thanks for sharing the workshop with Jaime del Val with us here -- and of
course you are quite right, creation and teaching are deeply interconnected,
and we have artists and teachers on our forum and by no means did we neglect
the need for encouraging younger/emerging researchers/engineers/artists toward
creation and inquiry, on the contrary, I think Nilüfer and others here –– I
spoke repeatedly of my MetaSeminar working on the kimospheres, and there were
about ten to fifteen peers and students involved – mentioned that they are
teaching or using praxis methods (fieldwork, gathering) for collecting
materials for their "choreographic objects" -- and what you describe is quite
fascinating and could yield further, lively discussion (e.g. on the game/play
parameters and frameworks) and what you can do to invite "players" and to
inspire "awe"- how do you do the latter? what kind of awe (induced by
technologies or aesthetics? or its hybrid potentialties........ a current
exhibition in Kassel at the Fridericianum titles the show "Inhuman" and, i
gather, deals with the post-audience: the audience after us).......
Implicating audiences ---- yes, and how is "play" ("toys," "possibilities,"
"creating awareness" of what?) purposed to storytelling and how do the
technical feats ("3-d printing, arduinos, wii-motes, Isadora patches, Kinect
interface, and prepared media") affect the performers (do you use performers,
as for example Michèle Danjoux implied in her post on designing wearables or
sonic/tactile occurences that may involve deep or intimate listening on part of
the audience but also influence the dancer/actor/musician on the mode of
performing) and / or the audiences and co-players? is there a difference? do
you care to affect performers and performer techniques, as Michèle and I do in
the DAP-Lab, or do you focus on audiences that are students but also non
How do we invite audiences that are not students? to study, enact or carry out
instructions, follow procedures, do tasks, become happenings? lean forward
with their apps as Jeannette suggested?
are there not always rules (as there are in games, too) for improvisation, for
reaction and participation (say, in installations)?
How do we think about our rules?
Someone recently repeated an obvious truth about games (I think it was Brenda
games are also rule-based systems and to some degree the scope of what can
take place is somewhat circumscribed by the limitations of those rules>>