PRACTICE

From October 16 until 20, 2008, Rosalind Crisp, Renate Graziadei, Arthur Stäldi, and Angela Schubot have been working on how to look at and use performative and choreographic tools in a process of instant decision-making. The following text publishes notes, Rosalind has taken during the working sessions.

pRACTICE day_1.

berlin practice-place of sharing to question the preconceived of dance practice

how to share

performative research and choreographic tools in contemporary environments
= practice

choreographic research and performative tools in contemporary environments
= craptice

flat back against the wall
loose responses, not too close to them in focus difussed, warming up, fragments of rhythm of song
shifting between image, sensation, direction in space, rhythm, body part, effort
If we take away performative research and substitute it with choreographic research…
tools for generating movement, tools for relationship with others-close, far, on/off, not at all, peripheral, going with, going against, maintaining, changing

Time to notice in the doing or in between the doing
practicing what I practice anyway in this new environement-these people with me all the time

Why the shift from group to solo is big-love the extra demand of solo

What is renate following now? listening, shape, negative space

control-releasing it
could I add anything -r and a are so connected
how the parameters shift-going in because I need to move, going in to add something, going in for..to break the watching making frame
not to break their performance/focus but to use concentrating on breaking
my frame of watching/making a piece, not pyscological either
music is an entrance. I was trying not to do psychological

too many things changing too fast between solo body, breaking the frame of making a piece as a score
a reason to go in
can’t we set up a ‘piece’, when it arrives-a relationship between 2- then I can pRACTICE my new frame/score

so I tried it alone-this new score called  ‘not making a piece’

the issue for me today from this we did is:
is it a practice as piece making - performative research or is it practice as choreographic  research

attention on composing a piece or on researching movement
Arthur body decision , composing-response to others moving in the space

I have practiced choreographic tools for years, but for me my interest today is how to shift myself, to ‘loose control’. What came for me today by paying attention to (concentrating on) breaking the making of a piece frame/ to be NOT reading the piece from inside it (nor from outside)
I am  not interested in understanding it but the interest for me is in setting up ways of loosing control
watching actively as a choice how to position myself-parameters/choices in how to participate as a watcher- as further ways of destabilising myself

peter-what decisions on, how do they stay on, do they think, what are the habits and styles  If  there is no recognition

Renate what I saw- me connecting directly, first time she saw me do this

what do I want?
I want to pursue freely my interests as they emerge in this context
I want to hear what others see
Do we set up structures or go in open and find them ourselves?

the undecidedness of it
a dialogue between decided and undecided

following the feedback from my body and the ways of producing movement that I practice
new environment

Day_2:

Nopeter today

the need to reaffirm I am just warming up-time to not produce-rest in this pleasure/permission
joined with the breath, the falling, heaving of Arthur
he is on a roll, falling thru own body out via another joint, face/gaze suspended
Felt like I was performing/by this I mean felt I had one particular relationship to being watched. need to open up more ways to create space to  have diff textures in perf tools

renate starts with listening
knows all the parts of herbody all of the  time, incredible awareness

going in to contrast or going in to go with, and all in between

the full body limbs, or the dissected details

I’ve got into watching in a certain way-seeing/looking for what is being made out there-therefore my dancing will be also about what is being made-seen by me thru this frame(the one I broke yesterday)

how can I position myself differently?
Instead of evaluating/reflecting….

okay so just let go to performing then!!!!

Renate How do I enter?
Angela Can we agree on  limiting it?
concrete ways to enter
Renate a task on the movement research ‘move round’
Arthur textures, colours, tools , honesty
Ros My 2 interests: relationships; and  how to shift my paradigm to use not performing/performing- to have range in performing textures

studio cannot be on stage
But I think shifting my paradigm will open a texture/territory between stage and studio. I think its not about putting studio on stage but about being active about manipulating your paradigm..creating the strategies to have range in performing texture.

understandING  space for not knowing the answers, for not sewing it up

need the choreog tools to do the performance research—how  to move, how to use the body instrument . Angela’s inbetweenness is more of a state than a choreographic tool

I went into Angelas solo with ‘not performing’ focus - felt like i was in one of those berlin conceptual pieces, so the way to alter this was to have a reason to move- to dance- I used my most accessible choreographic/dancing tool ie. shift my attention around my body and initiate from diff parts-reason to move

clear simple, simplify
arthur went in off this simplicity - I loved the intensity of his ‘not dancing’
then he started dancing and I wanted to go in as a log (s’thing from a totally other paradigm). Clearly this ‘not performing’ is in a relationship with performing, this ‘not dancing’ is in a dynamic with dancing

renate went in  ‘against’ arthur-not duetting  NOW we have berlin dance meets berlin conceptual-so interesting this texture-and they can do not duetting because they can duet, can do this not dancing because they can dance
is she turning away from him, great to see her performing textural range so wide, pedestrian, dance, relating to space, ball, looking directly, taking moves, transitioning easily between diff performative textures, so clear- maybe its also easier to read (and for her to do) because arthur is maintaining (quality, speed, continous)dancing, renate creating the duet, it only takes one person. It seems to be getting quite black and white, she is either dancing with, or away in pedestrian, could there be something else between these, another third quality of performingness?

Day_3:

seeking/noticing a different relationship with my practice-one of not arming myself with it, not not doing it, still practicing it, but opening a new relationship

tool as a device

watching not in frame/mode of evaluating, rather in frame/mode of participating

techniques-quantify
approaches to the body-qualify

teaching a phrase is a skeleton pathway for certain principles - forgrounded focus and its supporting focuses

evaluating is easier-its passive, to stay as participant in the watching requires more effort

beautiful continuity arthur, I am listening to his dance continuous, plus angela rhythmic sounds plus the amplifier constant and rhythmic

generating movement is not my preoccupation-my foregrounded interest here because its always there and the ways/choreographic tools I have to generate movement are plenty. So I’m not looking for new ways to generate movement, but rather new relationships with my material/with my dancing. Of course these are interrelated and inform each other. I started from trying to examine/use/research my performative modes and relationships to my material, to my dancing, by taking permission to have gradations of forground, background while performing all the time, so, always on to some degree even when watching, or writing. This then became a way to solo by shifting my relationship to my material from forgrounding it to backgrounding it. This was great, more options in performing with my choreog tools/dancing, this then became a score for dancing in duet with arthur, a way to be in relationship, so finally a way to generate movement-full circle !!  Changing my relationship to my material (performative research) became a way of generating material!
(mk)

renate so beautiful open continuousness supporting her being present - less active today-another texture in her relationship to her dancing,
arthur also continuous and now after dancing he is doing echo to renate’s movement
on side, fragements, but still continuousness - the underneath support to presence

Day_4:

Rosalind Crisp, Renate Graziadei, Arthur Stäldi and Angela Schubot have been working on how to look at and use performative and choreographic tools in a process of instant decision-making. They open their doors

maybe we can talk about what our indiv interests/concerns are during the work-showing-time, just step out when you feel.

on Friday, October 24, at 14h

post-modern approaches to the body (as opposed to ballet or modern dance techniques) put the focus on paying attention to the body itself (following/listening to the body) rather than putting the body in service of something, some predetermined outcome/form.

My danse project has been about paying attention to listening to/ following, the body in intersection with intention to create/represent, by developing ways of creating movement that put the focus on paying attention to choreographic constraints, so whilst there is a shaping going on there is not a predetermined outcome expected, but an outcome is produced (trust)
(MarkT)

My danse practice is a not trying to get anywhere/somewhere in particular, ie. not in service of an idea, an image, a form. Noticing ideas, images, forms that arise.

the pathways are not the goal

J’entre avec un cadre, un filtre avec lequel je peux percevoir tous que je suis en train de faire. Pour moi cette semaine c’est un cadre de la ‘non-performance’, ou plutot le permission d’avoir le plus grand gamme de choix de texture de relation avec ma matière. Puis de cette concentration je puisse inclure l’autre facilement

Arthur est entré avec une beau simplicité, mais pourquoi la répétition arthur? trop systematic. la question tient la question toujours, la filtre pour la question permanante  in the doing, mais en même temps il propose un question pour la pièce! Dans le contexte de cette pièce, dans ce metta niveau, il offre/propose un rupture/question- comme moi je faire en relation avec ma matière. Donc ses questions/frames sont en relation avec la pièce/les autres, plutôt qu’en relation avec son corps chorégraphique et sa matière

If everyone is really engaged with perceiving what they do through a particular frame/filtre/question then wow what is created? - a community? need to share somethings as well-such as gradations of being one, plus ‘rules’ of attention/support to others

renate so open, listening , found my filtre a useful tool to be with her, lots of unknownness, and joy to find self in same pond
she is changing texture constantly, effort of body changing, but also and perhaps primarily effort of attention changing constantly
arthur is maintaining, thats what he does best, thats what he uses to support his engagement
thats why he is easy to duet with, he stays, I change
angela seems to be searching for something, a reason to move?, a way to move?,. Maybe she could try just going for a time and not observing herself. She seems to give up her focus when someone else duets with her, maybe she could try absolutely ‘ignoring’ the other, using it as an opportunity to increase her attention on what she is doing
these less on ons of renate are very elegant

I want to try renates method of dancing with another-open wide inclusive ‘white coat’

last solo response to constant change of performative aesthetic, - still danse !- a constant change/negotiation of .., danse principles for the production of movement transferred/used for performative range!

we are only, are we limited by our choreog tools??

chicken music-gave me a constant to vary my relationship to
inhabiting the space of the relationship

by paying attention to shifting my relationship to my material and the material of the others, I had more space to notice and make choices in my reasons to move, the how.

Day_5: Showing moment

maybe we can talk about what our indiv interests/concerns are during the work-showing-time, just step out when you feel.

full body/empty body for Angela

me no performative range today, too quick in presenting, no guts of concentration focus-ok then work with that-trust
obligation to be in relationship- squeezes time to bring attention to own body up to a hight of volume

push to feel
judgement, say it then, there is no voice, where is my voice, only june carter substitute
master stood up, feigning participation… I don’t believe him, he is watching from the elevated chair of knowledge
destabilised myself maybe now too much, ie too far from the referent of not destabilising
in context of showing

audience tasks

get a grips

audience makes me feel stuff

10 urges to go, hold back dont dominate, full of sensations when there is an audience

next time you read these lines think of not thinking of not being thinking

they go into what they know, a safe haven to protect themselves from the audiences? true or false

odd timing, time is an outsider, coming from those who watch

getting warmed up in front of the audience, warming up with them, warming them up

am I changing the performative texture/relationship of the piece or am i changing my performative texture?

i cant watch, i see, i see the need for composition, decisions that are directed to the outside, but not connected with the outside

giving time to it, to watch

pressure to shape

rosalind; please smile

After the 1st ’showing’:
We have been practicing findING, not presenting. Here is an audience and I find myself attempting to show my new tools/ to present the tools rather than to be in the practice of findING tools!  Giving voice to it/talking, presented itself as a tool/way to release this unsatisfying sensation I was noticing that my new practice is not foregrounded  here, because the audience is here. They are foreground, so deal with this in the best way you can, ie.work with the new and stronger environment (the audience), don’t try and hang onto the new tools/processes you have been finding since the findING was not an artefact but a process anyway. And here we have the practice of improvisational performing!

Giving voice to the words welling up in my throat is a performative device/tool in performance improvisation I already know a little, it came through to rescue me from my dissatisfaction with myself. I got a clue when in response to the sensation feedback from myself that constantly changing my performative range was loosing its fresh impact on me, I decided to stop doing this and do the opposite, so instead went WITH renate and arthur. (how to notice when a new tool has become a useless old tool?) The sensation pressure inside me to communicate how important our discoveries had been to this audience here was growing louder, and even louder since I had just given myself permission to take the previous sensation I was noticing as my focus to work with. I finally let the thoughts out of my mouth. Then began one of those wonderful performing times … the poetic disintegration of my control. I loved every moment of it, knew I had run away from the others, but wanted it, otherwise the whole thing would have sunk, and me with it.   Oh the exquisite narcissism of the performer!

“A tool is a device used to help accomplish tasks. It serves as a means to an end”
Day_6:

perversity
seduction?
Joy

going with/going against  score for today
we are connected as a group, probably because others are invading our space today-we stick together

Nik Haffner und Antonia Bauer sind gekommen und jetz Christina Ciupke

so we gave them the score:

peter sniffed it opening/closing, towards others/away from others
Antonia with spots on the floor, Nik with spots Antonia looking for stuffs. Peter selling the air. Nik going to Antonia and now with the activity
Peter going against then with . I didn’t know he had mime skills
Going with seems to be about agreeing
Its coherent because they are playing games together, objets, dramaturgy, copying, everyday gestures simple three jumping, Antonia smelling boot then going with rhythm

we should have said no objects
Its watchable because its simple. They use the body as an object in the composition, rather than the /a site in itself, except perhaps peter … even the movements are repeated action/gesture to create a movable object

ahhhh so going with or against they all interpreted as in relationship to the others, rather
than in relationship to their own body… except perhaps a little peter

to get interested in moving objects around I had to find means - use my choreographic tools to get interested  eg going then interupting myself, then noticing that… then
Day_7:

group agreed duet score ‘one goes in , another joins after some time, find a resolution’

Arthur holds a territory, I come in in my contre façon, me working with not going with him…stay as long as I want in my performative range/contra, gradually when I was ready, not before, I gradually (over a few minutes) transitioned from contra to with, there was a clear moment when I was with him, then I stayed with his traces even after he had left and came back with new stuff, then we resolved together.

the fall rebound connection to the floor essential to keep the old motor going

Scores for duo research
1.
A. developes and maintains a territory
B. enters and works in contrast to his material, stays as long as she wants, when she wants gradually makes a transition to join with his material, taking as long as she wants to join, with a clear arrival.
A. ‘leaves and re-enters’ with contrasting material
B. maintains her traces of his first material and then quickly transitions to join his new material
A.&B. take it to a resolution together

When I was in A. role I enjoyed the delicate balance between not being responsible for what Arthur had to do (contrast me) and also being transparent for him, ie; not making it dificult, not impeding him either.

2.
Ros developes and maintains a territory
Renate enters and proposes a contrast to what she has seen of me
Both maintain their contrasting territories in the space
……

its a mess with 7 different people working in the space tog

we like it!!!
2 pieces next to each other!!!

solid room//empty space
Day_8:

duo with Angela, like the challenge of staying with /establishing a contrast to her that had enough room for me to play inside its parameters.
Did she change territory. My feeling was that her territory was her.

A. need to take time to discover a territory, to find out what it could be, not to decide too early

renate established almost immediately her terrain- continuous, circling, on spot, arms and head, not legs, and stays on standing level
arthur enters with similar tempo but lumpy forms, changing levels, thru space,
grad he starts to pick up the circling off renate, but fast and lumpy

way of watching-not analytic but from body response lets one go in and not know what the response(contrast) will be; Find out

Day_9:

still finding the score hems me in. makes me lazy, stop listening

I think we should open it up, so I propose this score :

not more than 3 people, going with or going against (body self, own material , material of other , room, floor) changing (occasionally, constantly, gradually, quickly) or staying with, gradations of being ON

dont like having the new guy (reebock..addidas?) since we spent 2 wks tog practicing and now he gets the performance cream and there is no practice in that. And he wont get off, make space for us who have a practice going. Too psychological, thats where they always go when they are new. So selfish

……….

much later on day_9…..

The first week I took total responsible for my being interested all of the time. I believe this created a fantastically rich environment to meet the others in.

The second week was very dissatisfying because I stopped this ruthless engagement with my own interests.

What happened was that we seemed to start trying to function as a group, shit how boring when one considers how different our artistic needs are! Some kind of weird responsibility for the others took over, urghhhh. When we were 4 disparate individuals, the fun was in negotiating our rencontre. Now we took a position as an homogenised group, yet without years of practice together this homogeneity of course, simply reflected the lowest common denominator.

Why did I (/we?) accept this? How did this happen?  Why didn’t I try and change it?
Why didn’t I ask myself for the conditions/context I want to pursue my artistic interests/my artistic practice?

I think what happened is that I/(we?), became passive recipients of the demands of the other group (Nik). They changed the hours, the space, the whole thing was completely different, we were asked (so seductively nicely) to fit in with this. We were trying to act like it didn’t matter (since someone said practice is about cohabitating), but I think it did matter.  I think we no longer had the space and time to rip up as we wished which was part of the context we were developing our practice in. The context was changed, we no longer had the same freedom to scream and shout in an environment of shared and growing understandings of each other. The safe environment we were building was gone. I think we stopped giving ourselves permission - a kind of craptice set in.