trying to address is: Is it interesting to watch the chaos of too many parts not working together for those rare glimpses when it does come together? I clearly think that the answer is yes for my own work, but am I that patient with other people's work? Mmmmm. not really.
This is really telling! I'm glad that I'm proud of my work and want to embrace the quirks and uncomfortable moments and I do love work that takes the quiet little pops and fizzles that are all around us and make something beautiful out of it. I guess maybe the difference is that I don't always feel that's what other artists are trying to do with their work, that they are trying to present a polished piece when they haven't yet harnessed all the nuances of the different media they're trying to throw together into one piece. It's really a tall order. Maybe I'd like it better if I thought it was really trying to embrace the chaos?
The performance also confirmed for me that it's important that people that come to my show are able to come and go as they please. I felt soooo trapped at this performance last night and I wanted to act out, which is very unlike me. I think it's because I'm so close to this type of work right now with the final show only a month away. I don't care that not everyone wants to stick around my work for a long time, I certainly stay with some pieces longer than others. However, I've also had people note both during my scratch performances and the Nunnery show that they wanted to sit with the piece for a while. I'm happy to have people come to my work on their own terms and not put a finite time limit on something that seems to want to continue to evolve longer than a 20-45 minutes time slot.
At any rate, I wasn't in love with the performance, but it was worthwhile to put a couple of things in perspective about my own practice.
The performance involved a video projection, a cello player, some ambient crowd/commuter train sound, and Parkina doing what can only be described as "interpretive dance" in the most gaudy and stereotypical sense. (please note that I'm not saying this to be catty, judging from the playfulness of her other work that I glimpsed, she'd probably agree.) The video was a mirror image of itself where figures would pop out of the seem between the two images and make an interesting shape. There were times when either her live body or her shadow (or both) were beautifully complementing the form that the recorded mirror bodies were creating. I felt that could have been the whole piece right there.
I saw in her performance, that while she clearly has done work in video before, she's still struggling with the big challenge of working across disciplines: you get kinda overwhelmed with all the cool stuff that's at your fingertips and it's really really hard to edit it down into a cohesive whole. And even when you think you have, it's still too much.
The question this raises, which I think I'm trying to address is: Is it interesting to watch the chaos of too many parts not working together for those rare glimpses when it does come together? I clearly think that the answer is yes for my own work, but am I that patient with other people's work? Mmmmm. not really.
This is really telling! I'm glad that I'm proud of my work and want to embrace the quirks and uncomfortable moments and I do love work that takes the quiet little pops and fizzles that are all around us and make something beautiful out of it. I guess maybe the difference is that I don't always feel that's what other artists are trying to do with their work, that they are trying to present a polished piece when they haven't yet harnessed all the nuances of the different media they're trying to throw together into one piece. It's really a tall order. Maybe I'd like it better if I thought it was really trying to embrace the chaos?
The performance also confirmed for me that it's important that people that come to my show are able to come and go as they please. I felt soooo trapped at this performance last night and I wanted to act out, which is very unlike me. I think it's because I'm so close to this type of work right now with the final show only a month away. I don't care that not everyone wants to stick around my work for a long time, I certainly stay with some pieces longer than others. However, I've also had people note both during my scratch performances and the Nunnery show that they wanted to sit with the piece for a while. I'm happy to have people come to my work on their own terms and not put a finite time limit on something that seems to want to continue to evolve longer than a 20-45 minutes time slot.
Tuesday, 3 June 2008
New sketches.
The weekly rehearsal time in a classroom at WCA have been really useful. I've posted 6 clips on my YouTube channel which I encourage you to go take a look at by clicking here. Too many to post here, but I've included 2 in this post.
Questions that were highlighted last week:
1. What is it like to have me tweaking equipment and explaining things to people during the performance?
2. How will I use isadora live? I like the layers (more on this below)
3. What it might look like to have two projections: 1 which is showing "source" material and one which is showing "composite" like this:
4. This clip has some interesting moments where the line between recorded and "live" image gets pretty blurred. Can this effect be achieved when you are actually live in the space, or is it working because of the cropping I chose for this shot? What strategies might achieve this live?
Some responses to above based on what I've done so far:
1. The tweaking looks like anyone else tweaking things onstage. I think it's probably inevitable, but I'm sure I can work on fluid strategies to minimize it or make it an integral "beat" within the performance. Maybe pre-recorded elements that don't require so much attention.
2. I didn't remember that Isadora allows you to layer multiple channels of video on the fly. This is, of course, one of my favorite techniques that has been in my work since I picked up a video camera 8 years ago. But what is it other than a neat technique? Why am I interested in it?
A passage of poetry that has been with me for 15 years from "The Layers" by Stanley Kunitz:
After last Thursday, I see the direct link between the transparent video layers, plus the layering of live and recorded presence, and skin. Amelia Jones brings it up over and over again in her writing, but I hadn't really felt how it connected to my work. I've noticed that as I review these sketches and think about Jones' idea of the skin stretching across technology (and in my case: other people, recorded and live presence, and the space we're in, sound, image, light, bodies) - it feels like each layer that I build is actually peeling back a skin as a boundary or border. I think this is what I'm looking for for this performance: the point at which all the layers have built up so much that they start to break down and merge so that we become less aware of the individual components that make up the performance and focus on the experience as a whole.
3. I realized that having the "source" and "composite" material projected simultaneously is similar to what it's like to be in the video editing quite. There's this other strand that I want people to come along through my whole process, warts and all, so having elements in the performance space that echo the behind the scenes structures of the filmmaking process is appealing. It's not all pretty, but another thing I would like to explore is: if I bring people along on my journey through the process, will they be more able to immerse themselves in the final piece?
4. Reviewing this footage has made me think that maybe it's not a bad thing to have some pre-recorded foundation elements. These would be recorded in the space and I could trigger when they get played, but they'd be guaranteed "good" takes that can serve as a foundation for a spontaneous improv. I think this is particularly clear with #4 where it is easy in editing to make yourself look "good" and confident, but there's not a whole lot you can do live if you start to lose your confidence or slip up. That's the beauty of the juxtaposition right there, I think. What if you highlight and loop the "bad" stuff? Does it become beautiful at some point? Does it make the live presence look better? Am I more HUMAN? (ugh, I didn't want to write it, but I thought it, so here it is.)
Other things:
I miss the singing, but still like the incidental noise (paper rustling in this case, the door shutting) I want to reincorporate the "footstep" ambient noise of people moving in the space as a foundation room tone for my pieces.
As is often the case, my brain has started spinning more after writing this. I'll leave it here for now. Looking forward to this week's practice.
Questions that were highlighted last week:
1. What is it like to have me tweaking equipment and explaining things to people during the performance?
2. How will I use isadora live? I like the layers (more on this below)
3. What it might look like to have two projections: 1 which is showing "source" material and one which is showing "composite" like this:
4. This clip has some interesting moments where the line between recorded and "live" image gets pretty blurred. Can this effect be achieved when you are actually live in the space, or is it working because of the cropping I chose for this shot? What strategies might achieve this live?
Some responses to above based on what I've done so far:
1. The tweaking looks like anyone else tweaking things onstage. I think it's probably inevitable, but I'm sure I can work on fluid strategies to minimize it or make it an integral "beat" within the performance. Maybe pre-recorded elements that don't require so much attention.
2. I didn't remember that Isadora allows you to layer multiple channels of video on the fly. This is, of course, one of my favorite techniques that has been in my work since I picked up a video camera 8 years ago. But what is it other than a neat technique? Why am I interested in it?
A passage of poetry that has been with me for 15 years from "The Layers" by Stanley Kunitz:
"Live in the layers,
not on the litter."
Though I lack the art
to decipher it,
no doubt the next chapter
in my book of transformations
is already written.
I am not done with my changes.
After last Thursday, I see the direct link between the transparent video layers, plus the layering of live and recorded presence, and skin. Amelia Jones brings it up over and over again in her writing, but I hadn't really felt how it connected to my work. I've noticed that as I review these sketches and think about Jones' idea of the skin stretching across technology (and in my case: other people, recorded and live presence, and the space we're in, sound, image, light, bodies) - it feels like each layer that I build is actually peeling back a skin as a boundary or border. I think this is what I'm looking for for this performance: the point at which all the layers have built up so much that they start to break down and merge so that we become less aware of the individual components that make up the performance and focus on the experience as a whole.
3. I realized that having the "source" and "composite" material projected simultaneously is similar to what it's like to be in the video editing quite. There's this other strand that I want people to come along through my whole process, warts and all, so having elements in the performance space that echo the behind the scenes structures of the filmmaking process is appealing. It's not all pretty, but another thing I would like to explore is: if I bring people along on my journey through the process, will they be more able to immerse themselves in the final piece?
4. Reviewing this footage has made me think that maybe it's not a bad thing to have some pre-recorded foundation elements. These would be recorded in the space and I could trigger when they get played, but they'd be guaranteed "good" takes that can serve as a foundation for a spontaneous improv. I think this is particularly clear with #4 where it is easy in editing to make yourself look "good" and confident, but there's not a whole lot you can do live if you start to lose your confidence or slip up. That's the beauty of the juxtaposition right there, I think. What if you highlight and loop the "bad" stuff? Does it become beautiful at some point? Does it make the live presence look better? Am I more HUMAN? (ugh, I didn't want to write it, but I thought it, so here it is.)
Other things:
I miss the singing, but still like the incidental noise (paper rustling in this case, the door shutting) I want to reincorporate the "footstep" ambient noise of people moving in the space as a foundation room tone for my pieces.
As is often the case, my brain has started spinning more after writing this. I'll leave it here for now. Looking forward to this week's practice.
Wednesday, 28 May 2008
Goat Island: helping me begin.
On Sunday, 18 May, I took a day long workshop with Goat Island at Siobhan Davies Studios in Elephant & Castle. Their work has come up time and again in my research and there was enough said to peak my interest without really being able to put my finger on why. After this workshop, and seeing their performance of their new and "last" performance The Lastmaker this past Saturday, I have a better understanding of why.
Their work is intellectually deep, physically demanding, and pretty abstract. Yet I never lost sight of the 5 people on stage as being anything but "themselves" or, maybe in other words, of how human they were. When they were doing ensemble choreographies, they would often be doing the same movements, but in their own way. There was not a pinch of arrogance or aloofness in anything they did.
This is the pitch I would love to achieve with my work. Watching their performance made me want to run off and join their circus. But for now, obviously, I've got to do my own thing. And use a tool and material that they gave me to begin this final phase of developing a performance for September.
They say it better than I can about their technique:
This technique of "response" was also brought up in the last workshop I blogged about. I'm finding that I resonate with this way of producing material. I need to constantly "do" and review to understand what is going on with my work. I think this technique also lends itself to performing with my recorded image on video screens. Echoes, layers, sparks...many words to describe the effect. And most importantly, it helps answer that question
WHERE DO I BEGIN?!?!?!
A quote that we were given in the workshop before a 10 minute walk to the Imperial War Museum:
Right now, I'm working with echoes from the Goat Island workshop. As with a natural echo down a canyon, this one goes through phases, not just evenly getting quieter the further away it gets from me in time and space, but occasionally getting louder as it bounces off a particularly well curved canyon wall.
I loved this quote from Andre Lepecki, especially the part about the body absorbing shocks only to release them later. That's exactly what is going on with me as I continue to process that workshop. I decided to use this quote as a literal starting point for my rehearsal time last week. I did a couple of recordings that I'm digitizing and will continue to build off of tomorrow when I go back. I'm going to play with Isadora tomorrow too and see how that goes. Will post the results early next week. or rather, will post the process early next week.
Their work is intellectually deep, physically demanding, and pretty abstract. Yet I never lost sight of the 5 people on stage as being anything but "themselves" or, maybe in other words, of how human they were. When they were doing ensemble choreographies, they would often be doing the same movements, but in their own way. There was not a pinch of arrogance or aloofness in anything they did.
This is the pitch I would love to achieve with my work. Watching their performance made me want to run off and join their circus. But for now, obviously, I've got to do my own thing. And use a tool and material that they gave me to begin this final phase of developing a performance for September.
They say it better than I can about their technique:
Goat Island performance work is a series of responses: to the exercises we give ourselves, to our surroundings, to the events of the world, but mostly, to each other. We perform responses for each other back and forth. The conversation goes further than were we just talking. At the end of the conversation we have a piece in front of us and it's ready to show. These conversations take place over a long period of time. As in a chess match, each response is carefully considered. Time, and therefore, dreams and reverie are part of the conversation. These conversations can be two years long. This gives time for a history to grow and for us to interpret it, for distortions to take on their own meaning, their own demands.
(from their website)
This technique of "response" was also brought up in the last workshop I blogged about. I'm finding that I resonate with this way of producing material. I need to constantly "do" and review to understand what is going on with my work. I think this technique also lends itself to performing with my recorded image on video screens. Echoes, layers, sparks...many words to describe the effect. And most importantly, it helps answer that question
WHERE DO I BEGIN?!?!?!
A quote that we were given in the workshop before a 10 minute walk to the Imperial War Museum:
The intricate cooperation of muscle and nerve fibers produce the means by which an organism interacts with its surrounding environment. That cooperation has a name which is movement. When the environment itself enters into fibrillation, it is the whole system (organism/environment) that becomes convulsive. The body absorbs all the shocks only to release them later on, in another time space, as unforeseen motions, reorganizing as much as outlining the distribution of violence in the nervous system. - Andre Lepecki from his book Exhausting Dance
Right now, I'm working with echoes from the Goat Island workshop. As with a natural echo down a canyon, this one goes through phases, not just evenly getting quieter the further away it gets from me in time and space, but occasionally getting louder as it bounces off a particularly well curved canyon wall.
I loved this quote from Andre Lepecki, especially the part about the body absorbing shocks only to release them later. That's exactly what is going on with me as I continue to process that workshop. I decided to use this quote as a literal starting point for my rehearsal time last week. I did a couple of recordings that I'm digitizing and will continue to build off of tomorrow when I go back. I'm going to play with Isadora tomorrow too and see how that goes. Will post the results early next week. or rather, will post the process early next week.
Monday, 10 March 2008
Initial thoughts on Nunning.
Learned a bunch from the Nunnery show. The overarching impression I've walked away from my piece with is that I've thrown open too many doors and have to figure out which ones are the ones I'm interested in moving forward with. I may or may not get around to organizing them into themes before I post this. Just want to get things down while they're still quite fresh.
So what is the piece about? Let's start with what seems to be there based on observations and audience feedback:
What seems to be ideal viewing moment for this piece?
If I did piece like this again, conditions I would insist upon:
But what exactly is the main point of interest or focal point of the piece?
Other things I felt or heard repeatedly:
So what is the piece about? Let's start with what seems to be there based on observations and audience feedback:
- pretty singing
- minimal, often unconfident live performance
- slippage between live and recorded image. What is actually happening live and what is pre-recorded? (I even saw one woman taking the headphones off in the middle of watching it, which was fantastic)
- immersion of viewer through soundtrack
- alienation of viewer through trapping them in a corner behind a camera and forcing them to watch complicated video piece on a small screen
- a layered piece that was read on different levels by different people
- a vague sense that there was "alot there" but no one at the actual performance who could put a finger on it
- from feedback pre-performance "extremely rich" area to explore. Yes, I'm finding it overwhelmingly rich!
- putting the audience in my shoes behind the camera
- confusing the role of the viewer to those around them who think that the person behind the camera is actually filming. As a result, preventing many possible viewers from approaching the camera and watching the piece.
- embodiment in space of both viewer and performer
- performer highlights interesting aspects of space through movement and vocalization
- video reinforces these
- performer ultimately becomes integrated into the different sensory layers of the space
- viewer becomes embodied simultaneously through immersion and alienation. When they walk away from the piece, they have a heightened awareness of the space.
- 3 phases to video that shifted mood, but also shifted weight of foreground/background between the video and the physical space
- mirroring 3 phases live
What seems to be ideal viewing moment for this piece?
- when the place has some people milling around, or walking from place to place
- when I appear live in the space as well, especially when singing. even if the singing isn't the same tune as the video piece.
If I did piece like this again, conditions I would insist upon:
- layered space: a place where there are people walking through, different points of entry and exit. I tried the piece in 5 different locations, both at WCA and at the Nunnery. The most interesting ones had people in different planes from the viewer walking through the frame. The 2 locations that were enclosed rooms were pretty boring.
- 2-3 days in the space before the performance to rehearse and plot out performance sound and movement. The performance side of things continued to be weak for the whole weekend. My performance skills are at a point where I still need to have a clear plan in place ahead of time. I can't wing it and hope for the best, even if I love improv. Sticking to a path and controlled movement on Sunday made me feel like I was starting to get there, and allowed me to find a good pitch to my performance over time. I was hoping that having all this time would do exactly that. However, in the future, I need to have this time BEFORE the actual performance!
- 2-3 full days of shooting with rough edits performed each evening or on the fly. Although I felt good about the work I did in the Nunnery. I ended up limiting my possibilities by only taking half a day there. Things that I thought would work together when reviewing the tape in the space ended up not working together at all. Editing is so easy with final cut these days!
But what exactly is the main point of interest or focal point of the piece?
- is it about the space?
- is it about the performer? in the foreground or the background?
- the viewer? alienated or immersed?
- the articulation of space through movement? sound? alienation? interruption? integration?
- my embodiment as a performer within my body? surroundings? in relation to the technology? the viewer?
Other things I felt or heard repeatedly:
- When I think back on this weekend, I feel like I'm playing a conceptual tennis match. Except no one's keeping score.
- live performance was chaos until Sunday. On Sunday, I had time to find something to do with myself that seemed to hold things together more. I created a walk for myself around the gallery walking backwards and forwards as if I were another person just looking at the art. However, once in a while I would stop and study something that wasn't the art, or start singing. If someone blocked my path, I reversed direction.It was interesting and seemed to make the piece hold together better.
- the whole piece "worked" on Sunday, but what do I mean by that?
- at what point do I give up and get someone who is a trained performer to do it for me? This question makes me really angry. I feel like there is some assumption that if you're not really good, you shouldn't put yourself in your work. How will I learn if I'm not in the work? And yet ultimately, when does my lack of performance skill get in the way of me communicating what I want to with the piece? I can't answer this right now. Still narrowing down what the piece is about?
- is it really important that people sit behind a camera? What would be other ways of doing this?
- soundtrack was fab.
- I realized that I was most interested in the sonic dimension of the space.
- I am also most interested in exploring the sonic dimension of video. I think. The one piece of this I can clarify right now is that I think the true power of video rests in its marriage of both sound and image.
- most people wanted to sit with the piece longer than one cycle. This is good. However, the underlying criticism of this is that I should have made the piece longer, chosen maybe 1 mood, or made each section longer.
- The discussion on Saturday kept coming back to the idea of audience expectations. This was most interesting because it made me think about all the unexpected, or extraneous things that audience members might focus on with my piece. For example, the whole thing about people spending ages in the space and not touching my piece because they didn't really it was a piece and the signifiers for a camera on a tripod are not to approach. This throws a whole new debate about my piece out there. And I need to be careful about such things because it can detract from what I am more interested in communicating with people.
- The other thing that comes to mind about being trapped behind the camera is that one of the interesting things about Janet Cardiff's video walks was that even though the viewer is behind the camera, their bodies are in motion, which seems like a freer way of experiencing the piece and perhaps enhances the viewer's embodiment of the piece. (I do believe Harriet made some comment along these lines when she viewed my test piece!)
- The piece was TOO hidden. I didn't want the performance to be in your face. But I wanted people to be aware of it. People were aware of my presence more than they were of the video. Sadly, my presence was nowhere near as interesting as the video.
- Do I need to be in the space to make the piece "work"? Are people walking away with what I intended when my presence in real time isn't there?
- Do I need to control when the viewers encounter me in the physical space?
- Is it interesting to have it unravel completely differently for every viewer?
Sunday, 27 January 2008
The Creative Habit
Amongst other things, I have picked up Twyla Tharp's book the Creative Habit. I am enjoying parts of it and appreciate that Tharp gives you some exercises and examples that have helped her in her own life that sound very prescriptive, but is careful to reiterate throughout that these are simply suggestions and that we all have our own way of working most effectively. That said, when I came to this questionnaire (below) in a section about our "creative DNA", I started to feel like a failure and a fraud because I couldn't think of clear answers for many of the questions. I have never had a singular or clear vision about the path my life would take. Add to this a general reluctance to follow prescribed exercises like this, and there was no question that I had to try and answer this questionnaire.
Here it is. I will post responses in another post to follow. Would love to see what you all think about it and if you end up taking it, if found it at all interesting or useful.
*******
Take the following questionnaire. If even one answer tells you something new about yourself, you're one step closer to understanding your creative DNA. There are no right answers here. The exercise is intended for your eyes only, which means no cheating, no answers to impress other people. It's supposed to be an honest self-appraiseal of what matters to you. Anything less is a distortion. I include it here and urge you to answer quickly, instinctively. Don't dawdle.
Your Creative Autobiography
Here it is. I will post responses in another post to follow. Would love to see what you all think about it and if you end up taking it, if found it at all interesting or useful.
*******
Take the following questionnaire. If even one answer tells you something new about yourself, you're one step closer to understanding your creative DNA. There are no right answers here. The exercise is intended for your eyes only, which means no cheating, no answers to impress other people. It's supposed to be an honest self-appraiseal of what matters to you. Anything less is a distortion. I include it here and urge you to answer quickly, instinctively. Don't dawdle.
Your Creative Autobiography
- What is the first creative moment you remember?
- Was anyone there to witness or appreciate it?
- What is the best idea you ever had?
- What made it great in your mind?
- What is the dumbest idea?
- What made it stupid?
- Can you connect the dots that led you to this idea?
- What is your creative ambition?
- What are the obstacles to this ambition?
- What are the vital steps to achieving this ambition?
- How do you begin your day?
- What are your habits? What patterns do you repeat?
- Describe your first successful creative act.
- Describe your second successful creative act.
- Compare them.
- What are your attitudes toward: money, power, praise, rivals, work, play?
- Which artists do you admire most?
- Why are they your role models?
- What do you and your role models have in common?
- Does anyone in your life regularly inspire you?
- Who is your muse?
- Define muse.
- When confronted with superior intelligence or talent, how do you respond?
- When faced with stupidity, hostility, intransigence, laziness, or indifference in others, how do you respond?
- When faced with the impending success or the threat of failure, how do you respond?
- When you work, do you love the process or the result?
- At what point do you feel your reach exceeds your grasp?
- What is your ideal creative activity?
- What is your greatest fear?
- What is the likelihood of either of the answers to the previous two questions happening?
- Which of your answers would you most like to change?
- What is your idea of mastery?
- What is your greatest dream?
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
Assessment round 1 site
Uploaded the website I designed for this first round of assessments.
Click HERE to view!
The only thing missing from the site are the workshop outlines I created for the ones I conducted myself. I'm happy to share them with folks on the course if you're curious. Just email me or comment here and I'll send them to you.
Click HERE to view!
The only thing missing from the site are the workshop outlines I created for the ones I conducted myself. I'm happy to share them with folks on the course if you're curious. Just email me or comment here and I'll send them to you.
Monday, 14 January 2008
From the archives: Learning Agreement
Before posting my Research Proposal, I thought I'd post the Learning Agreement and outline of research interests that J.M. asked us to submit to him before our first critical studies tutorial. Might as well let it all hang out, eh? I post these as is, without comment from the over-active peanut gallery in my head.
Aims (outline the purpose, scope, visions and ambition of your plan of work)
Research
1. Conduct a brief historical survey of avant garde performance
2. Select and begin analysis of 3-4 contemporary performance groups who work across disciplines, and who use improvisation to devise performances and/or incorporate improvisation into the final piece
3. Review the practices of a range of solo artists/performers who incorporate multiple disciplines into their work.
Practice
1. Explore an interdisciplinary solo performance practice
2. Begin to conduct improvisation-based workshops with artists from different backgrounds
2 Objectives (The expected objectives leading towards the learning outcomes of the unit)
Research
1. The historical survey will allow me to more clearly explain the lineage that my work is part of. I also hope to learn more specifics about techniques used throughout avant garde performance to give me a solid framework upon which to build new exercises that will translate well into a contemporary interdisciplinary performance.
2. Case studies of contemporary groups will give me some models currently in practice to help situate myself within contemporary practice, either aligning with or reacting against trends that come up. Focussing on a few groups instead of doing an overview survey will also give me insight into how companies present their work to the outside world and how it is critiqued.
3. Looking at solo performers will give me inspiration for exploring a solo performance practice that draws on my training in several disciplines, and ideas for engaging the audience when there is only one person to focus on.
Practice
1. Solo practice will give me another perspective on how the techniques I am developing for the workshops translate when applied to another performance mode. I will also be able to determine whether I would like to develop a solo performance practice in its own right or if it is simply a useful tool for a deeper understanding of exercises that I will be sharing with others.
2. The weekly workshops will give me experience in running workshops, explore modes of creative expression available in a performance context, test out exercises that come out of my research to see if they translate well to a group of artists from mixed backgrounds and/or are good at fostering a strong, collaborative group dynamic. At the end of this term, I would like to have a stronger sense of a good progression of exercises to use in workshops so that I can focus on devising a final performance with a group of artists who are serious about participating in this performance.
3 The Plan of Work describing the principal stages and timescale of the work
1) Historical survey 3-4 weeks
i. Determine initial bibliography and start reading (in progress)
ii. Locate any visual reference that could be useful in development of practice (ongoing)
iii. Develop outline highlighting key themes, moments, movements, artists that are particularly relevant to my practice (Dec)
2) Solo performance 6 weeks
i. Determine list of solo artists to explore further (in progress)
ii. Sketch ideas that spring from research, workshops & lectures (ongoing)
iii. Weekly dedicated practice time to try out ideas (ongoing)
iv. Outline themes and issues that have arisen from practice and research (Dec/Jan)
3) Group Workshops 7 weeks
i. Evaluate techniques from ongoing research (historical, contemporary & solo practice)
ii. Develop workshop plans for weekly workshops with an informal group of artists (weekly)
iii. Describe workshop plan and evaluate each workshop after its been conducted (weekly)
iv. Analyze themes in critique that has arisen from workshops at end of term (Dec/Jan)
4) Selection of contemporary practitioners for case studies 8 weeks
i. Review contemporary companies on VLP website (complete)
ii. Attend performances in London (ongoing)
iii. Select companies for deeper review (Dec)
• Access to information on group, documentation of performances
Aims (outline the purpose, scope, visions and ambition of your plan of work)
Research
1. Conduct a brief historical survey of avant garde performance
2. Select and begin analysis of 3-4 contemporary performance groups who work across disciplines, and who use improvisation to devise performances and/or incorporate improvisation into the final piece
3. Review the practices of a range of solo artists/performers who incorporate multiple disciplines into their work.
Practice
1. Explore an interdisciplinary solo performance practice
2. Begin to conduct improvisation-based workshops with artists from different backgrounds
2 Objectives (The expected objectives leading towards the learning outcomes of the unit)
Research
1. The historical survey will allow me to more clearly explain the lineage that my work is part of. I also hope to learn more specifics about techniques used throughout avant garde performance to give me a solid framework upon which to build new exercises that will translate well into a contemporary interdisciplinary performance.
2. Case studies of contemporary groups will give me some models currently in practice to help situate myself within contemporary practice, either aligning with or reacting against trends that come up. Focussing on a few groups instead of doing an overview survey will also give me insight into how companies present their work to the outside world and how it is critiqued.
3. Looking at solo performers will give me inspiration for exploring a solo performance practice that draws on my training in several disciplines, and ideas for engaging the audience when there is only one person to focus on.
Practice
1. Solo practice will give me another perspective on how the techniques I am developing for the workshops translate when applied to another performance mode. I will also be able to determine whether I would like to develop a solo performance practice in its own right or if it is simply a useful tool for a deeper understanding of exercises that I will be sharing with others.
2. The weekly workshops will give me experience in running workshops, explore modes of creative expression available in a performance context, test out exercises that come out of my research to see if they translate well to a group of artists from mixed backgrounds and/or are good at fostering a strong, collaborative group dynamic. At the end of this term, I would like to have a stronger sense of a good progression of exercises to use in workshops so that I can focus on devising a final performance with a group of artists who are serious about participating in this performance.
3 The Plan of Work describing the principal stages and timescale of the work
1) Historical survey 3-4 weeks
i. Determine initial bibliography and start reading (in progress)
ii. Locate any visual reference that could be useful in development of practice (ongoing)
iii. Develop outline highlighting key themes, moments, movements, artists that are particularly relevant to my practice (Dec)
2) Solo performance 6 weeks
i. Determine list of solo artists to explore further (in progress)
ii. Sketch ideas that spring from research, workshops & lectures (ongoing)
iii. Weekly dedicated practice time to try out ideas (ongoing)
iv. Outline themes and issues that have arisen from practice and research (Dec/Jan)
3) Group Workshops 7 weeks
i. Evaluate techniques from ongoing research (historical, contemporary & solo practice)
ii. Develop workshop plans for weekly workshops with an informal group of artists (weekly)
iii. Describe workshop plan and evaluate each workshop after its been conducted (weekly)
iv. Analyze themes in critique that has arisen from workshops at end of term (Dec/Jan)
4) Selection of contemporary practitioners for case studies 8 weeks
i. Review contemporary companies on VLP website (complete)
ii. Attend performances in London (ongoing)
iii. Select companies for deeper review (Dec)
• Access to information on group, documentation of performances
Monday, 22 October 2007
Catching up part 1: artist lectures
A bit of a "backblog" here. Want to get this all down before there are EVEN MORE things I want to make note of here.
1) Siobhan Davies & Shobana Jeyasingh @ Southbank Centre 7 OCT 2007
- Davies: interested in layers and the ability of the body to express internal processes like no other medium since it's all part of an integrated whole.
- Jeyasingh: interested in surfaces due to her training in classical indian dance. However, she too, broke with her tradition to find out what more she could do with it
I was struck by the difference in the way they describe their practices, coming from very different directions, but still feeling an undertanding and affinity for each others' work. I also appreciated Davies in particular, for her passion and interest in her particular mode of expression and the fact that she can thrive and be one of the country's most respected choreographers sticking to something as simple as "wanting to describe different circles in the space" (not exact quote) in her most recent work which was stages earlier this month.
I have tremendous respect for people who are committed to one particular practice and are able to succeed doing that one thing. There is increasing pressure to be multi-talented. This is a huge relief for those of us who like working across disciplines since I've felt that the emphasis for many years has been on specialists, but I hope that we don't forget to appreciate the people who have chosen a more narrow path and gone to a profound depth with it.
The other thing I noted was their discussion of the role of the choreographer. While the process of creating a dance might be a collaborative process, they both thought it was important to have that one person who would have a view of the big picture and make choices for what components go where and how the piece is organized in the space.
2) Paul Ryan at the Wellcome Trust, 19 NOV 2007
Ryan's lecture was on the semiotics of the sketchbook and the way that the sketch/sketchbook has been used more frequently in post-modern exhibitions.
I was happy that I went along to this lecture because it reminded me to think about exposing the process of my performance. My favorite exhibits these days are ones where I can see artists' process, or a performance where I can see the technicians working their magic "behind the scenes." In my artists statement, I make the claim that my performative video work helps create a connection between the audience and the performers because I create moments where the audience discovers that what they are seeing on the screen is coming from my camera.
Question: what are different ways that I can continue to integrate the process into the final performance?
Other notes:
- Peirce school of semiotics (do I want to read any?)
- He had a really concise, nice definition of semiotics - "how meaning is conveyed"
- Ryan, whose medium is drawing, said that he thought performance and installation work was less dogmatic than more traditional forms (painting, sculpture). The ephemeral nature of performance/installation meansyou are freer to try out different ideas whereas you've made a real commitment when you cast something in bronze. reminded me of McCluhan's "the media is the message" that Doug brought up in the VLP seminar earlier this week.
- the prevalence of these "private" works in public space has made them much less private. more self consciousness in the sketchbook knowing that you might incorporate it into a show later on. What would happen if you had some really private things that no one ever saw? How would that affect your work on it? Typing this question in a blog is interesting to me....exposing my thoughts that would normally stay stuck in the notebook. And yet there are pages and pages in the notebook that won't go here.
1) Siobhan Davies & Shobana Jeyasingh @ Southbank Centre 7 OCT 2007
- Davies: interested in layers and the ability of the body to express internal processes like no other medium since it's all part of an integrated whole.
- Jeyasingh: interested in surfaces due to her training in classical indian dance. However, she too, broke with her tradition to find out what more she could do with it
I was struck by the difference in the way they describe their practices, coming from very different directions, but still feeling an undertanding and affinity for each others' work. I also appreciated Davies in particular, for her passion and interest in her particular mode of expression and the fact that she can thrive and be one of the country's most respected choreographers sticking to something as simple as "wanting to describe different circles in the space" (not exact quote) in her most recent work which was stages earlier this month.
I have tremendous respect for people who are committed to one particular practice and are able to succeed doing that one thing. There is increasing pressure to be multi-talented. This is a huge relief for those of us who like working across disciplines since I've felt that the emphasis for many years has been on specialists, but I hope that we don't forget to appreciate the people who have chosen a more narrow path and gone to a profound depth with it.
The other thing I noted was their discussion of the role of the choreographer. While the process of creating a dance might be a collaborative process, they both thought it was important to have that one person who would have a view of the big picture and make choices for what components go where and how the piece is organized in the space.
2) Paul Ryan at the Wellcome Trust, 19 NOV 2007
Ryan's lecture was on the semiotics of the sketchbook and the way that the sketch/sketchbook has been used more frequently in post-modern exhibitions.
I was happy that I went along to this lecture because it reminded me to think about exposing the process of my performance. My favorite exhibits these days are ones where I can see artists' process, or a performance where I can see the technicians working their magic "behind the scenes." In my artists statement, I make the claim that my performative video work helps create a connection between the audience and the performers because I create moments where the audience discovers that what they are seeing on the screen is coming from my camera.
Question: what are different ways that I can continue to integrate the process into the final performance?
Other notes:
- Peirce school of semiotics (do I want to read any?)
- He had a really concise, nice definition of semiotics - "how meaning is conveyed"
- Ryan, whose medium is drawing, said that he thought performance and installation work was less dogmatic than more traditional forms (painting, sculpture). The ephemeral nature of performance/installation meansyou are freer to try out different ideas whereas you've made a real commitment when you cast something in bronze. reminded me of McCluhan's "the media is the message" that Doug brought up in the VLP seminar earlier this week.
- the prevalence of these "private" works in public space has made them much less private. more self consciousness in the sketchbook knowing that you might incorporate it into a show later on. What would happen if you had some really private things that no one ever saw? How would that affect your work on it? Typing this question in a blog is interesting to me....exposing my thoughts that would normally stay stuck in the notebook. And yet there are pages and pages in the notebook that won't go here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
