 |
 |
 |
 |
|
PARIP 2003 NATIONAL CONFERENCE: 11-14 September
BRIGINSHAW:
VALERIE / CLAID: EMILYN Copyright remains with the author(s). Do not quote from this webpaper without written permission from the author(s). abstract Three interrelated concerns of our research; namely, reconfigured notions of subjectivity, space and time that illustrate ambiguities, are to be presented. Using examples from video of live performances of Shiver Rococo (1999) and No Bodies Baby (2002), the film Remember to Forget (2003) and from writing, we will show how thought moves through extended research towards a multi-layered complexity of memories. We will present examples on video of performances, from the film and from writing that illustrate ways in which space and spatiality can be experienced differently and how plays with memory can reconfigure time and subjectivity. Throughout reference will be made to various post-structuralist theories that have informed the research. Valerie A. Briginshaw is Reader in Dance at University College Chichester. Her book Dance, Space and Subjectivity is published with Palgrave (2001). She has recently completed a chapter on Liz Aggiss's Die Orchidee for a forthcoming volume on Aggiss's work and is currently writing a chapter for a volume entitled Performing Nature to be published by Peter Lang in 2005. Emilyn Claid is Research Fellow in Creative and Performing Arts (AHRB) at University of Surrey.
Shiver
Rococo (1999) No
Bodies Baby (2002) Remember
to Forget (2002) 7 min. film Remember
to Forget (2003) ‘Remember to Forget’ What
we choose to take with us is wrapped on our bodies. Remember to Forget is a dance theatre production choreographed by Emilyn Claid; intimate and exquisite it is presented in the round with the audience in close proximity to the action, it features 5 outstanding performers, a newly composed score by Stuart Jones and film by Lucy Baldwyn. Remember to Forget, is a layering of memories; a tapestry of stories; a consideration of how the past travels with us and comes alive again — even if we might prefer it to remain hidden and lost. Remember to Forget is the third in trilogy of productions; the others being Shiver Rococo and No Bodies Baby, and which together comprise research for Embodying Ambiguities, a project funded by the AHRB and exploring the relations between choreographic performance and written theory through live dance-theatre performance, after-show discussions, workshops, seminars, film, CD-ROM and written articles. Further information:
Gwen Van Spijk, gwen@cueperformance.com
I’m going to talk about new knowledges and epistemologies we have discovered through our research in practice — possibly not 'new' knowledges, but different, and 'new' for some. 3 kinds of ambiguity
These ambiguities all — in-betweens/ plays between I am also playing between philosophical ideas/thoughts and these with my writing. These plays between/ambiguities I also see in relation to three different knowledges which are three interrelated concerns of our research I’m going to talk about namely: subjectivity, space and time. 1. Subjectivity In our research there is a focus on the ways in which human beings embody through their performance different kinds of ambiguities, which in turn suggest different kinds of subjectivities — no longer fixed, unified and relatively simple, instead they are complex, multiple and ambiguous. Emilyn chose 5 v.
different performers for NBB Ambiguities are revealed
through: repetition and difference (Bergson, Deleuze), habit is formed by the repetition of an effort; but what would be the use of repeating it, if the result were always to produce the same thing? The true effect of repetition is to decompose and then to recompose, and thus appeal to the intelligence of the body (Bergson, Matter & Memory: 111) another ambiguity
is evident in NBB because of the storytelling, which for me brings
to mind Italian feminist philosopher, Adriana Cavarero’s notion of
narratable selves — which are both individual
and relational selves who demonstrate an interconnectivity
with others. Cavarero claims that stories play a role in the
construction of subjectivity because: 'the question of who
one is finds its response in the unfolding of the story' (her emphasis)
(2000: 135). This kind of 'who', 'self' or subjectivity is importantly
based on Hannah Arendt's premise that: 'no human life[…I is possible
without a world which directly or indirectly testifies to the presence
of other human beings' (Arendt, 1958:22). Cavarero's 'narratable
self' is 'totally constituted by the relations of her appearance to
others in the world' (Cavarero, 2000:34). the personae of No
Bodies Baby further point up this ambiguity. The piece was devised
in rehearsal through stories/narratives — to create personae, then
encounters between the different personae created more stories —
devised through improvisation, also evident in the warm-ups before each
show: Interdependent
subjectivities egRita and Martin Show video clip of their
first encounter while reading excerpt of writing below: (START reading
video on black) ‘What is immediately apparent is their 'cat and mouse' game, their relationship is interdependent. In several other meetings throughout the piece the reciprocity of their storytelling is always apparent as is the ambiguity of their individuality and their interconnectivity. Their difference from each other is always evident but so is their attraction to or dependence on each other, although the nature of their encounters changes.’ Show video clips of other R/M encounters Each of their stories depend on the other for the telling. 2. Different experiences and understandings of space
Intercorporeality looks between individual performers and groups were played with in SR such that they structured and constructed spaces and dynamics between performers and between performers and audience, this is developed in NBB eg kites — martin and sue show 1st video clip ‘For me, this encounter vividly enacts some of Merleau-Ponty's ideas about intercorporeality. For example, in explaining the reversibility of seeing, he claims that our vision is 'formed in the heart of the visible…as though there were between it and us an intimacy as close as between the sea and the strand' (1968:130-1). In other words he is suggesting that our look is formed within what is visible, or in this instance Sue's look is formed within what she is looking at — Martin. Reinforcing the intimacy of the connection between the two, Merleau-Ponty claims that the look or gaze 'envelops', 'palpates', 'espouses' the things looked at, it 'clothes them with its own flesh' (ibid: 131 & 133). In other words the look affects what is being looked at in a strong way and I am arguing we can see this in Martin's action. It is as if there is an invisible thread or connection between the seer and what is seen. This connection is so strong that Merleau-Ponty terms it 'this strange adhesion of the seer and the visible' (ibid: 139) and likens it to touching. The force and energy which I perceive between the looks of Sue and Martin, and particularly in Sue's body as it is directed towards Martin, resonates with Merleau-Ponty's description of what happens when we look at or see something. He writes of a 'bursting forth of the mass of the body toward the things, which…makes me follow with my eyes the movements and the contours of the things themselves' (his emphasis)(ibid: 146). We can see an actual 'bursting forth of the mass' of Sue's body towards Martin. Show 2nd video clip of kites ‘There is a sense
in which once we see this encounter, in the terms of Merleau-Ponty's vivid
and resonant imagery, I think it is possible to see other encounters in
No Bodies Baby in a similar vein — those of Rita and Martin,
and between all other performers, and the encounters between audience
and performers, can all be conceived in these terms. All can be seen as
reciprocally interconnected, having an affect on each other. The intertwinings
of the various narratives in No Bodies Baby I see as fleshly
intercorporeal interconnections in Merleau-Ponty's terms. He claims: 'the
thickness of the flesh between the seer and the thing is constitutive
for the thing of its visibility as for the seer of his corporeity…it
is their means of communication' (ibid: 135). The reciprocity of
this interconnection is evident. It is from this strong sense of reversibility
that Merleau-Ponty proposes an intercorporeal self. This suggests a different
kind of subjectivity, a different kind of being or self, which is interconnected
with others and can be likened to Cavarero's narratable self.’ 3. Different ways of experiencing time repetitions
and plays of sameness/difference
in NBB exercise and play with our memories.
This layering and repetition of different stories at different times and places with the same and different performers resulted in a complex collage of non-linear narratives, like in a dream, creating a sense of non-linear time perceptions … each …extends over a certain depth of duration and…memory condenses in each an enormous multiplicity of vibrations which appear to us all at once, although they are successive (Bergson, M&M:70) Time is the Open, is what changes — is constantly changing in nature— each moment (Deleuze, N:55) in any work of art, there's always something open. And it always turns out to be time. (Deleuze, N:56) The project existing over time(3 years) with pilot project (4 years) has allowed production of 4 works SR, NBB, RtF, RtF and much writing — all of which have been played with and interwoven — and will be further played with on CDRom — this has allowed for plenty of plays with time (past, present and future mingling) and memory Many memories and traces appear, disappear and reappear in these 4 works Eg — performers
perception and
recollection always interpenetrate each other (Bergson, M&M:67) To summarise
and conclude where we are to date: becoming
kind of subjectivity (Deleuze) — which is fluid, ambiguous,
interdependent, intercorporeal, — that both embodies sameness and
difference in one, and because of its interdependency and interconnectivity,
intercorporeality and narratability enacts obligations and responsibilities
towards the other. It is evident through the complexities of the plays
between danced and written texts in the project, which focus on the movement
of thought between (Deleuze and Guattari) which present a kind
of model of ‘thinking as movement’, concerned
with reconfigured notions of space and time. When these complexities from
the 4 works and the writing in and between them are illustrated on CD
Rom we hope we might be able to suggest some of the ways in which But currently we are rehearsing the 4th piece Remember to Forget In this piece Emilyn is working with evoking narrative ambiguities between performers and between performers and spectators, narratives that appear in abstract stylised dance vocabulary which also carries shadows of past performance stories (her own, those from SR and NBB, and the performers’ memories). We are currently in the second week of rehearsal, some of the elements we have been exploring include:
There are elements of M’s writing which I think sum up for me some of the key threads in the research — particularly notions of intercorporeality, ‘two-in-oneness’ and relations with the other in a becoming kind of subjectivity that embodies ambiguity. Martin: I looked down at my hands. They were my hands, or at least I thought they were. Same skinny fingers, same scar on my left first-finger from splicing arrows when I was eleven. I smiled at the memory. They were my hands alright. I scanned them again for unrecognised moles, and, satisfied, rubbed the palm of my right over the back of my left, as if a tactile check would make me more certain. Elbows at my ribs I fanned both hands out, whirled the left around as the right fingers fluttered, pointed, before both hands pinched in together, flew apart, and I whirled the left again…or did I? Why would I do that with my hands? I felt my spine curve slightly…my spine? Fear shot into my guts like cold water. He was back. Him in my body — come to think of it, is he in my body, or on my body? Sometimes he can be quite fun though, he runs and jumps as though breathing, or gravity, or that lactic acid or whatever it’s called which builds up your muscles weren’t part of the reality I normally contend with. He just keeps going and we can really fly along. It’s all a little hazy, but I think the first time I was really aware of his presence was when I noticed that my clothes were different, stuff I would never have chosen for my self. It wasn’t through looking in a mirror, or anything like that, I was never really all that self-conscious before. It was more to do with the way that they felt, the clothes. The odd polyester slacks I was wearing (which he’d chosen!) were raising static on the hairs on my legs. The front of my thighs felt like a thunderstorm waiting to happen… Any questions?? Bibliography
|
|
|
|