My name is Femke and welcome to my artistic research.
It is an investigation into the impact of expectations on the creative process of an aerial performance.
It's an attempt to encourage and nurture the experiment of what an aerial perfomance can be,
sprouted from my personal encouters with expectations, expressed by professionals and spectators in my field, which is aerial and dance performances in the outdoor arts.
Those expectations are interfering with my creative need to:
make with an aerial apparatus, is stead of for it,
make from content in stead of form,
keep believing in agency.
Agency is “one’s context-specific ability do. It is the space that is granted,
it is the relative degree of one’s wiggle room.”, and it “expands the scope of the imaginable”
(Lievens, 2020. p.14)
The yellow line is your guide.
I wonder
what you're
expecting
from this research.
so what about these expectations..
For some time now my experience is that, even though an
audience is vocal about being open towards different
approaches of aerial performances, they still feel
dissatisfied afterwords. They express missing (some of)
the classic elements: hight, flexibility, difficulty, big
falls, thrilling moments, elegance, strength, superhuman
skills. It seems aerial performances are doomed to be
judged or labeled ‘not good’ when overshadowed by
expectations. Disappointment is blurring, or even
completely surpassing, the essence (or why/ subject /
content / urgency) of a performance.
During creative processes I've encountered situations
where persistent expectations caused unpleasant friction.
Performers fought tooth and nail to get their best trick
in the choreography, they felt underused, even though it
was a complete dramaturgical mismatch. It was difficult
to convince them that they are more then a performing
body, they are a human being contributing to the co-
creative process, with their ability to be.
These experiences led me to believe that expectation is
overlooked as a factor, a dormant influence, on the
making process of an aerial performance. And I feel the
need to address it...
... here it goes
The research question
What is the impact of expectations on the creative process of an aerial performance?
This investigation will dive into the if and why of the use of expected spectacular aerial movement vocabulary as a conscious and deliberate choice versus a logic and apparent choice.
subquestions
What is the thought behind how and why tricks are placed within a performance.
How to maintain creative integrity, while addressing expectations and navigating challenging dialogues during the co-creative process.
Where do expectations originate from for both maker and performer(s) involved in the creative process? Do the roots of expectations lie in education, in upbringing, in experiences from their professional and/or private life or in the history of aerial performance? And is that something that is expressed or suppressed? This first subquestion is zooming in to a micro level, to the inner works of personal expectation of the maker and performer, and how much it weighs on the creative process. Additionally: is that a (tacit) hinder or asset?
Can performances that prioritize artistic content and meaning over expected aerial stunts and tricks find acceptance and appreciation among the audience, performers, and creators alike?
At first this seems to be a simple yes/no question, which it is in itself, but the followup question why is possibly not as simple. It might even be one of those experiences you can’t or don’t want to put into words.
By posing this second subquestion as part of the overall research, I’m looking to step back and look at what is orbiting around an aerial performance, zooming out to a macro level. What are the conditions and terms for a creation is to be accepted as intended by the maker. Why does one performance have the upper hand over another when both prioritizing the artistic content.
In order to investigate what the impact of expectations is on the creative process of an aerial performance it is, in my eyes, important to understand where it comes from and how it manifests itself. With the supporting questions zooming in ànd out, they will inform and help steer the main question.
Key Elements / Research Methods ...........
Expectations
When talking about an expectation in psychology
terminology it is called a cognitive schema.
"Schemata are considered knowledge-files that are
stored in the brain. They are acquired throughout life,
are relatively stable and can organize and influence the
gathering, storing, understanding and retrieving new of
information (belonging to the same knowledge domain) in a
consistent way.
They are the glasses through which the world is seen and
therefor also color that world. In general schema’s are
fairly abstract and approximate, making them more
suitable for their generic purpose: color the processing
of new information in a consistent manner."
(Korrelboom & Broeke, 2014. p.140-141)
In 1932 Psychologist Frederic Bartlett described a schema as an active organization of past reactions or
experiences and his fundamental processing assumption was
that all new information interacts with old information
represented in a schema. (1932, p.201)
Ulric Neisser stated that "schemata are
anticipations, they are the medium by which the past
affects the future" (1976, p. 22)
Freely translated:
it is knowledge you've learned, and continue to learn,
about an experience. You put it in a jar and you make
assumptions, decisions and have expectations based on
that knowledge.
___ I've gathered knowledge on audience expectations by asking for feedback and starting conversations.
___ I've gathered knowledge on what kind of expectations are nestled in the maker & performer and what effect that had during the creative process.
Talking to different groups of people in the audience
such as spectators, performers, makers and festival directors,
provided diverse perspectives on how expectations influence the
perception of aerial performances. For the audience feedback
session I performed during Back to Base1,organized by TENT
circus productions. For the audiende conversation session I
performed during This Is Not A Conversation2, a platform
organized by myself to have a dialogue on the urgency of a
performance rather than the aesthetics.
These conversations offered insights into the differences and
similarities between the assumed expectations before the
performance and the actual expectations during and after
witnessing the aerial performance.
To understand how other makers tackle expectatons I visited a
number of dance and circus performances. As a spectator I
eavesdropped on conversations happening during and right after
those performances, and had a dialogue with one of the makers.
Intertwining Practice Based Research and
Practice as Research allowed observing the physical
and emotional responses towards expectations, it
encouraged discoveries and gave space to critically
reflect during the process. This proved to be
a fragile process and we found tools to build
trust and understanding between maker & performer.
I nourish freedom
.. to generate movement through skill-building and improvisation;
.. for both choreographer and performer(s) to practice communicating and (l)earn to trust dealing with, and let go of, expectations;
.. to work on a performance in a co-creative environment where we actively choose for
Content (inner, question, urgency) over Form (outer, taste, aesthetics)
Coming from two worlds I see that the current perspective is still: circus influences dance and dance influences circus.
It somehow gives me an alienated feeling (and experience), not really belonging to either of those worlds,
like a third-culture individual: "having roots in two cultures but never fully excepted by either,
struggling with identity, sense of belongingness and acceptance." (Van Raken & Pollock, 2017)
conclusion
In this artistic research journey, the impact of expectations on the creative process
of aerial performance has been unveiled through intricate dialogues and profound
insights. Expectations, it turns out, are not confined to the realm of the mind, they
have a tangible physical presence. In the case of the performer her experience,
marked by the clenching of her jaws and the emergence of stress in her upper chest,
served as a pivotal revelation.
The process of understanding these physical manifestations unfolded during our "after
talks," where early warning signs were identified and skillfully addressed through
techniques like RESET. This approach bolstered the performer's confidence, allowing her to navigate rehearsals with renewed creative freedom.
As a creator, I held multifaceted expectations, encompassing agency, commitment,
punctuality, and trust in the performer's role. The occasional deviation from these
expectations led to moments of disappointment, particularly regarding punctuality.
Yet, we discovered that small adjustments, such as delaying rehearsal times by half
an hour, could alleviate stress associated with daily routines.
Within this creative exploration, I as a maker, was also confronted with the concept
of a restless mind. During the research phase, my "Monkey Mind" remained tranquil,
eagerly embracing each day's learning curve. Yet, as I transitioned to the reporting
phase, I grappled with self-imposed pressures and doubts about conveying concepts
accurately. This transformed my once-calm "Monkey Mind" into a disruptive force,
impacting not only my mental state but also manifesting physically in the form of
stress and tightness.
This introspection led to a significant understanding: my own struggles mirrored the
performer's experiences during our co-creative journey. We both struggled with the
physical and mental manifestations of unmet expectations. To address this, I
committed to "practice what I preached." I employed tools designed to calm the
"Monkey Mind," embracing moments of Private Time, refraining from unnecessary
apologies for my learning curve, and employing the RESET technique when faced with
mental roadblocks. This transformational process allowed me to regain creative
freedom and reopen my "Listening Eye” towards reporting this research.
The merging of these experiences reverberates throughout the research's conclusion.
It underscores the profound impact of expectations on the creative process of aerial
performance. While expectations can manifest both mentally and physically, they also
offer opportunities for growth and transformation.
When it comes to having the audience’s expectations lingering in the back of the mind
while creating, we found nudging to be an expectation-neutralizing tool.
By embracing the principles of nudging and carefully crafting the "contract" with the
audience, artists can guide cognitive shifts, ushering spectators into a world of
wonderment and transcending the confines of traditional aerial performances. This
newfound understanding informs not only my artistic journey but also the broader
landscape of aerial performance, unlocking its true essence. As I continue to
experiment and push the boundaries of my practice, I am inspired to offer audiences
transformative experiences that challenge conventional expectations and embrace the
boundless possibilities of artistic expression.
Upon reflection, these findings have significantly reinforced my belief in the
co-creative process of an aerial performance, where content not only informs but
can even dictate the form. The journey ahead feels promising, filled with
uncharted territories to explore. I am increasingly inspired to push the
boundaries of my own practice, striving to nudge the audience's perceptions, much
like the transformative experience offered by Voetvolk's "Nomadics" during the
four-hour walk.
In my ongoing experimentation with "Wild Horse," I plan to present it as one of
four immersive landscape artworks encountered on a 45-minute walk through a forest
or park. However, it's imperative that I enhance the clarity of communication and
therefor the audience's contract. Drawing inspiration from Vantournhout's approach
in "Foreshadow," where he refrained from labeling his performance as a circus
performance despite collaborating solely with circus performers and their
technical circus knowledge for that specific creation.
I will experiment with categorization. By not rigidly defining my work as an
"aerial performance," I hope to create a more open and encompassing space that
mirrors the essence of the experience, thus inviting a broader spectrum of
audience engagement.
