today we had a few visitors in the studio. some people from Fabrik Potsdam and one of my friends from Berlin came to watch an informal showing of the materials we’ve been working on since last week.

today, our 7th rehearsal, we tried for the first time some sort of structure or sequence of different materials we had been working on. it was an interesting challenge to have to think about what could make sense, because I hadn’t been focused on that kind of choices. I asked for some things I wanted to see and I also asked William how would he feel about certain juxtapositions: from both his and my perspective I’m interested in finding organic connections between the different materials, an order (or different orders) that can emerge out of the tendencies inherent in the different movement works. since they all have a common sourcing, there are different options, but still some combinations don’t make sense, or make William’s work too difficult.

what came up: my interest in showing our basic sequence, because it is the source material for all the work, and it has a clarity and simplicity (somehow) that could give the audience an access into the rest of the work. the question is, then, whether to show it at the very beginning or later on. our observers seemed to more or less agree on that, besides the discussions about the physical work itself.

for me, the most striking comments was about other layers coming out of the work beyond the postures and forms. it was interesting to hear someone talk about a certain breathing (which appears with only 2 of the postures) in terms of an emotional content, which I’m interested in triggering. the problem is that she found it irritating and somehow suspicious, maybe because she could read it as an emotional layer. she said the choice for it was not clear enough (since that breathing is a particular work that doesn’t appear all throughout the postures) and that it could feel as a manipulation, some sort of forced attempt at indicating emotion… something like that (hope everyone realizes here that this is my interpretation of the thing). William then pointed out something important, which is about being careful with connecting also these kind of elements (like the breathing) back to the same sourcing process that the postures have… something to keep in mind both when we keep rehearsing these materials and when new things come up, not to cling to the things that work (the solutions) but to keep engaging with the processes that spawn them.

people seemed to see a lot of searching in the postures work, and several times memory was mentioned. it made me wonder if we need to adress that word more or not… in a way, it’s intrinsic in the procedures of work, which is maybe the way of generating an honest approach to it. at the same time, because of its significance in relation to the subject of forced disappearance of people, the social importance of exercising of a historical memory, it made me think that maybe we need to keep the word closer to our work…

it was also interesting to look at how the pictures we are using as sources work in the space, that is, hanging on the back wall, visible though not very clear. they triggered sometimes an awareness of the different gazes in the room, which is an interesting frame, though I would hope it doesn’t bring the audience’s attention into an exclusively visual relating to the performer.

finally, everyone seemed to agree on the necessity for some contextualization. of course the discussion is, how much is enough. it was interesting to hear everyone suggest that the physical work itself is already rather universal in a way that it wouldn’t be so easily narrowed down by giving the audience some context (for instance, with a small program text). this is something I’ve been busy with for already a few days in my head. I haven’t written anything properly yet, but it was good to talk about it today. it seemed in the talk that it could be important to share why I have a personal interest in approaching this subject. I have to say I have been thinking about that in relation to the fact that, in the end, what we are busy with is my interest, rather that Will’s or Ingrid’s, and that talking about it will require then a careful approach  to that situation: what is the difference between my engagement with the subject, and the performers’? and how is that instrumentalized in the work? I’m thinking about those issues specially for the coming presentations in Amsterdam, which are cleary framed as research presentations.

so, we’ll see how it goes on. I have to admit that today’s rehearsal, though short, drained a lot of my energy. it was very intense, and it changed my attention a lot. I go to sleep now.