Sept. 25 after 7:30 Show

A: Amazing piece. It was overwhelmingly physically and emotionally. I thought it mimicked our culture and society – some people were leaders and followers. Some people rise up, and some stay low. The level of hierarchy in the piece was overwhelming. It was personal because I dealt with that cultural impact being a foreigner. We all deal with the emotional contact with people you don’t know on a daily basis. It’s powerful to be able to experience that in art, translate it, and enjoy it and question where you belong. At the end, we are the same. We are equal. There are no boundaries, we’re human and we are here doing this together and that keeps our world turning. Keeping ourselves grounded in a piece like this keeps artists driving and working.

A: I think it’s effective that participation was initiated and then we had direct contact. It made me feel more open to direct contact because it was subtle and I was decided before it became more constant.

Noemie Lafrance: We got feedback and built on it. The first week we started with everyone dancing and so then you could see who the dancers were and that didn’t help make it gradual. Also, it didn’t leave the space for audience participation such as the lying down section.

A: It made it so my first interaction was internal and allowed it to grow into external participation.

A: I also liked that you couldn’t tell who the dancers were right away. The majority people involved looked like someone normal standing next to you. It read as a concept of what we see in society. Someone initiates something and lots of people follow and the question is why? Did you follow because you thought you were supposed to, or because you were moved? Or did you not follow at all? Did you follow and start a movement of your own? I saw people began to create their own movements and those contributed to the overall piece and picture. That was powerful.

NL: That is somewhere we want to bring it. I’ve been giving the dancers the directions to follow the audience, but there is still tension on their side. They don’t feel as if they have full permission yet. We are trying to develop that vein even more. I’m interested in the audience participation in the creation of the work and how they can add to it or change it.

A: I saw lots of layering of levels, with performance, ideas in the piece, boundaries, and with drama and theater techniques. I was confused by the moment where you wanted the audience to be a part dramatic and work shopping process. This means the audience has to internalize the creative process that you go through with the dancers making the piece. That was part of the dynamic tension I felt. At first, I wasn’t so sure whether I wanted to participate. As I was doing it, I was asking myself, why am I doing this? Why is this valuable? Why do I as an audience member participate in participating? What is changing in my experience with that? I’m looking at those dynamics. You are trying to re-establish in this media and technology driven age an interactive one on one piece and creating a presence in a performance instead of being a passive audience. That’s when I can see the tension.

NL: Yesterday most comments were about “do I conform or do I not conform”. It’s less tonight. I’m interested in hearing about the value in joining or in participating. Is it a value/choice because you value that? As I said yesterday, we make a lot of choices in our lives that are not based on the value and experience. I’m pondering several questions: Will I have a better experience if I participate? Will I be able to express myself? What is the value of participating?

A: There is lots of pressure of relational aesthetics to participate as you become a part of the environment as part of the current mode we’re in right now. That comes into play with your performative work instead of something that you did in your performative work Agora. We did not have audience participate. The audience watched the participation of all these scenarios, but weren’t part of the active process. It seems like you’re dealing with the tension of the audience and not audience and trying to make the performative space a part of the environment. I applaud you for it. It’s interesting to be on the other end and become a part of that dramatic process.

A: I love the ability to not distinguish between audience and dancers. I felt the purpose was to have joy of self expression and participation in group activity. I was invited when I had direct eye contact from another participant and also when there was a silence and a look from one side to another. I felt responsive to those areas of invitation. As I moved around the space, there was more and more direction. I was excited about participating in directive activity and not having to think or choose. It became hectic and I was worried about keeping up, but I still had a good time.

NL: I saw that you lied down very early. I don’t know how may people noticed. Did you do that purposely?

A: I saw someone else do it, so I did it. That’s the participation and invitation part without really exposing a whole lot, or risking a lot.

NL: It’s a darker area and it was interesting that you very gently lied down. It’s different than stepping into the center, but it is still a statement.

A: I had questions of permission. Do I have permission to be here? When I find permission I find expression. So that question was big for me. At what point am I permitted to engage in the activity?

NL: Would it be only permission that would give you freedom of expression?

A: I thought it was clear when there was invitation or when it was permission. I was interested in finding out if there were things that we were not permitted to do. That’s my curiosity. The invitation and directions were clear and I asked myself should I follow. I wondered what happens if I don’t. It becomes stigmatized. What happens and are you okay with not confirming and that becomes a part of the larger idea? Do you want people to not participate and some to participate? Do you want everyone to participate in this thing when invited? Is it important for me to know your intentions and important for me to respect them? What’s important here? Is my experience and what I want right now and that experience could be oh shit I’m right in the middle okay? Is that okay not just for me but also for the person who was creating this? Was that interesting to you to also say and do no in addition to doing the yes?

A: It’s interesting to me to be able to see the response of being either I object or I want to do, and I’m trying to find responses of people objecting. It’s the same idea I brought up in yesterday’s work – If you do what mama says or do the opposite of what mama says, you’re still doing in relation to mama. There may be other options and to go against our two options and then there’s more. It’s interesting we and you question whether I’m giving you permission, in a way you can do whatever you want. It’s all of those kinds of things.

A: Knowing and working as a dancer it was interesting for me to see every person in this piece and space as someone who has value. Not only artistic values, but also seeing it as people who can be hurt. From a little kid running around to someone who is lying down. If we see it as a community where everyone has a role, and everyone is vulnerable. People can get hurt if they are not watching, that was a motivator that community aspect brought the piece together. I enjoyed that portion.

A: Aside from psychology, it was nice to be invited to feel the result of the nice patterning and the voices going on, the dynamics and energy build up. The patterns and it being built up. When we did the talking and people were talking, I was unclear. I just started saying anything I wanted. It wasn’t clear who we were following – it could have been more free. It was unclear where individual space would be, one could just dive in, but I don’t know how you are set up with your group to deal with that.

NL: It’s new that we gave the dancers permission to follow the audience’s lead, not their own lead necessary. If someone offers something you’re offering another form to develop. - I want that form to be acted out. So then maybe lots of people lie down, and there is a carpet of people. It requires the dancers on the spot to collectively agree. But it’s possible.

Zoe Scheiber (Dancer): It happens a few times that we picked up the audience’s movements. The Macarena affected some people. The clapping also developed. Also, someone naturally started the humming section. I had to decide if I wanted to join. Eventually I followed. It broke down naturally. So, yes it did happen a little more this show

NL: Many ideas were done some nights, but became too complicated. We change them all the time.

ZS (D): There was also a general ‘Mmmhmmm’

A: Along with psychology, there were 2 moments provided anxiety – the dancers walked over and put their hands on shoulders – that group scooted to the corner – you were chosen and you’re able to kneel, but why weren’t others and it made me nervous. I remember thinking oh man I am happy to be kneeling right now. Then Fabio had people run, no no I need more and giving directions – they’re not doing it right and made me nervous.

NL: In Home, we have moments were people are writing things together and they were told to go faster and that people got so stressed out.

A: Interesting & why we check our backs but it was wonderful that we didn’t know who was who, ata certain point I recognized some audience and their walk and attention. What would it be like if it wasn’t easy for me to identify the dancers? And we started so late, and I was standing in ront and I though whoa, what about if this is it right now? It was fantastic that it began slowly and fantastic. With little openness and more direction. I was unsure at first, but then said why not,. My inner dialogue was interesting and deciding how far I wanted to go and where I held back, it was provocative.

NL: I’m interested in that internal dialogue. It’s something important about the way we make decisions, expecially on a collective decisions. We rarely make collective decisions in this society. Often we make more individual decisions, but this wants to explore the collective or corporation if you’re following or not, if you affect the group make decisions in relationship to the group

A: What have you decided is specific enough and open enough that increases your own juggling of the frame, and shaping what you really want to do in this piece?

NL: The order is the main thing, the structure has opened, the 5 word thing we developed in rehearsal as a performative thing we’re doing it ourselves. I thought why just do it ourselves? We want people to participate so we should participate with others. I didn’t want to tell anyone anything at first, I wanted them to guess everything. It wasn’t working, people expressed the need for individual contacts o I took them and changed them and went up to people as a secret, and also leaving people out of that. People desire to do it because others are doing it, but if you’re asked then you don’t want to.

A: My girlfriend was asked to join, and no one asked me. I wanted to know why she got involved. Finally a dancer saw that I was very confused and lost. She said, I can find a dancer to come and let you in if you want. I felt very left out until then.

A: I felt like I eavesdropped and think about my sentence before asked. I appreciated to be able to prep – it didn’t feel incorrect.

A: You [Noemie] said our society has an individual, but not collective mentality, and the part I felt you’re participating no matter what – so I wasn’t worried about when, but where is this going and how I want to be in it as it goes. When I was curious was when I became more active. I got the most into it during the down and pulled together part – That’s the only time that I felt like a collective mind state. I did because this clear progression and a goal. It was funny because a rhythm was happening and moving while this rhythm that was happening. It was obvious and funny. They all pulled together to push me into a collective mindset. I laughed first, but then right away I just started screaming, That’s what moved me into this collective mind state, was the humor and how obvious it all was. I was able to see the goal. I could help get to the goal.

NL: It’s a narrative, the first week we had everyone kneel and everyone scream. It opened the whole room and everyone got to scream. We gave it up for the narrative of two groups formed out of nothing and something to scream at. It’s becoming clearer that there are two groups.

A: I was intriguing by you’re doing what you’re supposed to do, but an audience member turned the table and made you question what you’re supposed to do. It exposed a vulnerability in the performer now because they not only looking like but they are part of the audience. Will they conform or follow the parameters? They follow this gray zone, so now we almost had the upper hand and the performer was lost except for what you set out. The light bulb went off – wow this wasn’t how I felt watching it only, but at the same time you can think about how the performer felt and how uneasy it felt as a performer because it continues to change.

Dancer: Last week everyone was so eager, yesterday we expected the audience to participate. We have to go off the audience, but not expect you and move on. Strange balance between performing what we know and are going to do and reacting towards the audience, not depending on you – it’s different between every audience. How much should we take or give.

NL: I keep telling them to leave time. Time is space for the audience. If you don’t have time then you are just looking at the show and you’re not asking yourself those questions. In this show, it was a smaller crowd and made it was very delicate compared to others that had large groups. Those were harder to see and felt massive. I liked the delicate nature and quality.

Heather Hammond (dancer): It was like being anonymous. In a large city, you can get away with anonymous and doing things you may not ordinarily do. But, in a small town you are aware. That changes behavior and group dynamics.

NL: I did tell them I’d tell them how many people would come before the show. That got lost in the shows, but we adjusted.

A: I’d like to elaborate on two things that came up earlier. The first, about needing permission and the second is interaction between dancer and audiences. As an audience member I made the choice to watch the audience. Already barriers are being broken down. In a box space, that naturally happens. Sometimes I thought I don’t have to watch the action and what is happening. I can watch other people and their reactions. I felt that allowed the two groups to blend.

NL: I think it is fascinating to watch the audience.

HH (D): That’s almost a third kind of participation. We have actively doing it, disengagement and then making the choice to sit out but watch…or going against, or making your own…

A: I had a strange moment of being thrilled to be in a space as a dancer and I felt people watching me as if I were a performer. I had a strange experience and participation as an observer aware of my space and aware of people watching me. It was thrilling. Also, testing the transitions and becoming clear and getting those to work – the first walkers, what if I just stand in your way. I enjoyed the running

Jennifer Carlson (Dancer): The audience is amazingly influence. You may be questioning should I join, and we’re questioning whether or not this is going to work between us. Will this work? Are we going to get where we are going? You brought up, were there things we didn’t have permission to do, and we did it? There is no ‘do whatever you want to do’, but there were lots of things that didn’t go the way we imagined them to. The playing field gets leveled quickly.

Emma Lovewell (dancer): Tonight I ran into more people that were unwillingly doing things –I went up to this woman and said, Okay this is what we’re going to do - I said ‘Okay, we’re going to make this five word phrase, anything – the sky is really blue today or whatever and you’ll say it and walk back and forth. Then we’ll do it together. She said ‘I think silence is better’ and I said Perfect! Let’s go! But she kept changing her sentence to ‘I don’t want to participate’, ‘I’d rather be watching’, ‘I don’t want to do this’ but she’s doing it and telling me. I’m saying this over and over again with her the whole time.

NL: She found a place to express herself.

ZS (D): My person grabbed my hand, and I said oh, you’re very sly. I did it for the fun of it, but then it became this thing. It was interesting because I thought, do I want to hold his hand.

A: Did anyone say no?

NL & Dancers: Oh yes.

A: I found many things that accidently worked out. I accidently laid down wrong and put my head in a woman’s lap. It could have been really awkward but she was very nice and pushed my hair out of my face. I stood up and lied back down and she cradled my head. It’s shocking, but amazing when people react in ways you’re not expecting at all.

NL: I love how the beginning worked when people lied down and created a setting for people sitting. It made them a part of it and it clicked.

Teresa Kochis (Dancer): During the channel, there were people along the wall, 3 people in the channel, and a line of audience and dancers – then a space and another line of people. It’s the 4 lines - it wasn’t even planned! It was great to see the spatial arrangement people agreed to without even prompting.

ZS (D): I was on that side when people were walking, and I had to decide if I have to cross the room. Do I want to? Should I time it?

A: Is the documentation always a part?

NL: It’s another component, and definitely adds multiple layers.