Hi, I’m also finding this really interesting right now. I guess what stands out for me is the line, "– We are not developing a performance – our performances are part of a research process.”
I really like this idea that, as performers, you’re exploring what the text is and means. If this is the case? But, instead of working through towards a moment when the text is fully understood and can be presented, there is always a becoming? All the best, Mark > On 9 Mar 2016, at 18:31, ruth catlow <ruth.cat...@furtherfield.org> wrote: > > Thank you for sharing this Annie, > I have a question (I enjoyed reading the last Bakhtin quote about voice). > Do you think that voice is also conveyed in the same way in the written word? > > I ask, because I recently participated in a residency in which a writer was > partnered with a voice coach. I was lucky enough to have a session with the > voice coach and feel that the extended range of voices that I accessed > through this session have added range to my thought and writing. > > Ruth > > On 03/03/16 10:48, Annie Abrahams wrote: >> >> This is a copy of my latest blogpost. I want to share it here too, because >> it might be of interest to some of you who are not connected to me >> otherwise. >> (Next performance will be March 19th 20h in Im_Flieger in Vienna) >> Take care >> Annie >> We started out with three very different meetings (See turbulence.org >> <http://turbulence.org/commissions/besides/>) and then decided to continue >> to explore one of them further; we restricted ourselves to a theme and made >> the project on “meeting online =” also a research on the relation between >> objects/things, text and the voice. >> We began experiencing and experimenting the performances as an other method >> of thinking together about both object agency and online collaboration. >> >> – We stage a collaborative performance project online. >> – Meeting online = >> – We are meeting online, trying to get more grip on what is actually >> happening in online webcam communication. >> – This is a research project where we use performance as a tool. >> – Using performance as a tool, is a way to create a common responsibility. >> – We use an interface which doesn’t permit that either of us two can become >> dominant, an interface that has flaws, glitches, bugs, an interface that >> cannot be domesticated. >> – We are not developing a performance – our performances are part of a >> research process. >> My performances are a research tool, not an object ansich, not something to >> show off. (See allergic-to-utopias >> <http://www.digicult.it/digimag/issue-058/annie-abrahams-allergic-to-utopias/>) >> >> But the audience? Why should they be interested, What is it for them? They >> can think with us! >> >> So far : >> besides, the person I am becoming 1/06 2015 >> There are : >> – the interface : two webcam images side by side, one managed by Martina, >> one by Annie. Both images have exactly the same size and presence there is >> no power relation. >> – a text : a remix, done together, of phrases read and heard, collected over >> one month by Annie and Martina individually. We determined before who would >> read what part of the text. >> – objects : things : we will not use personal objects, things with a very >> specific personal history and they should not be too beautiful, as ordinary, >> casual, daily as possible. >> What did we mean by that, why? We didn’t want things to be symbols. We >> almost entirely excluded also natural objects as flowers, leafs etc., >> because, they are already alive on their own and so are too symbolically >> loaded too. >> The objects were placed in front of the webcam at before undetermined >> intervals. >> – the hands : hands who lay down the objects carefully. >> – two voices : as neutral as possible. Because the interface merges the >> sound of both webcams in one stream, there is no way for the audience to >> distinguish if a voice comes from the one or from the other webcam. They can >> only hear that there are two different voices, there is a dialogue. >> >> What dialogue? Who is talking to who, who is addressed? Who receives? The >> objects replace the faces we are used to see in webcam images. We see them >> in close up – they become actors – we can believe them to be intimate, to >> have a relation. They too have a / are in dialogue. They too are elements >> being in the event. (1) >> >> This is where the two subjects meet. This is where we meet. >> >> In besides, the city is not a tree, 22/07 2015 we used a different, more >> narrative, mix of the same text collection. We decided to abandon the >> neutral voice and let the exchange be more natural allowing for affect to >> transpire (2). We speeded the rhythm and alternations. >> Hands should be just careful installers, shouldn’t manipulate, nor stay too >> long in the frame. >> For besides, smaller than a single pixel 28/11 2015 we made a new text >> collection. No natural objects at all were allowed anymore. Would the >> perceived agency of the thing change if we would enter and exit them at >> specific moments in the text? If we stopped talking while changing the >> objects? Would the objects become more present, have more influence if we >> allowed for moments without text? >> We stayed with speaking the text in an ordinary manner. Would the dialogue >> be more fluent if we decided to use the texts fragments randomly? Would that >> give more dialogical power to our voices and rhythm? Would that help us to >> use text and objects equally in our perform thinking experience? >> >> We perform experimenting thinking together using words and things and the >> affects transferred via our voices. We experiment performing thinking >> together using words and things and the affects transferred via our voices. >> We think performing experiments together, We experiment thinking performance >> together, We experiment performing thought … >> >> (1) “According to Bakhtin, in order to ‘overcome’ the separation and >> opposition between art and life, between art and culture, the elaboration of >> a ‘first philosophy’ is required: The philosophy of event-being. Art and >> life cannot and must not tend towards identification, as was the case with >> the Situationists, for example. But, in order that the enriching, excessive >> and productive difference between art and life be able to express itself, it >> is necessary to possess a theory which, whilst maintaining the irreducible >> differences between these two dimensions, articulates them in the >> achievement of the event.” Maurizio Lazzarato in Dialogism and Polyphony. >> geocities.ws/immateriallabour/lazzarato-dialogism-and-polyphony.html >> <http://www.geocities.ws/immateriallabour/lazzarato-dialogism-and-polyphony.html> >> (2) “According to Bakhtin, the voice or intonation, not yet captured in the >> ‘phonetic abstraction’ of language, is always produced ‘on the threshold of >> the verbal and the non-verbal, the said and the non-said’ and it is through >> it that it addresses itself to the other. This address is affective and >> ethico-political rather than linguistic. It ‘appropriates, travels, avails >> itself of linguistic and semiotic elements, confirms and drifts away, >> critiques and legitimates meanings and established intonations’. ……………It is >> only when the voice penetrates and appropriates words and statements that >> the latter loose their linguistic potentiality and turn into actualised >> expression. It is only at that moment that words and statements >> are encumbered with the a unique and non reproducible role in verbal >> exchange.” Maurizio Lazzarato generation-online.org/p/fp_lazzarato6.htm >> <http://www.generation-online.org/p/fp_lazzarato6.htm> >> Notes on performance series besides, <http://bram.org/besides/> with Martina >> Ruhsam, 03 2016, Annie Abrahams >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org <mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> <http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour> > > -- > Co-founder Co-director > Furtherfield > > www.furtherfield.org <http://www.furtherfield.org/> > > +44 (0) 77370 02879 > Meeting calendar - http://bit.ly/1NgeLce <http://bit.ly/1NgeLce> > Bitcoin Address 197BBaXa6M9PtHhhNTQkuHh1pVJA8RrJ2i > > Furtherfield is the UK's leading organisation for art shows, labs, & debates > around critical questions in art and technology, since 1997 > > Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee > registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205. > Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, Tally > Ho Corner, London N12 0EH. > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
