an·a·logue (n.)

The end of a fascinating week with Liam and Hannah from Analogue and a day that has certainly been provocative. I will try and split this into two sections, firstly the afternoon work with Liam and Hannah and then this morning's Cultural Landscapes.

The focus of our practitioner study this week has been very much grounded in exploring how it is possible to make work, the processes and outcomes of working collectively from starting points. Without exposing these starting points (which are being developed for performance by the company) I would like to move through some observations. Firstly, there was a little disquiet amongst the group when it came to working on the discovery of ideas or testing (rather like guinea pigs) the stimuli Liam and Hannah presented. How unfounded those concerns seem to have been and how ridiculous considering the genuine engagement both Liam and Hannah expressed today.

It was great to be part of a large performance, constituting smaller units or "stations" of performance groups and the rhythms that developed "backstage" were almost an event themselves. The work itself is hard to summarise as only 6 audience members were invited and able to witness it but the process has been one that has given birth to what seemed powerfully moving experience.

I noted the following words from our discussion / debrief today:

PRECISION
BOUNDARIES
RULES (OF ENGAGEMENT)
NARRATIVE
FATE
DISORIENTATION
ENERGY
INERTIA
NO INTERPRETATION IS WRONG
FIRST ENCOUNTER
AM I STANDING IN THE RIGHT PLACE?
CAR SICK
CLAUSTROPHOBIA
EDIT OWN PERFORMANCE
ROLE
IMAGE
CONTRIBUTING
EXPERIENCE
MIRROR
SHADOW
YOUR OWN WORLD
NERVOUS

Perhaps a list such as this, drawn from a discussion of a performance event I could not attend is useful / useless? I do not have the answer, however from working on the prologue and to a lesser extent the second section and hearing the other groups discuss their own processes it does seem that a strong and moving experience was happened upon.

What was rewarding was the supportive atmosphere, the experimental approach and room to fail that the works in progress have given me (and perhaps us all). Being here at Central is largely about testing and investigating, failing more than I succeed perhaps but always using this to reflect on practice...

Which brings me on to the morning's session: Cultural Landscapes, which can be summarised with the following email from Elyssa:
_________________________

Dear All,

Just a reminder about tomorrow’s session:

'the (un)easy co-existence of creative industry and critical dissent’

John Jordan from the Laboratory of Insurrectionary Imagination, a network of artists and activists, www.labofii.net (in particular have a look at their Experiment 9 and go to their news blog)

Mark Godber an Artists Producer from Arts Admin, an organization based in London that produces, supports and promotes arts projects (www.artsadmin.co.uk)

Salette Gressette, an arts officer at the Arts Council England (www. www.artscouncil.org.uk).

We will begin the session by looking at a project called 2degrees: Art, Activism and the Global Climate Emergency, hosted by Arts Adminin June 2009.

_________________________

What was facilitated was a fascinating discussion which has left a lasting impact, perhaps because I was exposed to passionate political positions and ideologies that perhaps as of now I do not share nor understand. There were some useful exercises and "on our feet" moments which did spark brilliant and rich debate and I think allowed the group to communicate personal and strongly held individual opinions. However, there was a part of me questioning today the why and what of this course, which is a resistance I need to understand in order to move past.

The Cultural Landscape is something that needs to be chartered (and at this week's Director's event at the Royal Court, a specific term used by Nicholas Wright - he was mentioning how the cultural landscape has moved, shifted and evolved into a fiercely competitive battlefield today) but I need to see a way in to these discussions on a Friday morning. There is an element of great use and exposure to such fascinating individuals but I am losing the point sometimes with regards our work and understanding where we should be locating our work. It is the least successful course as far as uniting the group and I feel as if we are quite a quiet bunch in contrast to other units this term, does this matter? Is that a fair judgement?

Elyssa certainly facilitates provocative discussion but I worry that we are partial to listening rather than engaging and when there is an engagement, answers aren't always freely given...I would like to start bringing the ideas / the "vision" of the individuals in the group to the forefront of these sessions so that we can start to understand the landscape we are moving in to and how to move into such a landscape successfully.

Can there be a more practical engagement with the sessions, would that be useful? Can we find a way to enliven the debate and balance the sessions so that we are active participants throughout the whole 3 hours?!

I suppose that I would benefit personally from practical advice, the knowledge of practitioners who can use their own work as examples to a wider discussion of cultural production and the challenges. Today seemed to prove that it was possible to be politicised and still funded by the Arts Council which was a great insight but are these partnerships more than professional? I had the feeling that the three panelists today had strong interpersonal relationships which is something to consider here on this course as a useful tool for bringing visions closer.

Each week is vastly different and next week promises to break the mould with some more focussed work with Elyssa so I will reserve judgement until then on the direction of the course as we move closer to our assessment tasks.