[dance-tech] Re: March-April Discussion forum on dance/performance and participation

  • From: Johannes Birringer <Johannes.Birringer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 20:16:08 +0000

dear all

we have almost debated now for a month, as we approach the weekend, and I want
to thank everyone here for responding to the call for a discussion on a
thematic; please feel free to continue or change the course/direction, someone
else could take on the "moderation" for the next 4 weeks, yes?

As to Alexandre's last post -- while I do much appreciate your suggestions
regarding "expanded" and "social" choreography, your references to Bojana
Cveijc and Ana Vujanovic took me by surprise as
I had not really pondered the "relation between choreography and

Procedueralism is a very odd and unattractive term, but I gather the
speculative theory here heads towards a
political or ideological critique of the various registers, rules, the
'procedere', say, in public spheres, in an installation, or a happening, a
ritual, a mass event (spectator sport, carnival, demonstration, etc and back we
are to the unreplaceable audience), etc, and thus particular kinds of
dispositifs -- and this I think could be very helpful.

I do think, if we work choreographically, or as organizers, or designers, with
"objects" (environments, flow, gatherings, atmospheres, somatic and sensorial
experience, and yes, dance did tend towards a "bias of the body"), we are
taking into account the kind of etiquette that may/will operate according to
the logic of the art event, or performance venue, genre, social context,
cultural dimensions, rhythms, the beat, and the other "regulators" of events
and behavioral architectures -- yes, the more I think about what you mention
(via Cveijc / Vujanovic), the more intriguing it gets; what do others here
think about the "proceduralism?"

You also mention Claire Bishop, and I started to read the piece you cited, here
an excerpt:

one of the central requirements of art is that it is given to be seen, and
reflected upon, by a spectator. Participatory art in the strictest sense
forecloses the
traditional idea of spectatorship and suggests a new understanding of art
audiences, one in which everyone is a producer. At the same time, the existence
of an
audience is ineliminable, since it is impossible for everyone in the world to
participate in
every project.

For the worker/labor theorists, the idea that everyone is a producer may be
tempting; maybe that is what Tino Sehgal is playing on, with the "constructed
situations", but when I happened into one of them (at Tate Modern), I did not
understand myself as a producer at all; I barely noticed the situations
actually. But since I knew they were there somewhere, I kept looking/waiting
for them.

Vujanovic is right, however, in reminding us of the historical power of the
theatre in civil life (>>artistic performance and theatre in particular
constituted an important social practice, not because in some specific cases it
thematised current political issues, but because it performed the structural
social role of providing models of acting and behaving in public and of testing
hypothetical subjectifications and social relations>>, quoted from "Vita
performactiva, on the Stage of Neoliberal Capitalist Democratic Society")

Now how does "participatory art" today try to accommodate such a politics? I

Johannes Birringer

[Alexandre Achour schreibt]

Thank you for sharing the materials. I am not familiar with the work of
Johannes no, I am discovering through the flow of conversations on this
Yes there is not much of Judson Church in your work, I think reading you I went
somewhere else in my imagination.

I thought to share these 2 paragraphs from Public Sphere by performance from
Bojana Cveijc and Ana Vujanovic. They offer a base to discuss about
choreography and expanded choreography, maybe it helps us in our conversation.

Choreography stresses the design of procedures that regulate a
process—chemical, physical, algorithmic, political, and diplomatic, in the
examples above. This observation resonates with choreographers’ and
performance-makers’ current theoretical, self-reflective obsession with
methods, procedures, formats, and scores.

The relation between choreography and proceduralism arises from two premises.
The first states that the expanded practice of choreography entails a shift
from the bias of the body and embodiment to procedures, or how processes are
structured and operated in time. The second holds that procedures aren’t just
instruments of governance; by and large, they define actions and attitudes in
general, which allows us to treat them as a logic, a thinking model, an
ideological apparatus. Unpacking the aforementioned registers of procedurality
may help us understand what choreography means when it is used outside the
strictly artistic and aesthetic realm of dance/performance.


Le 13 avr. 2015 à 14:40, Michele Danjoux
<michele.l.danjoux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:michele.l.danjoux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> a
écrit :

Hello Alexandre,

Thank you for responding to my post.

There are some parallels I believe that can be drawn with the Judson Church era
but in a way, I believe my intention to be quite different and my aesthetic
(which can shift dependent on the theme) is entirely different. I have worked
with Johannes in DAP-Lab since 2005 on our shared explorations into movement /
choreography, wearables and interactivity. Perhaps you have already seen some
of my work if you are familiar with the work of Johannes. Here is a link to our
2014 performance entitled for the time being. It was based on the Russian
Futurist opera Victory over the Sun and is a free adaptation. You will see that
the aesthetics relate to Russian Futurism, Suprematism and Constructivism but
that the characters we create deviate somewhat from Malevich's originals.

here is the link:


The movements have all emerged in relation to the wearables, their palpable
presence and interactive and sounding potentials.
Best Regards,

Other related posts: