here/there/then/now

1. here/there/then/now site, collaboration, interdisciplinary performance C h e r y l S t o c k with thanks to V a n e s s a M a f e S t e p h e n S t a n f I e l d I a n H u t s o nQ U T c r e a t i v e i n d u s t r i e s b r i s b a n e a u s t r a l i a

2. stairs to nowhere here deep crevices with no purpose there pillars in dialogue with floating objects then the inviting void of the black box now

3. where textured memories embedded in stone and metal merge with human presences

4. BACKGROUND bringing together of 10 independent artists in dance, music, theatre, design, visual, media arts responding to and evoking four sites inside the Brisbane Powerhouse development of concept 2001 rehearsals March to May 2002 performances 15-19 May 2002 supported by Arts Queensland, QUT Creative Industries, Brisbane Powerhouse, Ausdance

5. PURPOSE • support creative partnerships, established and new, in an interdisciplinary project • work together on a common concept that allows for personal aesthetic positions and specialist art form processes and outcomes • explore flexible performance platforms and theatricalise site-specific work • investigate ways of creating narrative through fragmented intertextuality • re-engage audiences in live performance through choices on how to view the works and from where

6. CONCEPT • 3 discrete performance installations, each with their own aesthetic and communicative intention culminating in a fourth site where memories of the first three coalesce • promenade journey of subliminal meanings through multiple viewpoints • construction and deconstruction of narrative revealed and concealed by the embodied experience of site • the body as site and repository of its own performing and lived histories combined with the inherent and imagined meanings and associations of the former industrial site of the Powerhouse

7. artists…. chosen for the unique qualities each could bring to the project dynamic and supportive mix of experienced mature artists and emerging artists high level of expertise in their field(s) generous approach to sharing ideas and processes independent and curious committed, creative, resourceful diverse in art forms/practices and response to the sites four teams of new and old partnerships with crossover of some personnel in each team

8. CONCEPTS OF SITEIN PERFORMANCE • ‘a site-specific performance defines itself ‘through properties, qualities or meanings produced in specific relationships between an “event” and a position it occupies’. • the integral link between performance and place is ‘articulated through interdisciplinary practices’ • the creative process in site-specific performance acts out a “writing over” the site…’ (Kaye: 2000, 1-8)

9. WRITING OVER THE SITE • the site is like a palimpsest in that is written over, effacing the original ‘writing’ • in the case of here/there/then/now the sites were written over with graffiti, so we were often ‘writing over’ the write over • a site-specific work ‘inevitably operates in anticipation or in recollection of the places it acts out’ • ‘site-specific performance attempts to define itself in the very sites it is caught in the process of erasing’ Kaye 2000: 11, 220

10. erasure ephemerality ‘one of the beauties of live performance is that it ignites a space and time and then disappears’ Meredith Monk

11. Focus of the work were the following sites: • heightened theatrical and dramatic space of here • isolated entrapped enclosure of there • framed but open space of then • architectural extended space of now shared space of memory concealed, revealed, fragmented, disturbed by light SITES of here/there/then/now

12. here stairs to nowhere heightened theatrical and dramatic space

13. here stairs to nowhere A study of contrasts around victim and aggressor here - the familiar, safe, protected where fire is power and warmth - a dungeon where risk becomes danger - a shadowy realm of dreams and memories - a sharing of private moments publicly revealed - the animal in the zoo; fascinating yet dangerous Performer/creator: Brian Lucas Sound artist: Brett Collery Visual artist: Ian Hutson Lighting designer: Jason Organ

14. deep crevices with no purpose isolated entrapped enclosure there

15. there deep crevices with no purpose An Australian dancer and a Thai singer explore there • barred vertical site of shadows and blinding light • place of confinement and entrapment • enclosed intimate world of no exits through dance/physical performance with acoustic unaccompanied voice and projected imagery, investigating reactions to situations of extreme stress when confronted with confinement. Choreographer/performer: Leanne Ringelstein Composer/singer/performer: Nok Thumrongsat Visualisation: Ian Hutson Lighting Designer: Jason Organ

16. pillars • in dialogue • with • floating • objects • framed but • open space then

17. contemplate the performer in a still life of objects, floating, hovering • then • theme of the “still-life” as its organising principle • distorted beauty and fragmentation of the body and sound in space • heightened colour and unconventional framing reflecting a Baroque sensibility • a platform for the interaction of industrial site and theatrical setting • Choreographer/director: Vanessa Mafe • Dancer: Ko-Pei Lin • Sound composer: Stephen Stanfield • Installation artist: Jondi Keane • Lighting designer: Jason Organ then pillars in dialogue with floating objects

19. now the inviting void of the black box architectural extended space

20. nowthe inviting void of the black box now treats the theatre as architectural site housing a sparsely fragmented repository for what has gone before • place of multiple entries and exits • performative dialogue of intersecting solos • emerging relationships of bodies and kinetic pathways • visual and aural connections to the sites left behind Concept and direction: Cheryl Stock Performers/collaborators: Ko-Pei Lin, Brian Lucas, Leanne Ringelstein, Nok Thumrongsat Composer: Stephen Stanfield Visuals: Ian Hutson Lighting Designer: Jason Organ

21. the viewer’s relationship to site wide range of people from arts aficionados to those who had never attended contemporary performance led from site to site in a promenade journey by guides able to move around the sites but not within them thus changing points of view and relationship to the performing body; looking down, in, across rather than at the performers mobility assists in making causal links between the sites and their stories drawn progressively through the building and into its depths

23. COLLABORATION “collaboration is a "catalytic process" used in interactive relationships among individuals working toward a mutually defined, concrete vision or outcome”. Idol and West, 1991  Since a creative project entails working with ideas that seem new or original, or transforming existing ideas and concepts in fresh ways it also relies on the harnessing of group innovation and creativity.

24. THEORIES OF GROUP CREATIVITY • a group’s creative potential depends on level of diversity in the group; cognitive & intuitive • relationship between diversity and creativity includes context, decision making strategies, leadership issues, feedback mechanisms • importance of ‘authentic dissent’ (diversity of opinion) • danger in early consensus or giving into conformity pressure • involves divergent and convergent processes Nijstad & Paulus, 2003: 326-339

25. KEY AREAS OF CREATIVE COLLABORATIONS • Communication skills • Developing a positive environment • Keeping decision making moving along • Recognising needs of individual members of collaborative team • Resolving conflict and risk Pritzker & Runco, 1997: 115-141

26. COLLABORATIONan artist view “Collaborations, at their best, are profound learning experiences that empower the collaborators to expand their visions and their creativity, give them courage, critique and support to move into areas of work they might otherwise not venture into, and provide exciting spaces for experimentation. At their worst, they allow some collaborators to colonise others and this is a most disempowering experience!” Marion D’Cruz (2003:77) Malaysian choreographer/artist

27. COLLABORATIVE DIMENSIONS • relational/creative • developing interpersonal relationships of mutual respect and interactive support • valuing specialist art form differences in language, aesthetics, processes, outcomes • consideration • valuing and accepting difference which encourages new avenues for understanding • positive / affirmative behaviours • transactional/task • common creative agendas which allow for diversity and cross over of practices, approaches and ideas • acceptance of leadership and shared responsibility • discipline based confidence and expertise • ‘a communicative relationship’ (Grau, 1992:19) - between collaborative partners, within the work and with the audience • dependability • proactive and reactive process • participation at all levels of the project including budgets, marketing, scheduling etc

28. COLLABORATIVE CHALLENGES in here/there/then/now • sudden and tragic death of a key member resulting in a 8 month postponement of the project • an experienced choreographer/dancer who had done the concept mapping for one site was offered and accepted full-time work • personal political agenda of one member became an undermining and obstructive force in the early stages of the process, creating unacceptable tension • personal artistic agenda of a lead team member resulted in non-engagement with the site and therefore a threat to the integrity of the project which was site driven in its concept Four of the original ten team members were replaced through the following circumstances:

29. views of participating artists Vanessa Mafe - choreographer/director then old and new collaborative relationships with experienced visual artist Jondi Keane: • both experienced artists with a long history of collaboration and open to investigate ideas • had already established images as the foundation for a common language with young dancer Ko-Pei Lin: • guiding and mentoring role to encourage interactive participation • need to establish a way of working together and then identifying “breakthrough” creative experiences beyond the usual dancer/choreographer relationship

30. views of participating artists Stephen Stanfield, composer then & now Differing collaborative processes then • initial discussions of concept and viewing of images and movement of work in progress • composition starting point was the concept of ‘still life and decay’ • composition and choreographic processes were almost entirely independent from one another now • score constructed of transformed material from other sites, with new elements idiosyncratic to the fourth installation. • past sounds were manipulated and recontextualised in time and space creating a sonic-wash of fragmented, distorted, and distant memories… • collaborative process was quite organic with the music and choreography developing symbiotically

31. views of participating artists Cheryl Stock - project concept/direction director/choregrapher now • assumed role of director / coordinator as conceiver of project • interactive communication with all collaborators crucial aspect of role • ‘participant/observer’ in first three sites; no primary creative role • collaborative consultative process involved overview integrating visual, theatrical, auditory elements, and links between sites • creative process of now dependent on deconstructed narratives and images from other 3 sites; fluid , morphing between created and creating images, objects, artists • blurred and indecipherable ‘ownership’ of resultant work

32. COLLABORATIVE OUTCOMES for the artists: opportunities for expanded dialogue renewed investigative practices in the artsbuilding of artistic communities emergence of more layered approach to own practices for the audience: collaboration between performer and audience results in “meaning-making”, ‘where the performative text is the reading, and where the emphasis is on process, on meaning as becoming’ Sandra Kemp, in Campbell, 1996:9

33. DANCE AS A BASIS FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION • space / design / shape – the architecture • rhythm / flow / time – duration • dynamics / force / energy – texture • body / instrument - medium elements of a discipline/artform applied to collaboration form the basis of a shared interdisciplinary language: Dance language, in common with music and visual arts, is poetic rather than prose-like because of its ‘multiple, symbolic and elusive meanings’ (Hanna, 1997:147)

34. INTERDISCIPLINARYPRACTICE • involves collaboration between distinct disciplines with different approaches, viewpoints and forms of expression • enables specialists to find the spaces between their individual practices in which to discover a shared creative/performative language based on common principles • entails a change in processes of creation, observation and reflection • an ongoing journey of discovery, questioning, and discussion • requires multiple interpretations and knowledge of more than one discipline • allows what is there to form the interdisciplinary language being created for each particular project • creates multi-layered narratives since ‘reading, watching, listening…assumes that a story is being told’ (Kemp, 1997:172)

35. INTERDISCIPLINARY OUTCOMES • establishes common working ground between disciplines • generates open lines of exchange • questions and offers alternatives for the conventions, vocabulary and assumptions inherent in each discipline • defines one’s own artistic practice more clearly inside and outside the discipline • has the potential to shift, connect differently with, and transform one’s particular practice • broadens one’s knowledge of other approaches and opens up new possibilities personally and creatively

36. here/there/then/now CREATIVE AND PRODUCTION TEAM Concept/direction: Cheryl Stock Collaborating artists: Brett Collery, Ian Hutson, Jondi Keane, Ko-Pei Lin, Brian Lucas, Vanessa Mafe, Jason Organ, Stephen Stanfield, Nok Thumrongsat Project manager / production coordinator: Kyle Petersen Lighting/site coordination: Jason Organ Sound coordination: Stephen Stanfield Stage manager: Ryan Colbran Wardrobe: Bianca Sevil Program design: Ian Hutson, Pam Koger CRICOS CODE:00213J