On the third day we started to use our gaze and touch more intensively. It’s not about: “What can I do with the objects?” but about “What is happening within this situation?”
Finding the path of the thing itself becomes a practice of doing “whatever”. But you are not intentionally doing “whatever”, you find yourself doing it. You follow the logic of the “whatever-thing” waving in the background and underneath all the time.
Doing it made me think of this early animation clip, though our practice wasn’t about repetition. Still, the feeling it creates is similar for me: Your attention, constantly shifting and trying the keep up with what’s happening, gives up after a while. Images become abstracts, actions lose or change their meaning and you realize that there is a logic inside the room which is working but still not possible, as there is much more going on than the space would allow.
Playing the experiment of being invisible, as we are doing and not being productive, we arrived in the world, totally into it. As Manuela Zechner later that evening in her book presentation of the “nanopolitics handbook” put it: We are learning by doing what we can do. Which means first: undoing what we want to produce within this situation, until the objects suddenly become something unknown.
What is the result? A catastrophe: a creation that has a different kind of logic compared to what we are used to, something that is nothing and yet absolutely here.
What to do with this? How to go on? What it the next step?
And how to apply this practice to other fields out of the dance/somatic area?
The methodology of it also consists of knowledge about what our bodies inhabit, about your roles in a context and then about dismantling this. In how fare do we need experts and profession? And what would it mean to work with people totally out of a performative field?
Again: How to apply?