The Pitfalls of Re/Working

This is a somewhat belated response to the final workshops delivered by Toby last week. I think it is important to highlight a couple of points here now though as they are especially useful for moving forwards in our company and as a framework for the nature of work in progress showings. Firstly, the week was packed full of useful work that did build a pace and enthusiasm amongst us all. There were useful high points and Toby was absolutely inspiring. However, something happened on Friday, when we were encouraged to show work (lets note that such work is fragile, which as I understand that word means that we acknowledge its "newness" and aren't too damning of its quality).

Each of the groups, no, I shall start with my own - my group presented work that was not agitating a contemporary condition, it didn't welcome risk taking and although thought through, we presented work that really was so in development it didn't have to have the audience exposure at the time. To deconstruct it is not wholly necessary but I do resent the pattern of making work under the constraints of time and then presenting something that is not as relevant as I believe performance needs to be, in order to be rigourous, necessary and "good" (lets side step the multiple meanings of that loaded word).

This extends out to the rest of the work which consisted of interesting engaging "moments", stage pictures and useful starting points for potential work but in itself was not narrative lead - and at times relied heavily upon deeply coded semiotics on stage. The use of coca-cola, yes with its loaded meaning (lets say multinational consumerism) was a tool that drew attention to the work but it is not enough to simply put this on stage - I personally need more and don't quite buy into the theory of anything on stage works incredibly hard to making the performance in the mind of the audience.

An apple, (when placed on stage) BECOMES - "The Apple".

However, with the above model, this needs to be conscious, the makers have to then transform the apple, with its coded language and use it to agitate a narrative - in order for the work to have relevance.

Relevant work is key.

The debrief that followed, like so many consisted of us as a group generously reading meaning in to work that was not fully formed and therefore needed to be treated as "in progress" any subjective observations needed to be delivered carefully and we need to learn as a group to treat our rehearsals and rehearsal spaces as labs. Why on earth do we send our "audience" of peers out of the room, only to turn the lights off and then get them back in, does this do anything for us? I personally am more interested in the charging of the space, the construction of the work and think that the more we make our pieces exist within the serious, the conventional theatrical space the more we load these same pieces with an atmosphere of reverence, church like reception.

Let us make work that is light, open and ready to be treated as in progress. Work that if not humorous has been constructed with the audience in mind - welcoming, daring and relevant. In an interesting conversation with the newly formed company we noted how little we have smiled or laughed, even been made to feel light hearted from these small showings?! Is there a formula, a reason a definitive explanation for this?!

I will leave that musing there, (for now).