Day one of week two. But last week was only a half week. This week is 6 days, last week was four. Each week separated by a one day weekend. Anyway. I've read back over it and I promise the next bit is better.
Some thoughts on a recent exercise. So there are about twenty of us. In groups of six or maybe nine we take turns creating scored body-assemblages, engaging in one or multiple movement vocabularies - or, perhaps, “ways of being”. Or, even still, ways of becoming. Maybe being suggests a certain stillness, which isn't quite right as we are always on the way to becoming something else... [Insert excellent quote here*.] Or at least if not always on the way to becoming something else, never quite in a state of stasis, or stratification. Carpet burns really don't feel like an adult problem. So I was saying about these assemblages, or group-things: while one or two groups creates the machine or cluster or amoeba or whatever you want to label it, another group or two groups observe and said machineclusteramoeba (herein let's say m-c-a, though I know this is already taken). We observe not to compose but to glean. Hey, maybe even on the outside we are still part of the machine. Space isn't the only thing that binds us all together. The m-c-a forms and deforms. Is there an aesthetic endpoint to which we strive, or a continual unfolding of possibilities? A failing and a blossoming? We work from a place of “not knowing”, but even in the unknown we can attach ourselves to gently floating recognisable objects. For lunch I had a pomegranate salad. In part, the observers in this exercise serve to emulate the “audience” we will eventually be met with. What strikes me about this observer/performer dualism we establish in these particular investigations is that, no matter what spatial perspective you take - either within or outside the m-c-a - there is no privileged position from which it can be grasped as a whole. This is not to say that it is ungraspable, but it seems to me that the continually mutating elements of the cluster draws attention to a sort of molecular level. To synchronisations and accidents and causal relationships and rearranged bodies. I should have mentioned that a key part of the score is that the performers are only allowed to have a percentage of the other performers in their field of vision at any one time. I should have mentioned a lot of things. Such rules do not apply to the observer, they can look wherever they like, from whatever distance they choose. But still, there is no godlike standpoint. There is no throne.
*i’ll just put it at the end. Becoming could be defined as “a process of entering into composition with the affects of another body” - Laura Cull, Theatres of Immanence.
Also here is a photo I took whilst walking through Redfern and writing this on Emma's iPad. Have you ever tried to type on someone else's iPad whilst walking down the street? It's traumatic. Ps you don't have to include this in the blog.
- Marcus Mckenzie, performer