john/anna's reside/create first/last blogblog
this has been brewing for, oh, about a month now. sorry if i reach 9.7 on the blahblah richter scale!
on artpatch, lingo and chac - thank you thank you thank you exclamation points at a bus passing.
on the space - wood is grain is good is gone is gold and smelly and dank and dear and floor and floor and floor and floor and cringing and crouching and resting and warm and how long it took long and longer to warm then did and was easy and warm, of course, and the room, the light, the leaking breath of yesterday, the churchlike aftershocks of deadless goth parades, the needle core accuracy of opening up the door within, the stupidity of rigidity and sleepless wanting for more time than did we could. truth be told, we were there in the inside (never left) and lost as much as we gained. and more, at least 60 pieces of us are hanging sideways there behind the unopened air for a later child to bear but we take home more than 60 and find balance in the closing up of that downlying time, that most moist regret, that jesusmell of rising up and up and up just by stopping and being there, in that spacious space, a liquid home for this thirsty pair of sneakers.
on rehearsing - great. fabulous. amazing work. fascinating explorations. generous unfolding of interest and development. unbelievable generosity in time. delicious dancing spread out and out and out. and yet, on one level, the question rears it's ugly head - why was it so HARD? not the rehearsing really, but life's constant barrage of boundaries and last minute explosions and supercharged challenges and inner bubbles bursting and... such a cliche really, but anna and i noticed rather quickly that when you/we get/got a lugubriously rich quantity of what you desperately want (space, time, support to do the work you REALLY want to do...) the rest of your world goes into double time to make ALL the issues that you face on a daily basis exponentially more demanding. just making in to rehearse sometimes became a keystone cops routine. why just yesterday, on our final day, we got up extra early so that we could arrive at the space early and have a great last rehearsal, only to get to the car and have our battery/electrical system go on the fritz. like so many times, laughing and crying were not so strange bedfellows. i guess it just drives home that thing of how making "art" puts you smack dab in the path of the wildest, most dangerous and feral creature on the planet - your self/Self/SELF! in dealing with the marauding ferocity of our inner kittens, we came to the conclusion that all of that crap/challenge/difficulty was really just part of the gift of this residency. that we were/are, in fact, just using this time to do the real work so that we can be strong enough to continue on into the rest of our lives with as much generosity and depth of exploration as we had during these four weeks. the art is, as always for us, just an artifact of that process - the "rehearsal" process. so now that it's over, we're ready to begin.
on the work - YAY!!!!!!!!!!! wowza bingbong and yabbadabbadoo. anna and i have remarked so often how amazing it has been to make work that is so true and so honest to ourselves that it doesn't even feel like work/art - something 'other.' we've both made quite a lot of stuff over the years, but this is probably the first time either one of us has felt so utterly at home in the material that is occurring. the chew on it sessions have been a great litmus test of this for us, where we've shown the rawest product of our investigations and still felt clear and interested and engaged, without any of the nagging questions or inner criticisms that so often haunt such occasions. the material that is coming through us feels like a multi-prismatic refraction of how we exist - both daily and on the deepest level. no difference really and, ironically, that has made all the difference. today was a funfest as we found a whole new GOAT to milk. came from anna's playful dancering of warming up while drinking kombucha (of course). i said "set" (a score we decided upon weeks ago but didn't use until TODAY - hah!) and it put us on a course of wacky hoedown dancing with two southern-cracked characters apparently not named jeb and milo. ah, the joy of creation. such a delicious balance to the wanderlust of challenges i babblementioned earlier. we danced a bit of 'GOAT' (also known as "Subgroup 17A") while playing with text, space and rhythm in the last chewonit session today. t'was fun and funky and forgotten and remembered and a great last guffawing gasp to the wacky world of this time at CHAC.
on with/in - the performance element of our residency. three performances over three weeks with a different 'cast' of dancers each week open to audience members. free tea. a clean world. so many cathedral-like audience eyes - invested, sleepy, wondrous, bored, a luminous list of unknown visions within each of them simultaneously unfolding as ACTION in our shared dancing/music-ing bodies. this action - the action of performing the research, of sharing the questions in kinesthetic ACTIVITY instead of words...always such a challenge to this verbal culture. each week offered many amazing images, from (five month old) Kaveh's FIRST solo in week one (replayed in the end by the whole cast), through the silence and stillness accompanying jeff's twilit guitar meanderings at the end of week two, to the gravity defying flight on Scott's shoulders with my eyes closed in week three. layers of presence in action. action as RESEARCH shared with the community without editing. in the midst of 80+ hours of rehearsal by ourselves in such a vast rehearsal space, these performances were like a kind of art/food for anna and me, inspiring us and rejuvenating our daily investigations. a deep and heartfelt THANK YOU to the performers and adventurous audience members who shared the precious warmth of these moments with us.
on the question of improvisational performance - after week 2's with/in performance, the inimitable tim summers asked what i think is an important question (paraphrased here) - if the performance is functioning also as research, why have an audience? great question. i spoke briefly about how anna and i deeply believe in the value of shared process and open artistic communication. and, in our view, how all action (not just performance) is a type of homeostatic research - act, tip, stabilize, repeat. and how we're interested in making/sharing art that reveals thinking/feeling/moving humans functioning at the height of their potential, sharing choice sharing interest, weight, space, confusion, joy, stretching and redefining the boundaries between known and unknown, basting and warming the heart and hearth of our sometimes lonely human journey. and not just the "height" of gross human function - kick high, turnturn, etc. (hallelujah that, but it's only one layer) - but the height of the fullness of human function. we think a lot about all the layers in existence, and we're incredibly interested in showing/explicating/revealing the intrinsic VALUE of every layer...in the work, the art, in the ongoing moment of moving, seeing, listening, touching, performing, teaching, exploring, discovering, making, breaking, and on and on. the current model for mainstream performance tends to show a pretty thin crust on a much meatier bread. in my aesthetic world, (aka - physiological reality) there is a niagara falls of processing happening in every living moment. in this statement "process" functions as a code word for improvisation - something being made right now. from a neural perspective, your reading is the light energy entering your eyes transforming into electro-chemical energy that goes through layers upon layers of reciprocal processing to form, in the end, your conscious experience. TA-DA! however, it is incredibly important to note that just how consciousness occurs is still a MYSTERY to the scientific world. this strikes me as an incredibly juicy juxtaposition - process and mystery. improvisational performance uses that very juice as its fuel, and sharing THAT with an audience is about as interesting a project as i can find. well, that and sewing, but that's another story...
on lingo/inhabit - amazing. such a deep weaving of art and life. conflict and confluence abound - not quite unexpurgated, but brimming with juicy inner presence. and so deeply generous towards ALL the participants - from escorting the audience in, to the sharing of food, drink and conversation, through unbelievable physical to the unveiling of personal stories and investigations, to the yummiest communal nap i've ever taken. i feel just so grateful that such gorgeous it happened in our community. what a gift. thank you to kt, dustin, bianca, aaron, sarah, and all the artists involved for making this happen.
on residency partners mischa, violette, jessica, luke and kt - you have all become such important voices in our lives. thank you. we look forward to more and more.
ok.
that was clearly tooooo much.
and yet we're just getting started.
these words
the residency
love
john/anna
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Monday, May 14, 2007
Jobaris' Inhabitation station
Finally, after weeks of Reside/Generate residency work, I get to see the creators of the residency do their "thang." I thought i would put the blog to use and share a few thoughts about my experience while in Inhabit.
Getting right down to it, there was something genuinely irrestible about the whole evening. You are greeted, taken inside, given a few perameters, or "boundaries," and then its as if you were thrown down the rabbit hole where cocktail hour meets racing track meets support group meets kindergarten meets celebration meets love! The room had begun to spin, as the lingo performers were not only conversing with us, they were having dance conversations with us. Afterwards, I was like a wee-little fiddlehead fern; I unfurled out of my inner shell, and onto the streets, to see even just walking with night had completely changed. Re-sensitized, both environmentally and internally. The best kind of art does this; changes your perspective, changes your internal state.
At distinct points, I wasn't even sure what the boundaries were (not that it was important anyway, I felt somehow safe with these performers) as far as touching the performers,or having them touch me, or following or refusing to follow their directions.....it was joyful chaos and the structure felt simultaneously held and unravelled. We were all there together losing our safety as witnesses, and gaining momentum as participants, or at least feeling as if we could. Whatever it was that held us back, or propelled us forward, that was something for us to look at in ourselves. Inhabit gave me a place to play with my cowardice, courage, and openness,not merely as an audience member, but also as a human being, how I am inhabiting the world outside the theater. Inhabiting with what intention, avarice or delight, at what is here and who I share it with?
Getting right down to it, there was something genuinely irrestible about the whole evening. You are greeted, taken inside, given a few perameters, or "boundaries," and then its as if you were thrown down the rabbit hole where cocktail hour meets racing track meets support group meets kindergarten meets celebration meets love! The room had begun to spin, as the lingo performers were not only conversing with us, they were having dance conversations with us. Afterwards, I was like a wee-little fiddlehead fern; I unfurled out of my inner shell, and onto the streets, to see even just walking with night had completely changed. Re-sensitized, both environmentally and internally. The best kind of art does this; changes your perspective, changes your internal state.
At distinct points, I wasn't even sure what the boundaries were (not that it was important anyway, I felt somehow safe with these performers) as far as touching the performers,or having them touch me, or following or refusing to follow their directions.....it was joyful chaos and the structure felt simultaneously held and unravelled. We were all there together losing our safety as witnesses, and gaining momentum as participants, or at least feeling as if we could. Whatever it was that held us back, or propelled us forward, that was something for us to look at in ourselves. Inhabit gave me a place to play with my cowardice, courage, and openness,not merely as an audience member, but also as a human being, how I am inhabiting the world outside the theater. Inhabiting with what intention, avarice or delight, at what is here and who I share it with?
Aaron 4 weeks in
Well, one more week to go and it has been a ride. This weekend not only did we perform, I also managed to check out the second Chew On it, which was brilliant and inspiring, I really felt all the performers openning up their process and selves to us.
Observations about INHABIT week 4. Much more social. I saw lots of folks talking to others who they didn't know, and also it seemed to take longer for people to figure out and tune in to the dancing as it trickled in to the space. That is one of my favorite moments, that shift of attention as seemingly simultaneusly 12 people look up and notice a duet in the space. I wonder if we are relaxing in some subtle way which is creating a more social quality to the space.
We also put into effect a simple communication technique to try and enable us to step into the moments that we might otherwise feel constrained to enter due to the agreement of the choreography. KTs blog talks about this a lot. I felt an increased relaxation from having this language as a prearranged element of the show even though it was not used much. We call it clarifications and simple revelations. Basically such things as, "I'm going to step out for a moment", "Are you going on?", "I'm ready now", "Are we late?". Just basic statements that primarilly allow us to understand where the others are at, but also a slight insight into the inner landscape of our thoughts.
Another change we made or talked about was in the space after the peice, the shifted social. I had been feeling awkward, waiting for people to congratulate me, feeling myself in an old post performance pattern that didn't interest me much. Others shared this sense (though not Dustin so much) so we talked about being a bit more proactive, seeking out people we felt connected with, asking more questions about memories and experiences rather than judgement or analysis. I really felt the difference. Not only did I have good conversations, I had more of them, because I had a way not only in but also out of them, heading off to search for the next person I was hoping to touch base with. Some thoughts/experiences that came up. Feeling like he was on drugs about half way through due to the richness of attention. Him noticing a peice of paper being passed, the shadow it cast on the wall and the dancer behind it all as one woven tapestry. Another guest having someone step in front of him and him just taking it as a cue to move to another spot in the room, a seemingly small but actually massive shift. Repeated movement as an opportunity to try on a new lens. The loveliness of lying down, the bird calls and lullaby. The increased participation felt when we went to our respective corners and worlds. Imagining what we are feeling as we lie on the floor, noticing there is space in the light for one more next to us. Looking at the other guests during the circle. Having certain moments of intimacy that really stood out for them personally.
Funny how quickly the memories fade and blur, its back to the boy for me now.
Observations about INHABIT week 4. Much more social. I saw lots of folks talking to others who they didn't know, and also it seemed to take longer for people to figure out and tune in to the dancing as it trickled in to the space. That is one of my favorite moments, that shift of attention as seemingly simultaneusly 12 people look up and notice a duet in the space. I wonder if we are relaxing in some subtle way which is creating a more social quality to the space.
We also put into effect a simple communication technique to try and enable us to step into the moments that we might otherwise feel constrained to enter due to the agreement of the choreography. KTs blog talks about this a lot. I felt an increased relaxation from having this language as a prearranged element of the show even though it was not used much. We call it clarifications and simple revelations. Basically such things as, "I'm going to step out for a moment", "Are you going on?", "I'm ready now", "Are we late?". Just basic statements that primarilly allow us to understand where the others are at, but also a slight insight into the inner landscape of our thoughts.
Another change we made or talked about was in the space after the peice, the shifted social. I had been feeling awkward, waiting for people to congratulate me, feeling myself in an old post performance pattern that didn't interest me much. Others shared this sense (though not Dustin so much) so we talked about being a bit more proactive, seeking out people we felt connected with, asking more questions about memories and experiences rather than judgement or analysis. I really felt the difference. Not only did I have good conversations, I had more of them, because I had a way not only in but also out of them, heading off to search for the next person I was hoping to touch base with. Some thoughts/experiences that came up. Feeling like he was on drugs about half way through due to the richness of attention. Him noticing a peice of paper being passed, the shadow it cast on the wall and the dancer behind it all as one woven tapestry. Another guest having someone step in front of him and him just taking it as a cue to move to another spot in the room, a seemingly small but actually massive shift. Repeated movement as an opportunity to try on a new lens. The loveliness of lying down, the bird calls and lullaby. The increased participation felt when we went to our respective corners and worlds. Imagining what we are feeling as we lie on the floor, noticing there is space in the light for one more next to us. Looking at the other guests during the circle. Having certain moments of intimacy that really stood out for them personally.
Funny how quickly the memories fade and blur, its back to the boy for me now.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Thoughts from Vic Marks Conversation by KT 5/8/07
I had a great talk with Vic Marks on Sunday night after the show. What an inspired and inspiring artist she is. It was a privilege to perform for her and an even bigger privilege to nosh on the potential of the piece for two hours over dinner after the show.
I love Vic’s idea that choreography is simply a set of pre-arranged agreements. “When I do this, you do that. When I am here, you will be there.” Some agreements are weightier than others. If I dive in the air, my contract with the dancer catching me is wrapped up in serious physical need. These physical contracts are rarely broken in dance and even more rarely questioned. When injury is the potential end result of a missed connection, its relevance is obvious.
But there are slipperier spoken and unspoken agreements we make with one another. “You ALWAYS do that. Why not tonight? I expected it.” Things relating to timing, emotional connections, physical trajectories and the millions of unspoken moments that get imbedded in a work as it is made and performed. Choreography IS a set of pre-arranged agreements. Yet many of those agreements are subconscious and although they wind up BEING the choreography, they are often not the original intent.
At the end of INHABIT, we each give an individual guest a solo. These solos are the hardest part of the work for me. I usually sit next to someone with my eyes averted, and tell them how hard it is for me to deal with proximity, both with strangers and at times with someone close. Then I muse a bit – “why is this hard? What is it that makes being close to someone in physical or emotional space so vulnerable?” I was remarking on my feelings of failure surrounding this solo to Vic and she asked me to imagine the solo with me speaking my inner monologue into a mic. Still keep the honesty and intimacy of giving it to one person, but simultaneously open it up so all could be privy to the private moment. I think I want to try this.
This conversation led us down an interesting path. Thoughts came up around ways to let guests experience our inner dialogues in general and throughout the evening. Instead of trying to homogenize our pre-arranged agreements with the choreography as a quartet – which is my normal entry point into dance making – Vic made the suggestion to go further into our differences.
This idea would have to be done with care and communication, but I like it. It makes me think about the dialogues we have had in rehearsals over the past year. It has been a deeply collaborative process. As a result, the four of us have brought our agendas and passions to the table more strongly than before. And we don’t always agree. When we don’t agree, the general conversation that ensues is to search for compromise –to find a balance we can all live with. But because our positions are often quite impassioned, compromise usually winds up feeling like a loss to one or more of us.
In general, I think my rules around how to engage with choreography are very traditional and center around timing. Be where you said you were going to be when you said you were going to be there. So, if Dustin decides not to lie down in the square of light before Aaron’s solo, but sit in a different place in the room instead, I am thrown. If Aaron is having a space hold solo with a guest at the end that takes a longer time than “normal”, I am thrown. And so on.
Conversely, my guess is Aaron’s rules of engagement, for example, would be defined differently, if asked. I imagine the strengths and meaning in this work for him center around interactions he has with guests. Therefore, to leave a solo his is giving to an individual when it is going well doesn’t make sense to him. After all, isn’t that what the work is about? And I am curious about Dustin and Bianca. What are their unspoken agreements with the work? Actually, I am curious about us ALL defining and articulating what are agreements to the choreography are and noting where they line up and where they differ.
Then, Vic took it further. Like the KT/mic space hold solo idea, her suggestion was to use the choreography of INHABIT as a boat and see how far the ballast could tip before all hell broke loose – and do it with transparency.
This would mean going deeper into the moment that comes up where I am expecting the choreography to continue in time and another performer decides what they are engaged in should take precedence. To figure out a way to let each of us engage as we see fit and simultaneously let our inner thought processes be heard.
What would it be like if I stated my confusion and desire out loud – “Dustin, I need you to be here in this square right now” and for Dustin to respond “I know and I am going to stay here a bit longer”? It is dicey to imagine this happening in full scale. But it is also exciting. Exciting to imagine the choreography as a strong enough container to let the rules of engagement fray and still maintain the integrity of the work. Then, when there are only three dancers “on the mark” in a moment where there are “supposed” to be four, because one has decided to adhere to another, decidedly more pressing relationship, we could all handle it – perhaps made better by it.
Vic also had a thought about the toasts. I was telling her about Rob Balis and how he was imagining the piece encountering turbulence with a San Francisco audience the way it is currently structured. “It’s a proscenium work in the round, KT, and you’re also telling people it’s ‘interactive’ in some way. Seattle audiences are polite, but in San Francisco, if you say ‘interactive’, they will INTERACT with you guaranteed, and right now it doesn’t seem like the piece can handle that.” Hmm – I wonder about that – how much involvement to we want? Physically, verbally, spatially? And what is the point of the work. IS it a proscenium work in the round? Is it a container for more open communication?
Vic suggested using the first toast one night in Seattle to set the stage. Instead of toasting to “our habits”, toast to a night of exploration. Pointedly make an open invitation to the guests to “get as involved as they dare”. Make it known we are asking for a full throttle night of rule breaking and see how it plays out. Again, a thrilling, yet terrifying idea. I would like to try it – this weekend perhaps?
What is INHABIT about? What are the tenants of the choreography? What are the questions we are asking? About social interaction – about how and why we gather – about what we want out of our crossings with strangers and friends in our days. Is the face off circle about watching our duets in the middle or is it really about communing with the rest of the guests standing dutifully in the round. Noticing if they are tired or bored or engaged and having a moment where you make eye contact with someone and choose to sit down together? A private moment of understanding with a stranger. How delicious.
I like the idea of choreography being a set of pre-arranged agreements and I like using that idea to find more meaning, understanding chaos and clarity in our current artistic and social experiment.
Thank you, Vic.
I love Vic’s idea that choreography is simply a set of pre-arranged agreements. “When I do this, you do that. When I am here, you will be there.” Some agreements are weightier than others. If I dive in the air, my contract with the dancer catching me is wrapped up in serious physical need. These physical contracts are rarely broken in dance and even more rarely questioned. When injury is the potential end result of a missed connection, its relevance is obvious.
But there are slipperier spoken and unspoken agreements we make with one another. “You ALWAYS do that. Why not tonight? I expected it.” Things relating to timing, emotional connections, physical trajectories and the millions of unspoken moments that get imbedded in a work as it is made and performed. Choreography IS a set of pre-arranged agreements. Yet many of those agreements are subconscious and although they wind up BEING the choreography, they are often not the original intent.
At the end of INHABIT, we each give an individual guest a solo. These solos are the hardest part of the work for me. I usually sit next to someone with my eyes averted, and tell them how hard it is for me to deal with proximity, both with strangers and at times with someone close. Then I muse a bit – “why is this hard? What is it that makes being close to someone in physical or emotional space so vulnerable?” I was remarking on my feelings of failure surrounding this solo to Vic and she asked me to imagine the solo with me speaking my inner monologue into a mic. Still keep the honesty and intimacy of giving it to one person, but simultaneously open it up so all could be privy to the private moment. I think I want to try this.
This conversation led us down an interesting path. Thoughts came up around ways to let guests experience our inner dialogues in general and throughout the evening. Instead of trying to homogenize our pre-arranged agreements with the choreography as a quartet – which is my normal entry point into dance making – Vic made the suggestion to go further into our differences.
This idea would have to be done with care and communication, but I like it. It makes me think about the dialogues we have had in rehearsals over the past year. It has been a deeply collaborative process. As a result, the four of us have brought our agendas and passions to the table more strongly than before. And we don’t always agree. When we don’t agree, the general conversation that ensues is to search for compromise –to find a balance we can all live with. But because our positions are often quite impassioned, compromise usually winds up feeling like a loss to one or more of us.
In general, I think my rules around how to engage with choreography are very traditional and center around timing. Be where you said you were going to be when you said you were going to be there. So, if Dustin decides not to lie down in the square of light before Aaron’s solo, but sit in a different place in the room instead, I am thrown. If Aaron is having a space hold solo with a guest at the end that takes a longer time than “normal”, I am thrown. And so on.
Conversely, my guess is Aaron’s rules of engagement, for example, would be defined differently, if asked. I imagine the strengths and meaning in this work for him center around interactions he has with guests. Therefore, to leave a solo his is giving to an individual when it is going well doesn’t make sense to him. After all, isn’t that what the work is about? And I am curious about Dustin and Bianca. What are their unspoken agreements with the work? Actually, I am curious about us ALL defining and articulating what are agreements to the choreography are and noting where they line up and where they differ.
Then, Vic took it further. Like the KT/mic space hold solo idea, her suggestion was to use the choreography of INHABIT as a boat and see how far the ballast could tip before all hell broke loose – and do it with transparency.
This would mean going deeper into the moment that comes up where I am expecting the choreography to continue in time and another performer decides what they are engaged in should take precedence. To figure out a way to let each of us engage as we see fit and simultaneously let our inner thought processes be heard.
What would it be like if I stated my confusion and desire out loud – “Dustin, I need you to be here in this square right now” and for Dustin to respond “I know and I am going to stay here a bit longer”? It is dicey to imagine this happening in full scale. But it is also exciting. Exciting to imagine the choreography as a strong enough container to let the rules of engagement fray and still maintain the integrity of the work. Then, when there are only three dancers “on the mark” in a moment where there are “supposed” to be four, because one has decided to adhere to another, decidedly more pressing relationship, we could all handle it – perhaps made better by it.
Vic also had a thought about the toasts. I was telling her about Rob Balis and how he was imagining the piece encountering turbulence with a San Francisco audience the way it is currently structured. “It’s a proscenium work in the round, KT, and you’re also telling people it’s ‘interactive’ in some way. Seattle audiences are polite, but in San Francisco, if you say ‘interactive’, they will INTERACT with you guaranteed, and right now it doesn’t seem like the piece can handle that.” Hmm – I wonder about that – how much involvement to we want? Physically, verbally, spatially? And what is the point of the work. IS it a proscenium work in the round? Is it a container for more open communication?
Vic suggested using the first toast one night in Seattle to set the stage. Instead of toasting to “our habits”, toast to a night of exploration. Pointedly make an open invitation to the guests to “get as involved as they dare”. Make it known we are asking for a full throttle night of rule breaking and see how it plays out. Again, a thrilling, yet terrifying idea. I would like to try it – this weekend perhaps?
What is INHABIT about? What are the tenants of the choreography? What are the questions we are asking? About social interaction – about how and why we gather – about what we want out of our crossings with strangers and friends in our days. Is the face off circle about watching our duets in the middle or is it really about communing with the rest of the guests standing dutifully in the round. Noticing if they are tired or bored or engaged and having a moment where you make eye contact with someone and choose to sit down together? A private moment of understanding with a stranger. How delicious.
I like the idea of choreography being a set of pre-arranged agreements and I like using that idea to find more meaning, understanding chaos and clarity in our current artistic and social experiment.
Thank you, Vic.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
John and Anna improv with/in session #2
To everyone including but not limited to John, Anna, Amelia, Sheri, Mark, Jason ...
I was absolutely charmed by your use of energy, mind, spirit and listening last night.
Your improvisation was revealing, hilarious, surprising, inspiring, odd, illuminating......
What can I say but really thank you. I aspire to hold the space the way you did and to be aware with/in each moment. Fo sho!
The source of action and stillness was interpreted so honestly, both collectively and individually.
I thank you for re-introducing me to the space.
It will not be the same when i re-enter today.
PS. If you are reading this, then go to the next improvisation Wednesday May 9th.
At the CHAC. New cast and some of the old. You'll be in great company.
I was absolutely charmed by your use of energy, mind, spirit and listening last night.
Your improvisation was revealing, hilarious, surprising, inspiring, odd, illuminating......
What can I say but really thank you. I aspire to hold the space the way you did and to be aware with/in each moment. Fo sho!
The source of action and stillness was interpreted so honestly, both collectively and individually.
I thank you for re-introducing me to the space.
It will not be the same when i re-enter today.
PS. If you are reading this, then go to the next improvisation Wednesday May 9th.
At the CHAC. New cast and some of the old. You'll be in great company.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Jessica waxing stock phrase residence metaphors, late in the monday night
This is a new sensation: To be bored of oneself and still want to get to the other side of that. Without overexaggerating, solo work is painful. Still, today, in a day of rest, I found myself aching to get back in the space. The residency or archealogical dig has me mouth wetted for more bones to spit on, dust off, and more ruins to claim. Ruins of the internal, extrememly heavy mummified beasts that guard the psyche, ruins of the psyche itself...
Partly serious/partly in jest, what could be more profound than running in a circle for hours to determine the necessity of simplicity in "dance?" Don't answer that (standing). Now if only i could take those hours of running and condense the experience into just three jogs in a circle, and give it a similar profundity, then hopefully a witness will see the work done for that very informed moment. Just one witness is enough. We are so accustomed to taking things for face value.
Beyond expectations of performer and audience, I'm happily employing the importance of teeth, reproductive organs, horses, children, native americans, Karen Finley, and a certain Monarch to assist me. My very own research team to dig with (In truth, this is not really a solo work). The images have made themselves known, the songs to accompany my reproductive organs will rise in this night, and my heart's hands are ready to weave. and rest. and repeat in infinite.
(photo: Luke Allen)
Partly serious/partly in jest, what could be more profound than running in a circle for hours to determine the necessity of simplicity in "dance?" Don't answer that (standing). Now if only i could take those hours of running and condense the experience into just three jogs in a circle, and give it a similar profundity, then hopefully a witness will see the work done for that very informed moment. Just one witness is enough. We are so accustomed to taking things for face value.
Beyond expectations of performer and audience, I'm happily employing the importance of teeth, reproductive organs, horses, children, native americans, Karen Finley, and a certain Monarch to assist me. My very own research team to dig with (In truth, this is not really a solo work). The images have made themselves known, the songs to accompany my reproductive organs will rise in this night, and my heart's hands are ready to weave. and rest. and repeat in infinite.
(photo: Luke Allen)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
