enecs eht no kcab
today we worked a half day at st peters, and spent the afternoon conversing by the canal. we have an impulsive working methodology as this r&d is for ourselves. usually the day is framed with some formal practice (beginning and end) but slips in and out of dancing, theorising and divergent activities. at the heart of it all we attempt to prove our practice like a sourdough bread.
If in Zen something is boring, do it for two minutes. If it is still boring, do it for four minutes. If it is still boring, do it for eight minutes, sixteen, thirty-two. Eventually you’ll find it’s not boring at all but very interesting. [john cage]we also exhaust a «broken» proposition to it’s pre-agreed end, after all you have to really make sure it doesn’t work. but more importantly only one of us may be struggling. anyhow, if you struggle in performance it is useful to have already experienced the situation. we found ourselves in «contact» today, having not excluded the possibility form our initial proposition. we observed that particular subsets of contact possibilities seemed to fit and indicate spatial structures. as we initiated our day with the restricted space, we played exclusively with contact in a later session. what we noticed was that proximity is beneficial to the spatial (and content) composition but hinders the emergence of divergent paths. for example staying in a box (or exteriorly proximal) is counter productive, even when allowing rule breaking. tomorrow we will devise a more flexible restriction matrix. the intention is to find spatial volumes that implicitly assist our compositional choices. we are mining some old choreographic blog comments powered by Disqus
