Quinsy asks Flavio Quinsy answers on behalf of Sina
Sina asks Quinsy Sina answers on behalf of Flavio
Flavio asks Lilia Flavio answers on behalf of Deborah
Chloe asks Deborah Chloe answers on behalf of Lilia
Deborah asks Kasia Deborah answers on behalf of Magda
AnaPaula asks Magda Ana Paula answers on behalf of Chloe
Magda asks Ana Paula Magda answers on behalf of kasia
Lilia asks Chloe Lilia answers on behalf of Quinsy
Kasia asks Sina Kasia answers on behalf of Ana Paula
icon-chimera representation symbol (different dimensions of value attacghed to a particualr object --> exposing something about the reserch) body (traversed in different presentations, questions, embodiments, ) list (listed things, evidence ( types of revelation ) storytelling starting from document (found video, image zoom, body painting, forensic ( as an aproach? temporalities of story / temporality of evidence / ... (scale of the literary, ) storytellllling (unfolding of narrative step by step, use of suspense, excitement, mixing reality with fiction, conversational device, ) composite (trace, wound, poetics, coming together of disparate materialities, traces that are traced and something floats above it, dialogue betweeen mutlipled channels of commhnication, superimposition and juxtaposition, conflicting elements but a tenderness) veiling and valences, resonating between two different modes that are in tension, is it this or this? it must be somewhere in the middle but the middle isn't given, the veil is a protection (for us and for the performer), intimacy given with a veil, buffer zone, erotic and voyerism of it (touch group, chat room, intimacy made semi public, alter egos, displacement as a way to access intimacy
Quinsy asks Flavio, Sina answers on behalf of Flavio Hair falls shaven. Some evidence shared. A karma question. An other contemporaneity. Immense worlds open. Three to five. Numbers in sequence. Wounds and scars are traced. Do we know? May we feel? Shall we understand? We are directed to read. Can we grasp? Six attempts given. Instructions to pause. Body as territory. Fractures to fill. A referenced self. An othered story. Silence fill lines. Connections focusing pressure. Umbilical cords redrawn. To exist differently. The selves align never separated. Collectively or alone? Questions pile up. Shirt rolled up. Elevated to show. A bundling of varied desires. Shall we cut? May we break? Do we expose? Come closer than your comfort. Trust your guide. Enter at unease. Follow your doubts. Read at a determined pace. You matter here. Read the code. Enter as complicit. So I ask. When to pose? Where to color? Whom to clean?
Lilia asks Chloe, Ana Paula responds on behalf of Chloe
There is a text on the wall. Drawn on black fabric, almost visible. There is a computer and a projector projecting a film of the text on the fabrik. The computer also has a black screen. There is a woman lying on the floor back to us reading sometimes parts of the same text. This text comes in and out of the different support frames, forming and un-forming in multiple matters. From the ink on the fabrik, the projection of the computer and the voice of the woman. Not linear and not not desconstructed, it always seemed like the text was full on its segments. It was an intimate athmosphere, it felt like being back stage looking at the process of something taking place. A room. A room with words. A woman. My question would be about movement. The movement of the words between surfaces. The movement of the words and the movement of the body gaining meanings through their movement. Can this movement be the undetermined place where meaning takes place? How is the body of the performer acting within it? What type of embodiement is needed to be intentional and fractal simultaneously in this situation? Saying this I came across a quote of Athena Athanasiou definition of the performative included in Singularities by A. Lepecki : "differential and differentiating process of materialising and mattering, which remains uninsured and unanticipated, persistently and interminably susceptible to the spectral forces of eventness".
Magda asks Ana Paula, Kasia answers on behalf of Ana Paula
The amplification of the sound created an immersive environment where the sound became a defining, dominant element of it. For me that was the sound that navigated my attention, activated perception and imagination. What do you want to amplify in your practice today?
Flavio asks Lilia, Chloe answers on behalf of Lilia
My body has its world or understands its world without having to go through representations, without subordinating itself to a symbolic or objectifying function... I am not in space and time, I do not think of space and time; I am in space and time, my body applies to them and embraces them. The breadth of this apprehension measures the breadth of my existence (Merleau-Ponty, 1994, p.195).
From experience I feel that training, perhaps implicitly, is even therapeutic.
Why not think about the healing dimension of the experience?
Which agency frames the healing dimension of the experience to an aesthetic one as well?
What are the tensions between knowing and not knowing the other's body?
What are the tensions between faking or not faking the touch?
How do such tensions draw the dramaturgy-score of this action?
Sina asks Quinsy / Lilia answers
in your mode of storytelling, as an audience I was faced with an unfolding of a serious (if not mysterious) matter. your suspense allowed a continuous engagement with you, and also sustained a relation between you and us, in which one is disarmed and quieted in order to hear the full story till the end. we are at the presence of both an effective narrative and an edifying discourse ['edify' meaning: to make understand, to enlighten.] you used a style of storytelling that blurs between being an evidence and performing a testimony. an implicit [not enunciated] search for an absent and fragile witness of the (catastrophic character of) events you face or care for. this search (not research) is not really looking for a legal default, it is rather a form of demanding it. you ask rhetorically "where is the witness?". the police is called in, material evidence mobilized, historical documents shuffled up and zoomed, and so on. we are in the space of a trial, which is in this case, not to reach a definitive verdict, but as a form of historical and political pedagogy.
in your presentation, you had this box that was sent to you viciously. after which you called in the bomb squad to open it. my question is that, why you didn't open the box?! I am taking that box as a metaphor, of an unwanted potentially dangerous gift, that by opening it you put yourself at risk. this is not a sadistic jinx, but a question of research. why you don't want to explode?
Deborah asks Kasia, Magda answers
I was interested in a specific moment of your presentation, when someone asked you "what does precious mean in this context?"
You began your presentation in a gentle manner, you directed us to the table, and then you said, "Oh, you can touch them," as though you didn't realise that we would wait for you to invite us before touching the objects.
I liked that when the question was posed, you paused, looked at the questioner, thought about it, and then said you will finish the presentation and then answer the 'precious' question.
It was uncompromising, but still gentle. It gave me a sense that you have a vision for what you want, and you're more interested in preserving that than giving us what we want. I like it.
Imagine that instead of a question mark there is something like "...."
[I want more] [TBC]
Dear Sina to whom I address my question and dear Quincy who is going to reply,
“knowledge & style of knowledge".
This was something that I wrote down after your presentation Sina.
Here I write it again, with the capital letters: Knowledge & Style of Knowledge. As if I would recall the proper names of two kingdoms and to re-affirm their mightiness. Once you introduced them to us - through your speech and the stream of images, I couldn’t find enough room inside to embrace them both.
So, I focused on what I saw on the screen. The commercial video documenting reality. The airport in Singapur (I believe?), which looked just over the top: overscaled, overdone, too rich, too splendid, too redundant. Then other videos, outrageous, from the outskirt of the system - strange animals, ab-normal bodies, two rabbits playing paws - ‘crazy’ I thought. I yet, I was amazed, excited, confused and arrested.
Your parallel narrative strands and those two streams of delivering reality, touched something important for me. You captured a slit, a gap where this slight shift grows and radiates- between depth, experience, genuineness and something from the margins, not well produced, not really planned, a little bit deviated, unnoticed or just so fake that it casts the spell and convinces everybody that it is real.
My question is following. Can we say there is a style of everything? That the way it appears creates a new realm, something distinguished? And if so, are these two realms equally powerful and able to make an impact? What happens when we shut down our eyes? What kind of colours, patterns and figure are there? And it this the style or an illusion, or maybe something relatively free?