A huge collection of thoughts, questions and ideas I had from a Lillypad showing featuring the process of Kris Wheeler and Vanessa DeWolf

– Keeping your solo longer than is comfortable: What if you don’t get to call your own end? What if we wait and see what happens after performance is over? This is what happens in clown: The Ringmaster not only disrupts the clown but also extends the clown past the shelf life of their idea, to get past the facade work and see what really lies beneath. It’s when you run out of thread that the real work begins.

– What if a dance piece or show were itself an experiment, a true experiment beyond the scored experimentation of improv? What if the artists entered truly uncharted territory for the first time in a piece?

– Miked improvisation, a sort of self ventriloquism. Miking a performer is nothing new. Miking an improviser isn’t even all that strange. Miking an experimental performance artist can take us somewhere strange.

– What if the miked performer played in a separate space from where their voice was projected? What if performers in the other space had their voice play only in the other space?

– Clowns have a practice exercise where they sit together quietly on a bench until impulsive, subtle activity produces action. What if dancers commenced a scene by standing together in a similar, neutral fashion until compelled to move? And then only moved when influenced by impulse?

– Is it all just living noise?

– One score: Do a limitless series of improvised hyper-pieces, each 10, 30 or 60 seconds long. You can also go by counts: 8 counts, 16 counts, 32 counts. Once the time expires, you drop what you’re doing and start anew. You can either have these happen in a vacuum, independent of one other, or have each one build off the ones previous.

– For an audience to actively witness an experiment, the objective must be clear. They can witness it otherwise, but they are only witnessing an end product. The scope of the experiment is irrelevant to their experience unless it is made clear to them.

– What are you?: Seeking, giving, desiring, bringing inward, sending outward, looking to change?

– Question: Why are you here, performing in this space? What do you want?

– Question: Does what you’re doing take courage?

– Tonya Lockyer mentioned that scientists test ideas through a methodology, with a hypothesis and a process of research. Artists frequently go about their *research* the opposite way.

– To have failure, you need stakes.

– Is beauty important?

– What is the definition of honesty/authenticity?

– Fundamental, philosophical ifferences among collaborators should be received and engaged rather than rejected.

– Free association liberates.

– Every dance is an ethnic, or cultural, dance.

– Question: How much should dramaturgy shape dance?

– Poetry is showing, letting everything be in its time and place rather than narratively attaching concrete meaning to what is shown.

– Experiment: Mix narratives with poetry.

– Continuity is something dancers play with, but something thespians demand.

– Text can dictate the meaning of a dance, but a dance cannot do vice versa.

– Think about people who only value work if it leads to a performance vs people who value any research, exploration or personal development.

– Many artists, especially in theatre, don’t want to have a serious conversation about their work, one where their approach can get called into question or doubt.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: