[-empyre-] critical motion nowhere and everywhere at some time

[Johannes Birringer]

-----Original Message-----
From: Johannes Birringer 
Sent: 13 May 2009 19:24
To: empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
Subject: critical motion nowhere and everywhere at some time


hello all:

thanks Norah for drawing attention to a question that perhaps might like
to see itself addressed in this month's discussion, namely what would
constitute "critical motion" and what
such a term or concept implies for us here, to address, and why. 

Your brief reference to work (and dissemination of research) which,
admittedly, I was able to experience first-hand (and i am thus partial)
in London during the recent Forsythe festival, 
was refreshing in its questions... can you say more about
"counterpoint"?


(I love Forsythe's worktitles:  "Nowhere and Everywhere at the Same
Time").......


<<<<   Norah Zuniga Shaw wrote:
The interactive moving animations reflect on, work on, re-invent the
choreographic structures in a dance. They were generated at the
intersection
of choreography, animation art, geography, architecture, theory (maybe)
and
even I suppose a form of activism in that they are reaching out to
invite
folks in to the dance and into some ways that we see patterns in
complexity.

Are they a technological approach to movement? A critical one? They are
a
mix of analytical and creative. They seek to generate new creativity
while
representing a form of it (namely counterpoint in William Forsythe's One
Flat Thing Reproduced). They seek to invite a certain kind of "dance
readership." Counterpoint itself suggests some pretty radical ideas
about
ways to relate and find agreement in motion that don't require unison
(or
unity). The work is created in a complex community of practice that
requires
both interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary practices for creation...
>>>


I was in a production workshop over the last 10 days and am barely able
to shift energies now from physical work and computing/editing and
designing
to the reading of such a highly complex and philosophical debate that we
have had here. 

 I could not read the debate in a linear way, as it began,
with Stamatia and Ashkey lighting out, and Erin following. 

Then i got to a point where i did not want to read further.  Did anyone
else have this
sensation? 

 The discourse, I began so sense, was becoming less than particpatory,
but i could be wrong. ??  I am sorry if I misunderstood.

What readership, Norah, was invited, in your work?


with many regards
Johannes




Johannes Birringer
artistic director, DAP Lab
School of Arts 
Brunel University
West London 
UB8 3PH   UK
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/dap
http://www.danssansjoux.org