|||

some more on working with Bagryana Popov

I’ve just finished working in the studio with Bagryana Popov. She and I have been working together on a solo work since October 2007 when we started work in Bitola (Macedonia). Since then we’ve spent time in the studio in Sofia (Bulgaria), and Melbourne (three times?). We’ve also found that two other projects we’d begun started to merge with this one, and it has been interesting to sense how different ideas took hold’ and then faded into the background a bit. It’s also one of those rare projects in which we have time and space to test ideas and to allow them to mature ??? we ensured the work is not funding dependent, and simply found ways to make it happen.

Although Bagryana started the work with quite a strong idea — “the body at the receiving end of power” — she’s allowed the timing and development of the project to develop at its own pace, and we’ve both found the model of short rehearsal periods interspersed with long research/reflective periods to be highly conducive to our working relationship, and the quality of the work itself.

One of the key issues about the performance of the work has been about how to negotiate the balance between choreographed and improvised actions and scenes. We both liked the liveness’ of the rehearsal studio, in which new physical possibilities were constantly being afforded (or manifest) by my dropping in to the more psychologically initiated rehearsed materials. Even though we’ve had two weeks in the studio in this last rehearsal iteration, it wasn’t until the third week that we started to think of the scenes as a collection of guides’ which I could choose to perform at any time (including repetitions). At the same time, I am given the freedom to keep exploring or seeking alternative routes, combinations, sensations and attention during the performance.

This last component — a way of framing and performing these deeply embodied materials (‘embodied’ simply because of the amount of time we have spent working in the studio, and our beginning to understand the nuances of the actions) — fell into place quite rapidly. That is, the work became complete’ even though we weren’t expecting this. It was as if we’d kept questioning how the experiences of freshness and attention in the studio work might remain present in the performances, and then once this was solved’ the work was ready.

I’m reminded here of writing (long) literature reviews when the organisation and rhythm of the writing starts to make sense’ because of how long you’ve spent working through the materials. It is not (I think) a process of forcing an outcome, but simply staying with the ideas long enough for your understanding to emerge; that making each decision is, in effect, made very simple because of your strengthened ability to assess each decision’s worth.

I’ll upload some video once I get some access to a video camera.

Up next Bagryana adapting I started back in the studio this week on two distinct projects. The first is a solo work directed by Bagryana Popov and the second is a project on learning The best thing for being sad is to learn something. That is the only thing that never fails. You may grow old and trembling in your anatomies. You
Latest posts secret history of our enemies popcorn popping long form documents installation view three applications for research asking questions research systems there is no cloud dial-a-spectacle nick cave and mercy failed institute of failure slow motion postcards from before advantage of writing the long view naps tendency to want to do something changing minds donato sansone concatenation comfort in confront our errors empty for nothing is fixed eighteen pandemic intimacy one fine day too old to dream sniff the screen to question your knowledge in my body ige