Saturday, May 21, 2011
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
OKADA interview
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
text
Scott Heron and Thomas Hauert met in New York City in the fall of 2009 as participants in the Movement Research Festival. They had both been invited by Jennifer Monson to explore improvisation with a group of dancers and musicians. All the participants in the festival would play Chinese checkers with Steve Paxton as a basis for discussion and practice of game theory as relates to improvisation. During that week Heron and Hauert danced together a lot and saw each other's work since both were asked to bring their own work as featured artists in the festival. Although they were participating with a much larger group in the process of the festival, they were also forming a bond both personally and especially as fellow dancers.
Dancing together and watching each other dance, there was a sense of knowing each other's past and history. They could see a love for intense physicality and an innocent classical beauty in each other. Both of their bodies contained the stories of dancing alone as young boys in the living room of their respective houses on different continents, breathing in classical music, moving with abandon and knowing deeply what it is to be a dancer from a very personal and innocent place.
At the end of the festival, they exchanged well wishes and the desire to see each other again and possibly to make some work together in the future.
For the next year they visited each other in Brussels and New Orleans, dancing in the studio occasionally and kicking around the idea of making a piece. After a couple years of discussion they met in New York City during a sweaty hot August to get serious about conceptualizing a new work.
The collaboration:
The artists live and work on separate continents. They come from different training and practice their work in different contexts and structures. Their work appears on the surface to be quite different from each other’s. And yet there is a bond of affinity for each other's perspective and a desire to fully collaborate, to collectively be in charge of the process. The work ahead is to find ways to communicate.
Where we begin:
We agree to a six-month gestation period before our first meeting in the studio. We propose numerous strategies to get the ball rolling before that first meeting. Technology will facilitate communication and may or may not extend into the actual work.
We will each fill a suitcase full of significant objects to present to the other on our first meeting. Each of us will interpret the inherent narrative of the objects presented.
We will create an online diary, posting short videos of ourselves dancing, links to information of interest, photos, words and writings.
Together we will mine this collective journal and the collected objects to create a joint storyboard of our ideas and process.
We will search for the piece's intrinsic narrative by applying our distinct practices and points of view. Sometimes we will bend towards each other; other times we will layer our very distinct styles on top of each other. We both appreciate non-narative, non-linear structures. Heron expresses this often as jarringly absurdist juxtaposition and startling and comically abrupt changes. Hauert's research into movement and use of improvisation among the dancers lead to complex, unexpected solutions that defy linear or logical ways of perceiving. The mechanics are too intricate to be deciphered consciously.
This piece will not be an exercise in autobiography – “The Thomas and Scotty Show”. We want to follow the paths that lead away from our personal stories. Our journey will be moderated by an outside grid, an area of themes in which we chose to play. We intend to create tasks that remove us from our habits, choreography as something to navigate through and around, structures that force us from our well-trodden paths and comfort zones.
Where we are coming from:
We both are dancing men in our 40s. We want to confound the audience's expectation of two “older” dancers. We don't want to rely on being clumsy or cute. We don't want to use the situation of “older” men dancing to create a response. We will make a dance about something else.
We are both gay men. We are interested in our experience of growing up queer in America and growing up queer in Europe. Heron's work is often layered with all kinds of campy outrageous devices—wigs, heels, floppy dresses. These poses are part of the flow of Heron's grab-bag approach. His dances are mine fields of obstacles to navigate. He aims his full attention and intelligence at navigating often absurd situations. Hauert thinks that Heron's queerness is not just about gender or sexuality but also manifests more generally in his unconventionality and willingness to flaunt societal norms. Paradoxically sometimes more ‘common sense’ is found in non-conformity than in convention. Heron sees in Hauert's dancing a willingness to erase the boundaries of manliness by channeling the inner child. Hauert is attracted to surprise, always looking for emotional or visceral response both in the dance and from the audience. He investigates physical questions and the body's relationship to music. Ultimately he seeks ways to modify and interrupt the expected flow both for the dancer and the audience. This interrupting impulse could be an extension of having grown up gay in a culture that expects a very different life progression.
These considerations of queerness may or may not influence the content of the new work, but we want to allow these experiences of queer reality to inform the dance as a whole on both a practical and abstract level.
Practical matters.
We will meet four times over eights months for intense bursts of activity lasting two to four weeks, both in Europe and the US. The atmosphere of the places in which we work will color our explorations.
We agree to co-create this piece both fully in charge of the outcome. We may delegate areas to each other, possibly Hauert as musical director and Heron in charge of props and stage design. We might ask Matt Voorter to contribute costumes. We will make this work for smaller stages, in recognition of our desire to experiment and take chances. We choose to locate our inquiry firmly in our bodies, with an economy of theatrical means. We don't want to get over our heads in technology and processes that we cannot control ourselves.
Dancing together and watching each other dance, there was a sense of knowing each other's past and history. They could see a love for intense physicality and an innocent classical beauty in each other. Both of their bodies contained the stories of dancing alone as young boys in the living room of their respective houses on different continents, breathing in classical music, moving with abandon and knowing deeply what it is to be a dancer from a very personal and innocent place.
At the end of the festival, they exchanged well wishes and the desire to see each other again and possibly to make some work together in the future.
For the next year they visited each other in Brussels and New Orleans, dancing in the studio occasionally and kicking around the idea of making a piece. After a couple years of discussion they met in New York City during a sweaty hot August to get serious about conceptualizing a new work.
The collaboration:
The artists live and work on separate continents. They come from different training and practice their work in different contexts and structures. Their work appears on the surface to be quite different from each other’s. And yet there is a bond of affinity for each other's perspective and a desire to fully collaborate, to collectively be in charge of the process. The work ahead is to find ways to communicate.
Where we begin:
We agree to a six-month gestation period before our first meeting in the studio. We propose numerous strategies to get the ball rolling before that first meeting. Technology will facilitate communication and may or may not extend into the actual work.
We will each fill a suitcase full of significant objects to present to the other on our first meeting. Each of us will interpret the inherent narrative of the objects presented.
We will create an online diary, posting short videos of ourselves dancing, links to information of interest, photos, words and writings.
Together we will mine this collective journal and the collected objects to create a joint storyboard of our ideas and process.
We will search for the piece's intrinsic narrative by applying our distinct practices and points of view. Sometimes we will bend towards each other; other times we will layer our very distinct styles on top of each other. We both appreciate non-narative, non-linear structures. Heron expresses this often as jarringly absurdist juxtaposition and startling and comically abrupt changes. Hauert's research into movement and use of improvisation among the dancers lead to complex, unexpected solutions that defy linear or logical ways of perceiving. The mechanics are too intricate to be deciphered consciously.
This piece will not be an exercise in autobiography – “The Thomas and Scotty Show”. We want to follow the paths that lead away from our personal stories. Our journey will be moderated by an outside grid, an area of themes in which we chose to play. We intend to create tasks that remove us from our habits, choreography as something to navigate through and around, structures that force us from our well-trodden paths and comfort zones.
Where we are coming from:
We both are dancing men in our 40s. We want to confound the audience's expectation of two “older” dancers. We don't want to rely on being clumsy or cute. We don't want to use the situation of “older” men dancing to create a response. We will make a dance about something else.
We are both gay men. We are interested in our experience of growing up queer in America and growing up queer in Europe. Heron's work is often layered with all kinds of campy outrageous devices—wigs, heels, floppy dresses. These poses are part of the flow of Heron's grab-bag approach. His dances are mine fields of obstacles to navigate. He aims his full attention and intelligence at navigating often absurd situations. Hauert thinks that Heron's queerness is not just about gender or sexuality but also manifests more generally in his unconventionality and willingness to flaunt societal norms. Paradoxically sometimes more ‘common sense’ is found in non-conformity than in convention. Heron sees in Hauert's dancing a willingness to erase the boundaries of manliness by channeling the inner child. Hauert is attracted to surprise, always looking for emotional or visceral response both in the dance and from the audience. He investigates physical questions and the body's relationship to music. Ultimately he seeks ways to modify and interrupt the expected flow both for the dancer and the audience. This interrupting impulse could be an extension of having grown up gay in a culture that expects a very different life progression.
These considerations of queerness may or may not influence the content of the new work, but we want to allow these experiences of queer reality to inform the dance as a whole on both a practical and abstract level.
Practical matters.
We will meet four times over eights months for intense bursts of activity lasting two to four weeks, both in Europe and the US. The atmosphere of the places in which we work will color our explorations.
We agree to co-create this piece both fully in charge of the outcome. We may delegate areas to each other, possibly Hauert as musical director and Heron in charge of props and stage design. We might ask Matt Voorter to contribute costumes. We will make this work for smaller stages, in recognition of our desire to experiment and take chances. We choose to locate our inquiry firmly in our bodies, with an economy of theatrical means. We don't want to get over our heads in technology and processes that we cannot control ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)