Two circles, or two vortexes, or two spheres, concentric ... slightly decentred...
Merleau-Ponty's poetic image resonates strongly with this project, where quite a few slightly shifted, yet almost concentric elements are tied, linked, mapped together, juxtaposed, superposed or co-performed. He might mean the inherent duality of seer and seen in the context of his argumentation, but for us it might as well apply to the physical presence and the performative action. Or the fixity of a 'work' we believe in, even if it merely exists as short-duration and ephemeral coming-together of people, intentions, accumulated experiences brought into a compact time-frame for the sake of convention, but also pragmatically sharing in a well defined space and time-span.
The Invisible might not be so much an optical or visual aspect as much as the shift from the concretely assumed and pretended work to the fluid and ever shifting, yet underlying artistic space and process, a domain that exists not solely in performance, nor in the documentation, nor exclusively in the experiences, but is an assemblage of all the elements and for each person takes on a different shape. The Double Vortex in question repeats, doubles up and resonates across two works, two disciplines, performers and observers. Like Artaud's shadowy double of theatre, the plague and cruelty (Artaud 1938), movement and sound, bodies and instruments, technology and experiences form dualities and pairs that are inextricably intertwined and interdependent.
Using the two pieces 'Double Vortex' and 'Moving Music' as concrete examples, this article explores issues of impact and affect of movement in combination with sound, and how the mixture of methods deployed in this project constitute a process of research through artistic practice. By laying out perspectives, traces and reflections that cover the development and performance of both pieces, a tentative map or web of relationships is revealed with the intent of generating insight and understanding about this particular kind of performing art.
This exposition is organised in different sections. They cover methods of creation, of development processes and performance, comparisons of the central pieces of this article, observations from an non-artist perspective on the different work-flows and processes, and higher level reflections on the import and significance of weaving a second layer of discursive, yet loose assemblages of elements. The different sections are organised in zones on the map, arranged in thematic tracks that can be followed along the lines that make up the table of contents.
"There is an extraordinary push-pull to wearable and ambient technologies, a dynamic of seduction and repulsion. We are seduced by the convergence of computational systems with corporeality ... or by unseen systems that anticipate corporeal needs ..; seduced by the potential expansion of our senses, intellects, and imaginations, of how we engage with the world, how we communicate, how we remember the past and project desires into the future. Yet we are only a breath away from repulsion at the specter of the monstrous body or monstrous forces of surveillance and control lurking just behind the technologization of the body. Once the domain of research and performance converges with skin, blood, flesh, internal organs, biology, or DNA, political questions around who controls, owns, or has access to our bodies are unavoidable." (Kozel 2007, p.271)
The two central pieces of this project serve as vehicles for exploring corporeality. Their entire development and creation processes aim on the one hand at performance, and on the other hand at creating a space for reflection, experimentation, materials collection, and iteratively testing in a continuous dialogue the configuration and balance between the key elements of each setup.
The piece for trombone and live-electronics is mirrored by the piece for interactive, improvised dance. Both pieces are based on similar premises and share a common practice of exploratory, improvised performance in conjunction with technology. Both pieces share the same function within the larger research context: they serve as a space to explore and investigate gesture and movement in relation to live-generated and interactive music.
The pieces share the formal framing, they are intended to be performed in a concert situation, mainly in a frontal disposition. They are solo-pieces with live-electronics, and the composer is always present as live-electronic performer, influencing to varying degree the evolution of musical elements. Furthermore, the use of technology is in both cases instrumental, i.e., it provides the means to extend or alter the sound outcomes of an artist's musical performance. The pieces have approximately the same duration between 10 and 15 minutes and rely on amplification of sound to augment the human performer. From a compositional point of view, both pieces consist of several parts that create a progression of musical materials, gestural expressions and sonic principles. Although a narrative can only be discerned on an abstract level, the works share the notion of a dramaturgic arc, they are neither static states nor minimalistic empty spaces.
The question of augmenting, sensing and interfering with the performer's body through the movement-to-sound linkage is a recurrent theme. In the case of the interactive dance piece, the connection through sensing technology between movement and sound poses a number of critical questions about the role and impact of wearable and surveillance technology on the performing subject, as is so poignantly expressed in the quote by Susan Kozel (2007). These fundamental questions contaminate both of the pieces and consequently the central issue in the space of this exposition deals with corporeality in technologically augmented performance.
Finally, when analysing the conceptual and artistic development processes, it is important to keep in mind that the trombone piece serves as template for the dance piece, since it precedes it by an entire development cycle of six month and the first version shown in public performance. In some regard the methods and conceptual focus are already established and get adapted rather than redeveloped for the work on the inverted roles of body and sound in `Moving Music'.
Composing and the edge of a known style with the influence of outside concepts, such as is the case in `Double Vortex' and 'Moving Music' demands engaging in processes of speculation, experimentation and loose ways of fixating structural, interactive or sonic ideas. This pragmatic way of projecting and subsequently validating ideas through and with the aid of sketches probably forms part of any artist's process. In the case of performing music, and particularly using technological mediation layers for linking and organising interaction, the notated traces of ideas could coalesce into a score, something which was done here only in a rudimentary fashion. Yet even before reaching that stage, the use of sketches as external representations of processes is an essential means of 'coming to grips' with or apprehending the various forces and elements involved (Nakakoji et al. 2006).
At least two kinds of sketches form part of this process: the paper-based and non paper-based sketches.
Paper-based sketches are drawings, diagrams, maps and collections of key-terms put down before, during and after the development process in the collaborative working sessions. These graphical arrangements are a support for metaphorical, visual thinking, by using structures in the visual domain to think and communicate about the organisation of materials and processes. The sketches keep a fleeting, ephemeral quality until their idea have been experienced, evaluated and deemed worth keeping. This represents the essential aspect of sketch-based exploratory work. During the compositional developments for each piece, in preparation for experimental rehearsal sessions, a number of visual sketches are made in a speculative manner, providing a conceptual as well as graphical model. The graphical representation is based on some common metaphors, known from a notational practice in related styles or disciplines (notation from music gets transferred to organising dance and vice versa). The paper-based sketch then gets implemented in an exploratory, searching mode that makes evident the idea in the combination of the given frame of the piece and the other elements in play, such as sound materials or chosen interaction-patterns.
The non-paper sketches are based on the same principles of exploratory experimentation. They are geared towards generating a state that allows for an evaluation based on the experience it elicits. A typical sketch of this kind is a `what-if' scenario during a working session, where a new notion or idea surfaces and the collaboration partners agree to test it without prior structural, technical or conceptual preparation other than the one already taking place over the entire development process. In any musical style or idiom, an interpreter will do these trials in private practising preparations, but in the collaborative developments described here, almost all of those trials are part of the exploration process. Trial and error is used in order to generate an experience based on which it becomes possible to evaluate the effectiveness of certain interaction strategies, formal constructions or sound ideas (Edmonds 2009).
The core of this method is the dialogical process, which is characterised by a collaborative compositional development that evolves through and around an active dialogue between the musician(s) and dancer. The dialogue takes place at any stage of the process, but is particularly important for the evaluation of trials. Beginning with communication through language-based exploration of visual sketches, the dialogue continues through explorations of materials, interaction patterns and sound transformation processes and closes the loop after the performance of a sketch, an intermediate state of the work, or an actual performance in concert. These pre-, intra- and post-experimentation dialogues take the place of a more definitive form of fixing processes and elements, and result in common `agreements' that make a proper score if not superfluous then less binding. The visual, graphical sketches are then refined into graphical scripts or scores that serve as a mnemonic device between sessions and help moving forward towards the performance moment.
When operating on fragments, traces and and left-over forms after performance processes and actual moments, the problem arises that the origin, the primary works or objects possess infinitely densely intertwined or enfolded multitudes of relationships, significations and effects. The primary artwork's virtue is that it generates a compact, singular entity of a flowing manifold (Held 2003), but its descendant, the trace, echo and secondary emissary does not have this power. It needs to make more explicit and present in a more graspable way those elements that should form a new narrative, and thus 'retrace a transformational relationship' (Schwab 2014) to their original.
Linear argumentative language is one way of effecting such a translation, but lines of intersection, connection, flight function in too loose an association for a single rigid form, in order to become an appropriate rendering or approximation.
The multiple intersecting planes, vortices, slightly de-centred spheres and circles (Merleau-Ponty 1964, p. 138) demand an entangled, enfolded, shifting, and continuous rearrangement of elements, a reading or trans-section that can only be one of many attempts, a fortuitous choice or random occurrence that generates meaning from the intrinsic connections and inherent potential of the elements inherited from the original source of the primary work.
Map
The activity of finding or defining paths across an accumulation of materials, territories or planes (Deleuze and Guattari 1988 p.512) constitutes maps. In concrete terms the present exposition on the weave of the research catalogue is a map of elements that are all related to the project at stake. Since "a map is not the territory it represents, but, if correct, it has a similar structure to the territory, which accounts for its usefulness" (Korzybski 1933) or Magritte's "ceci n'est pas une pipe", the discrepancy between the signifier and the signification is evident. If the territory, in our case, is the fleeting, ephemeral `actual' of a performance and the map is a reading of more solid traces, artefacts and resonances of this intangible object, the relation between map and territory could be considered inverted. it is important to avoid reifying the map at the expense of the 'actual'. De-multiplying readings and continuously rearranging the map provides a promising, if impractical solution. Nevertheless, if additional communication outside the place or time-space of performance is intended, engaging in a process of continuous re-readings and re-arrangements of the assembled traces is necessary. As a consequence, in artistic practice if not research through art, the process map-making of some sort is always occurring. The critical question then becomes what possible forms the maps may take, and how accessible they can be and how well they communicate.
The impossibility of ever fully grasping complexity in art might be exemplified in a reflection Smithson makes about `mapscapes or carthographc sites' in relation to an abstract idea of minimal space: "The use Fuller makes of the `dot' is in a sense a concentration or dilation of an infinite expanse of spheres of energy. The `dot' has is rim and middle, and could be related to Reinhardt's mandala, Judd's `device of the specific and general or Pascal's universe of center and circumference. Yet, the dot evades our capacity to find it's center. Where is the central point, axis, pole, dominant interest, fixed position, absolute structure, or decided goal? The mind is always being hurled towards the outer edge into intractable trajectories that lead to vertigo." (Smithson 1996, p.94) Although Smithson's central works are in the domain of land art and his writing about the `mapscape' is concerned with the fascination with actual representational maps, what is interesting in his reflection about Fuller's `dot' is the realisation that in cannot be fixed or tied down, it's centre is unreachable. In a sense the `infinite of expanse of spheres of energy' correlate with the compressed, singular moment of performance, where the `concentration or dilation' is a characteristic of the intangibility of the moment on stage, and the attempt at grasping and trying to generate understanding may lead to actual `vertigo' and being hurled `to the outer edge'.
Diagram
The connecting and establishing of relations between trace-elements of a performance, and also the manner of reading a performance from the vantage point of the partaking audience constitutes a type of diagram. The web of interpretation can take a multitude of forms, some visible as sketches, or graphical diagrams, or juxtapositions of blocks of text on the page, some invisible as understanding of relations through recognising repetitions, commonalities, and parallelisms.
This exposition as a whole attempts to function as a diagram, a symbolic representation and laying out of elements with their connections. From low-level local juxtapositions, that sometimes even look like diagrammatic drawings to the highest level of layout which is only visible through the navigator, the significance of elements and their relationships is important. The groups arranged on the page with their individual lines of flight denote their dependence and slipping relationships amongst each other, that would, in an alternate, less fixed form, get rearranged with every new reading.
Assemblage
Even without extending into abstract signification, the concept of laying out heterogeneous objects side by side in order to form an assemblage, the value of such an unordered and non-hierarchical procedure becomes clear. It is precisely through the equivalences of all elements, through their juxtaposition rather than ordering by dependencies, that an open field, a malleable pool of materials is generated that is essential for navigation, reading, drawing of connections, if not conclusions. Assembling does not mean fixing; the grouping may shift, dissolve, and re-arrange itself at any moment. This malleability is crucial for constructing a second-order art-object from the ruins of the primary work. Assembling as an activity rather than assemblage as a state is also more appropriate to the time-sensitive nature of the performing arts context. The same way a partaking audience member is co-performing with the musician or dancer during a show, the reader is co-assembling the exposition with the author. In that sense the translation mechanisms, the method of salvaging and rebuilding are art practices themselves.
The two pieces were accompanied during the entire time-span from their inception to their final form by second author Patrick Neff. This was done through observation, participation and conversation. In the beginning, before any specific artistic materials or forms were present, a set of research topics was chosen from the larger theoretical background, and considerations were formulated to serve as a guideline, while the form of the process remained open. The following set of questions show the thematic scope of the framing topics, and serve here rather as a backdrop for the interpretation of the observations than basis for a systematical analysis.
– The main interest was in movement and gesturality at all stages or situations of the developing piece: How is movement used to inform the piece? Are there different states and functions of movement in the creative process, in rehearsal and in performance? Do they change over time? How consciously and deliberately is movement used in the artistic practice of the performers in general?
– What role does the polymodality of the senses and the body play? How is the acoustic domain translated to the corporeal and vice versa? What is the role of the visual? Do the modalities work in parallel, complementary or fuse together?
– How is movement and gesturality integrated in the actual piece: What role do they play and how important are they? How are they integrated in the performance? How do they convey artistic expressions, meaning or communication aspects?
– What is the personal relationship to movement and gesturality in the artistic practice in general: How did the interest in gestural performance arise? How did it develop in the performer's biography and how much does it constitute an integral part of their work? How will this practice develop in the future?
By being present as an observer at all stages of the parallel development of the pieces, a comparison of similarities, overlaps and disparities becomes possible and constitutes the common theme of the observations that are reported here.
The trombone player in `Double Vortex' started with an impetus to move in the project: never before did he consciously integrate and refine movement and gesturality in his practice. Limited by his instrument, where both hands are needed to hold and manipulate the trombone also constricting the movement of the upper body by a fixed posture, the artist is motivated and inspired to explore new possibilities of movement. Further restricting, by his own word but also visible in observation, are the learned movement patterns related to the instrument. The only gestural, or related, freely movable parts of the body are therefore the head with mainly the eyes, which on their part are neither used very often. Moving the whole body in space, that is walking or dancing around a room, is also hard to realise and beyond the actual and future repertoire of the performer. Given these limitations and the motivation as well as inspiration to explore the boundaries of movement and gestures in trombone play in an interactive setting, the artist can be seen at a turning point of his gestural performance practice. Constrained by standing on a single spot in space, the artist explores the space through movements of the instrument, which has an implicit directionality he uses to fathom the depths of the room by sending and receiving sounds. Furthermore he investigates aspects of temporality and anticipation through different movement velocities and (mis-)matching sound with motion. With this (mind) set the artist therefore begins the (personal) process of establishing a new practice.
Concretely the novel movement patterns need to be rehearsed physically to actively evolve from the long years of traditional trombone performance: Physically in a literal sense as it actually requires repetitive monotonic training of new movement patterns. With a missing notation, translation or generally text during the course of development of the whole piece, these basic elements or subjective feels of it start to inform the gestural `dictionary' of the piece. The possibilities of interpretational thought and expressive considerations come with further training and experience: The artist becomes able to detach from procedurality and starts to perform in the singularity in being there "in the moment". The focus of attention shifts from bodily awareness and control to awareness of sound and space: The bodily postures, movements and directed trombone sounds are now used for artistic expression and performance flow. This two-tiered process does not stop here but does iterate over the development of the piece but also, on a grand scale, in the personal, artistic development of the performer. Interestingly the interaction between the musician performer and the electronic music performer did never touch on the actual movements, postures and gestures, as it remained strictly to sound and technical aspects of the setup. The specific `dictionary' or language developed by the instrumentalist/performer remained his own in this interaction - as well as in his personal repertoire possibly manifesting in future concepts and projects.
The dancer-performer in `Moving Music', on the other hand, started with a life-long practice of (gestural) improvisational dance and clearly reported an intrinsic motivation and actual fulfilment of her "urge to move" and "perfectionism in action not thought". Compared to the instrumentalist, there is no intermediate instrument present and the body is in direct contact with the sound and space. Beyond that the dancer is able to act pre-consciously and synaesthetically. The movement and sounds are felt in the same field and the performer is able to completely dwell in this intimate and immersed state from the beginning. This state is relevant throughout the whole process: it seems to be a prerequisite to explore, integrate and generate new expressive movement from the start. On the other hand this `singularity' empowers the dancer-performer to be fully expressive in a staging of the piece.
The development of the piece started with open discussions, improvisational phases but also small instructions by the electronic musician partner. A `basic set' of movements was then established and solidified. With both these `basic sets' the actual main phase of the development started: Parameters of interest like velocity and density were defined and with them variations of the `basic sets' explored. The various setups of the parameters were used as `stains of the body' - a personal mode or (mind)set of the dancer-performer helping her practice (here: in rehearsal). Within these `stained, parametric' variations new insights and concepts were continuously generated, discussed and integrated in the piece. The three-tiered approach in creating and developing a piece is the personal `optimum' of the dancer-performer. After the open improvisational finding phase and the solidifying of the `basic sets', the third phase of `staining', performing and updating is the most productive phase with a peak of artistic processes and freedoms. From there on, mainly the third phase is iterated: the performer is able to concentrate on the interaction with sound and space, which is especially important in the actual setup as she actively triggers and modulates the sounds. Gestures are never directed to the audience or the co-performer in that that they are never communicative but merely expressive. This leaves the dancer-performer all by herself, `in the moment', interacting and exploring sound and space - reminiscent of the initial phase of finding and exploring.
The two pieces are performed live on stage in front of an audience. In such a standard scenario most of the fundamental decisions and assumptions are not made explicit, they belong rather into the domain of common cultural codes. The physical presence of the performers is complemented by media and interaction technology, as well as the co-performing composer/performer, which represents a common setting in contemporary performing arts.
In this context the core question of corporeality can only be addressed by looking at the potential and impact of performing with the body. Whereas for the dancer the action of creating expressive forms with the body conforms to the core discipline, the same cannot be said of the trombone player. Conversely, having the dancer follow musical rather kinaesthetic and movement principles for the creation of forms, pushes her into a new territory as well.
The resulting imbalance creates an affective impact. First it does so for the performers, who become aware of the corporeal presence in a different way than habitual, then it produces the same effect through kinaesthetic, non-verbal channels for the audience. The trombone player's astonished statement that "Movement sounds!" indicates that the conceptually motivated task of performing silent phrases with the body instead of the instrument shifts the perceptual focus and offers new insights. Already after the first cycle of development and performance, trombonist and composer both agree that indeed the slow silent gestures embedded within the composed form turn out to be some the strongest moments of the piece. Furthermore, by putting an emphasis on the corporeality of the musician, through very slow rotation movement that are impossible to carry out smoothly and in a relaxed manner, his performative presence is brought more to the foreground. Although musicians are trained and used to be physically precise in their actions, awareness about the expressive potential of the body is rarely developed, too much attention and focus is put on the sounding result. In this project, through the decision to put movement and corporeality in the centre of the work, all involved persons become acutely aware of the importance and impact that the body has on this kind of performance. The piece becomes as much 'about movement' as about the specific sound language and extended playing techniques.
The dancer in `Moving Music' finds herself in the inverse situation. Being an expert in expressive body-work, the challenge is now to reduce the richness and polyphony of `kinetic melodies' (Luria 1973, Sheets-Johnstone 2009) and `moving forms' to a functional instrumental shaping of (a limited set of) sounds. The strategy developed to deal with this constraint is to deliberately simplify the movement repertoire and at first focus exclusively on the task of phrasing the music through movement (in the first part) and placing the sounds in space (in the second part). This produces a sort of demonstrative exploratory and searching action that has the benefit of being clearly readable by the audience. The functional movements are gradually enriched by properly expressive movement sequences. The combination of these two complementary movement modalities ultimately produces the full dynamic range that represents one of the aims of the piece. The corporeal presence of the dancer therefore undergoes a transformation in the opposite direction of that of the trombone player. At first she needs to remove capabilities and habitual modes of performing, before the dual modes of instrumental and dance actions can be integrated. This constraint has an affective impact, through its reducing influence, because the emphatic kinaesthetic perception triggers in the viewers a sense of unease, tension, restraint while at the same time it lets the audience take part in the process of learning and understanding the relationship and interdependence between body and sound. The dancer's statement that her "perception of movement tends to be purely auditive" finds its reflection or manifestation of musical phrasing that can now be heard rather than seen or felt in the movement alone. The corporeal sense of rhythm, of co-articulating sequences of movement chunks in the same manner as melodic chains is rendered visible to some extent and allows the dancer to use her corporeal presence in an openly musical manner.
The third corporeal presence in both pieces is that of the composer/performer situated at the front of the stage. Since the sound processing in both pieces is done in real-time and depends on the control and oversight of the composer, he co-performs the pieces with the musician or dancer. Contrary to a sound technician's presence at the mixing desk, in this context, the physical presence and attention of the composer/performer is crucial for keeping up the dialogical qualities of both pieces. The dance piece depends to high degree on his actions for an entire layer of sound processes. Therefore, the corporeal levels plays a central role in conveying dynamics, tension and temporal arcs from the dancer to the second player, and only the direct physical perception allows the proper co-performance of the live-electronics processes.
For the audience, from an outside perspective, these presences are essential for experiencing the pieces properly. As with all performing arts, being part of the situational, physical, corporeally shared space is what engenders the full experience. In the case of the two piece discussed here, it may be that the core statement reached by working in this manner is conveyed as much in the corporeal, kinaesthetic domain as through visual and auditive perception. In this constellation it may be the emphatic co-performance that occurs on a pre-reflective level which carries the strongest meaning and impact for the audience. The sliding corporeal states of both performers therefore transform the pieces from compositions for movement and electronic sounds into something else, where gesturality and physical (co-)presence represent the central elements.
A sketch depicting a temporal form of a section of Double Vortex in the 2015 version (click to enlarge).
"But my seeing body subtends the visible body, and all the visibles with it. There is a reciprocal insertion and intertwining of one in the other. Or rather, if, as once again we must, we eschew the thinking by planes and perspectives, there are two circles, or two vortexes, or two spheres, concentric when I live naïvely, and as soon as I question myself, the one slightly decentred with respect to the other'"
(Merlau-Ponty 1964, p. 138)
"The diagrammatic or abstract machine does not function to represent, even something real, but rather constructs a real that is yet to come, a new type of reality. " (Deleuze and Guattari 1988, p 142)
Rehearsal for 'Moving Music': the two spaces of the stage and the desk collide, corresponding to the artists' co-performing roles of moving and controlling (09/2015).
The practice of performing with live-electronics and instrumental action represents a well established form in the current musical landscape. The use of live-electronics as a musical element in composition dates back to the first electronic music decade, the 1960s, c.f. Stockhausen's 'Solo' from 1964 (Esler 2006), and has evolved with the advances in technology ever since. A qualitative shift occurred with the advent of computer-based live-signal processing, for example with Boulez' Répons (Boulez 1981) that built on the era's highest performing musical computing available (Casserley 1993). In the past two decades, adding electronic sound processing to live-performance has become a common musical practice, that wouldn't warrant any further attention, unless it was applied in a specific manner. In parallel, albeit beginning at a later point in time, performing with sensors and gestural interaction developed with the advent of sensing and conversion technologies. Pioneering the use of gestural controllers, institutions such as STEIM (http://steim.org/) in Amsterdam and the work carried out there by Michel Waisvisz (1985) paved the way for a practice of performing with technology. Performers and researchers such as Laetitia Sonami (1991), Atau Tanaka (2000), or Sergi Jordá (2005) helped to further establish and develop the field. Nowadays, thanks to the open hardware and maker movements and in particular thanks to the Arduino platform (www.arduino.cc), interfacing and performing with sensors has become simple, accessible and common among many electronic music practitioners.
Mixing dance with analytical methods dates back to the early twentieth century and appears for example already in the categorisations of the Laban's Movement Notation (Laban 1950, Maletic 1987), or choreographic translation strategies such as those of Mary Wigman, Martha Graham and Merce Cunningham (Reynolds 2007), Steve Paxton's `Material from the Spine' (Paxton 2008), William Forsythe's synchronous objects (Shaw 2011), or Wayne McGregor's collaborations with neuroscientists (Kirsh 2010) and dance researchers (DeLahunta 2004). Interactive dance in the narrower sense begins with the advent of real-time capable music- and media-systems in the 1990s. An early pioneer in this field is David Rokeby (1995) with his Very Nervous System VNS, with which he explored and demonstrated the limits and potential for movement-based interaction. Since the 1990's a wide range of dance-makers have explored working with interactive dance (Siegel 1998, Bevilacqua et al, 2011) and research projects in the field of dance have started to leverage the techniques of movement acquisition and analysis for archival and dissemination purposes (Bermudez et al. 2011, DeLahunta 2013).
The techniques and technologies used here in both pieces are based on well-known musical developments using real-time electronic sound processes and performing a mixed style with instruments and sensors. Slightly less mainstream but established and mature is the field of movement analysis where choreographers collaborate with researcher from various fields to learn about the potential of motion and expressive movement.
With this overview of the lineage of the practice, the musical style and attitude with regard to composition and improvisation needs to be addressed as well. Deploying electronic sound processes and interaction principles through technical sensing does not per se imply a specific stylistic and aesthetic direction. The historical examples cited thus far are mostly situated in the domain of fixed, notated, composed pieces that can be recreated from one form of text or another, and depend on specific technical settings for their performance.
In the case of the two pieces presented here this is different:
The development process served as a dialogical co-composition method. Both pieces leverage the highly developed improvisation skill of the particular performer, and the compositional agreements or determined / fixed elements, which provide a loose temporal and task framework, rather than a fixed score or choreography. In both pieces, the live-electronic sound processes represent the most written out element. The configuration of technical elements, sensors, microphones, speakers, as well as software structure are the closest thing to a score, the performers and the live-electronic interpreter (composer) re-enact every time anew the structure and intentions of the piece, from memory and along the commonly developed shared agreements.
The particular position taken up in this project focuses on a discipline-crossing exploration between sound and movement. The specific question this project poses is about the meaning and impact of, on the one hand, performing (possibly silent) movements in music and on the other hand generating music with movement through dance actions. In both constellations the central objective and actions of the discipline are extended by a demand to originate and carry expression in both mediums. In the mirrored configurations of the two pieces, through the reciprocal dependency, a number of underlying principles of movement and sound performance become visible. Phrasing, co-phrasing, co-articulating, and the handling of time-units of these actions can now clearly be attributed to bodily dimensions, speeds and energies. The resonance of bodily action in the perceptual space and through it the influence of gestures and movement phrases on musical density can clearly be perceived.
By embedding the artistic development processes in a wider context of investigation, the significance of the practices of live-electronics and interactive dance shifts. Where in a purely artistic context composition and performance of these pieces follows the demands of artistic creation and production, in the current cases the development processes for the methods and the observatory activities of the larger investigation that occur in parallel have a definite impact on the work itself. For example, it is evident that a research environment that looks at gestural expressivity will foster work that exhibits this type of artistic form. As another example of cross-contamination, the development of analytical tools for measurement of movement and detection of patterns using machine learning algorithms provides a tool that serves to explore the potential of the live-electronic algorithms autonomy with regards to decision taking (Schacher and Bisig 2016).
Finally, the improvisational approach used to embody the pieces every time is as important as the technical concept and modalities chosen. The final form and aspect of the pieces lives as much from the specific sound and movement languages that the performers create as from the juxtaposition with technology.
'Double Vortex' for trombone, movement and live-electronics is a collaboration between trombonist Beat Unternährer and Jan Schacher.
A trombone player steps to the centre of the stage and performs a piece that lasts approximately 15 minutes. Starting with breathing and an imperceptible rotation of the instrument and the body, the physical presence of the musician is the first and central compositional element presented. The piece gradually evolves from breathing and air sounds, to noisy double-reed multiphonic techniques and mouthpiece-less playing, to include feedback with the adjacent speaker and electronic sound processing. The movements of the trombone player become more expansive, finally covering all sectors of his peri-personal (body-encircling) space.
On the instrument a wireless microphone is visibly mounted as well as a small wireless sensor-pack that is less prominent. The stage, originally flanked by a pair of speakers, contains now a single speaker that is positioned on a box at hip-height a few meters to the right of, and half-facing the performer. At the front right corner of the stage is a table where the second musician is facing the performer and is operating the live-electronics in a traditional control-desk type setting. The trombone player is equipped with a few materials that enable extended playing techniques, such as double-reeds to be inserted in the tube instead of the mouthpiece, or a rubber plunger that acts as a mute. These materials are ready to hand, in such a way that the performer doesn't need to interrupt the playing in to insert or apply them.
The music is constituted entirely by the sounds the trombonist generates and all live-electronic sound processing has at its source the sounds that are captured through the microphone during the performance itself. The performer's movements are captured with the aid of a small wireless motion-sensing unit attached to the trombone next to the musician's head. The motion-sensor provides information about the energy of movement, and in particular measures the angle of inclination and the absolute orientation in space of the instrument (a.o. with the aid of a magnetic compass). The instrumentalist interacts with sound processing in several ways, reflecting varying degrees of inter-dependence with the algorithmic system. The connection goes from purely analogous amplification, to sensor-controlled sound manipulation with standard audio-effects, to almost independent generative and interactive decision making by the machine-learning algorithms (schema 1 & 2).
The piece explores the performer's physical presence and actions by sensing his movement rather than analysing the audio-signal. The composition formalises physical movement as fully-fledged compositional element and prescribes movement-only sections that have a `musical' character. The intention is to render more evident the connection between movement and sound, by overlaying and augmenting the technical processes with musical actions. Live-electronics and motion sensing represent a compositional layer, which has the potential to problematise the relationship between musician, instrument, movement and sound, as well as the algorithmic, autonomous system.
Conceptually, the technology sits at the nexus between the instrumentalist's actions and the natural or electronically extended sounds. The ensuing sound world consist of concentric layers of ever more abstract sound characters, alway keeping the trombone player's original sound palette and actions at their core. For the audience, the declaration and subsequent recognition and reading of the technologies and sound transformations during performance generates expectations: they want to see and recognise the linkages and dependencies that are at play through technical means. A way of playing with these expectations in the composition becomes manifest through the idea that the system sometimes fulfils expectations, and sometimes proposes alternate modalities of interplay, the most abstract of which are autonomous, algorithmically generated musical structures.
The compositional concept builds on the premise that in addition to musical and sonic characteristics any instrumental performance – with electronics or without – will contain aspects of physical presence and movement. These aspects form an integral part of the piece's content, its affective power, and their presence deeply informs the act of performing the piece. The composition for this piece is built using a modular framework, where playing techniques and dynamic qualities as well as movement-to-sound relationships constitute the skeleton of musical material, which gets re-embodied by the musician in each performance in an open, improvised mode. Different ways of relating musical playing techniques and movement characteristics are explored either perceptually, or with the aid of motion sensing, which provides a technical as well as conceptual bridge between the two. The compositional juxtaposition of movement- and sound-instructions leads to sections during the piece, where the activity of the musician consists of simultaneously playing and moving with body and instrument, which has the effect of producing a perceptual shift between eye and ear. In some of the sections complex movement patterns are overlaid over the musical elements. This influences the instrumental sound through a physiological impact on the player's posture, affecting the breath and destabilising the air-column by disturbing the player's diaphragm. Through sensor-linkage, movements are also mapped directly to electronic sound-processing, in some instances directly influencing sound-effect parameters such as amount of reverberation through an immediate mapping.
Two sections of the piece deal explicitly with autonomous decision-making in human-machine interaction. Here the question of agency and intersubjective interaction, or simply the interplay between trombone player and algorithmic system becomes the core of the composition. The intended interaction model is that of a conversation between two subjects, however, in some instances the algorithms exhibit abstract autonomous behaviours, which may not appear to the listener as directly linked to the actions of the musician.
The piece ends with the trombone player's breathing, while the autonomous algorithmic system continues playing on its own, before being cut off.
The temporal dimensions of exploratory musical developments processes should not be neglected in this reflection. In particular the long-term trajectory of composing, rehearsing and performing. During the life span of a musician these phases repeat over and over, get juxtaposed, superimposed across pieces and works, layered according to contexts and styles. These phases inevitably exist for the performance of each piece. But rarely are they part of an explicit observation and reflection, in they way that is the case in this investigation. The perspective on process and method is unusually prominent in this project, given that artistic, musical work remains the core concern. But the fact that a research-agenda contaminates the musical intentions and that there is no clear separation between creative work and investigate, auto-ethnographical methods, accentuates the process of going through the three phases.
The term `Vortex' is used as a metaphor for the singular moment of performance, or the `actual' (Schechner 1977). Going through it means traversing changing states of focus, of exploratory indetermination and of concentration. The compressed moment of the performance is a crystallisation point along a chain of activity that starts long before going on stage and does not end there, as the existence of this exposition coveys. By the same token the compression provides the motivation and goal point for the entire process.
The transition from relatively loose activities in the experimentation phase, to the increases in pressure during final rehearsal, to the moment of the actual performance is stepwise, never just gradual. The transition into the moment of the piece in the actual performance is rapid and uncontrollable, for the obvious reason that by stepping into the limelight in front of the audience there is no turning back, everything starts to matter in a way that does not allow correction or retries. (Of course it does, there is always the possibility to fail and start again, without any severe consequences, except perhaps to the performer's self-esteem and career-chances).
The increased pressure and the fact that this moment counts so much provides the performer during the time on stage with extra energy, a higher focus, possibly a state of hyper-attention (Kozel 2007) that allows multi-focal, multi-level (self-)perceptions and (self-)observations. During the exploratory phases of the development process various materials, behaviours and interaction patterns are tested, discarded or kept in a continuous flow of aggregating elements that constitute the work. During the action, however, the option of testing and trying is no longer given, at least within the time-frame of the performance. The improvisatory attitude and attention is now directed towards navigating the altered state while following pre-agreed structures, ideas or aesthetic choices. In the larger scope of the experimental process this merely represents a single moment in a sequence of stages, and is equivalent, albeit more densely packed with meaning and experience, to other trial runs that provided the necessary basis for making informed choices.
The choices that become possible, based on the experience gained by going through the vortex of performance, cover a wider array of meanings, affects and impacts, more than can possibly be reached and understood only in rehearsal studio or laboratory situations. The social dimension, for example, of playing in front of an audience that has not been informed of the prior processes is emphasised considerably. Elements of the frame as well as the content of the work come to the foreground. The frame of the concert stage for instance, even if it not changed from a conventional frontal setup, changes significantly for the performer(s). The lights are different, the room has a different acoustic, possibly due to the presence of the audience, and the time feels different due to the intense attention and scrutiny the performer is subjected to. A highly experienced performing artist is used to this factors changing and therefore is able to ignore or adapt in the best manner possible. Still, the difference in tension, attention, and awareness is what makes the performance essential, not just as a goal for the musical practice, but also as a lens through which to understand better how the work functions and what its constituting elements signify.
Reflection on processes of art making is an integral part of any artist's method. It serves to guide and sharpen, differentiate and refine the works created. Organising these thoughts, words, and materials in such a way that it supplements, extends, enfolds and entangles the primary artwork in a fabric or skin of additional elements is what distinguishes `ordinary artistic practice' from research that communicates in domains that reach beyond the work's original environment.
Exposing the work through other means, providing a secondary discursive narrative to the original ideas that are (mostly) beyond the reach of words, is not the prerogative of the domain of arts; even natural sciences contain aspects that cannot be conveyed properly with natural language. Therefore any research's essential task, aside from the intrinsic demands of its discipline, is to communicate and make itself understood to outsiders, those who do not possess the necessary vocabulary or detailed knowledge of the processes and methods involved.
In the case of performing arts practices, and in particular the ones involving exploratory, searching, 'impro-vised', and unforeseen elements, the demand for making itself understood comes before the demands of an institutional research culture. It is plain common sense to provide additional insights into thinking, process, and method. Doing so in a manner that can serve as the basis for analytical thinking and further investigations provides added benefits.
When subscribing to this position the crucial question question then becomes: How to do this? What are the appropriate means of exposing the necessary element in order to understood by outsider, laypeople or experts form other fields? What translation processes and methods are appropriate and acceptable for weaving a `second skin' around the primary art work?
Contrary to fine arts disciplines that produce as their primary work artefacts in the shape of physical or virtual objects, the performing arts, and in particular non-text based forms such a open-form music or dance performances produce no tangible and lasting objects. The 'actual' is contained in a performer's effort and expression and gets translated into an experience for the audience. The primary 'actual' is gone as soon as the show is over, as soon as the performer steps off the stage. (Of course work can be recreated, performed more than once, but how far are these repeated performances not new singular 'actuals', when there is not a sufficient degree if fixity to convey the sameness from performance to performance?)
What about the artistic activities during the development, where alternative solutions and more or different ideas might co-exist, but fail to materialise during the actual performance, for whatever reason? How does the status of these moments differ from the ones on stage in front of a proper audience?
Without being able to answer these questions, the main strategy used to mitigate the fleeting nature of the art-objects is to collect all possible forms of traces from the development process and the actualisation, in the hope that through these stand-in, or surrogate objects, single, detached aspects of the primary work might, if not reappear, then at least resonate and produce inklings and inspiration that relate the disappeared or the never materialised experience and work.
Therefore an archaeology of the immediate past of performance is needed, and indeed the processes, concepts and methods used in working after performance have much in common with this anthropological discipline concerned with the past. In practical terms, the traces are physical artefacts or media traces, that have their origin in the process and performance. Texts, sketches, notes, scores, discussions, audio and video-recordings, and photographs are all examples of traces that might help the emergence of a new identity of the work, in a new, second order form (Schwab 2014).
This exposition undertakes to explore the potential and limits of re-arranging these traces, to assemble in a loose form materials, insights, descriptions, reports and media, in order to constitute a new identity, one that echoes and resonates after the fleeting primary object of our art-making has gone.
Let us now turn to the actual performance of the pieces in front of an audience. Influenced by the research topics and with special attention to the third aspect, namely the realisation of gesture and movement within the actual pieces, the observation of role of gestures in the pieces is approached in the following comparative manner:
In both developing pieces the disposition of a performative mode is observed in which the artistic processes and content can prosper under ideal circumstances. This state, while being established and applied slightly differently in each piece, is in turn also key to both performances: In the trombone piece it allows the performer to actually interact with the space by `probing' it by continuously re-interpreting the material, and for with the audience by playing with perceptions and expectations. The dance piece is different in two aspects of the performance: First, the performer is not static; she is not forced to stay in one place. Therefore she is capable of exploring the space and also the sound-space with her own body by going to different actual locations. The room and body can be seen as the `instrument' as the sound is produced through the interaction of the two. Secondly, the dancer does not have to handle an actual instrument and more importantly the associated cultural codes. Reduced to the mere body and corpo-reality, the performed gestures, postures and sequences don't need to overcome the socio-cultural contexts as is the case in the trombone piece. In turn, the trombone piece with its constant challenging of standardised perceptions may be more accessible to the audience through the violations of respective expectations. In the dance piece this dimension is missing and the audience is faced with a much wider array of possibilities of movement and sound.
After analysing the development processes of the pieces in the previous section, the evolution of a narrative or discourse within the `actual' performance shows interesting parallels. Both pieces start with a silent setup, an empty `stage', and a single visible performer - a clean sheet. Both pieces then begin to slowly and continuously explore single movements and their interaction with the sound and space gradually evolving to more complex patterns. The observer still is able to grasp all of the discoveries of the performer as the tempo and focus is fitting. With confidence arisen in both the `sender' and `receiver', the phase of finding and handling the space, the sound and finally the repertoire or `basic sets' ends. Interestingly, in both pieces the transition to different states or `stains' is marked by pauses or transition. In the dance piece the exploration of a different `parameter' becomes central, whereas in the trombone piece the `(obvious) parameters' remain but the quality and tempo is changed. At this point, the analogy of the described developmental process of the pieces is mirrored within the evolution of the singular moment of the performed piece. When moving further into each piece, densities and tensions increase and tend to reach a climax in both performances: Boundaries are crossed and extremes are cultivated - in both performances this is reminiscent of random natural life processes and dramatic primitives. These characteristics evolve and culminate in an interesting parallelism between the two pieces: A `human' scream, detached from the instrument and the rest of the material of the performance marks the culmination point in the trombone piece whereas the `catastrophic' collapse of the dancer at the ned of the dance piece can be interpreted in the same way. In both cases, the culmination does not incorporate the climax or ending of the performances as such and must not be seen as inevitable. Both of the performances fade out smoothly by ending as cryptically as they started.
Part of understanding the different positions present in the artists-and-observer constellation is to draw parallels in the perception of processes between the inner (the involved artists) and the outer (the observing psychologist) points of views and perspectives. (The inner perspective being based as much on listening as on watching it should probably correctly be defined as `multi-modal partaking').
The intention is to be able to crack open the `black box' of the artistic development processes, even if only tiny bit. The participation by a psychologist as a (biased) observer opens up the opportunity to receive information about patterns and modes of operation that are usually hidden in the blind spot of an individual artist's practice. In this sense, the parallels reveal important connections, albeit only ephemerally present during the moments of rehearsal and development work behind close doors and not necessarily on stage.
Inner Perspective (artist position)
From the point of view of the actively engaged artists, the parallels and commonalities between the two work-flows can be seen everywhere, as was noted several times at other points in this exposition. Parallels can be seen in the repeated working methods applied in both the disciplines of dance and music; they also include compositional strategies and structural decisions about the form of the pieces. This comes as no surprise since in both cases the composer-performer was generating, modulating and carrying forward the development of the pieces, always in close collaboration with both performers. Seen from the inside, even dealing with two disciplines that do not share all their fundamental principles, the commonalities exceeded the differences. This insight is based on extended working with both disciplines over an extended period of time. A novice without training in reading the idiomatic and specific techniques of each field, and not familiar with making of work in the mode presented, could potentially see the two pieces as disparate and different.
Outer Perspective (observer position)
The work on the pieces did not start at the same time but as it becomes evident from the timeline ran in parallel most of the time. It is noteworthy, that we are only interested in similarities between the pieces that were not the result by structural and procedural influences of the research project (i.e. dates of showings etc.). The pieces were developed independently; the only shared time and space being the (intermediate) showings and a single rehearsal. No significant overlaps or crossings exist between the two pieces except the electronic music performer being involved in both projects. Given this constellation, it was prima facie not observable that one piece influenced the other in form or content. Nevertheless, it certainly may have - since parallels, mirrorings and identical aspects between the pieces are discovered constantly in observing the process. The momentum and the process of a possible reciprocal influence remains a `black box' and may only be solved with specific information obtained from the artist present in both pieces.
"In the passage from one to the other, from the assemblage of sounds to the Machine that renders it sonorous, from the becoming-child of the musician to the becoming-cosmic of the child, many dangers crop up: black holes, closures, paralysis of the finger and auditory hallucinations, Schumann's madness, cosmic force gone bad, a note that pursues you, a sound that transfixes you." (Deleuze and Guattari 1988, p 350)
Carrying out an analysis of the works presented here from a structural, compositional point of view can only yield statements concerning the form and techniques that were used. Similarly, observing the experiences made by artists, audience and expert observers will provide insights into some aspect of the experience, but will fail to provide a wider perspective on the practice and its impact outside the circle of peers. Framing the artistic works with conceptual consideration concerning processes and methods for arts-based inquiry can also only extend the perspective in a limited fashion.
The intention of this exposition is to explore methods for mapping out materials and reflections and gathering understanding about assembling traces and elements of both an artistic development process as well as set of compact performance pieces. By doing this both from a subjective point of view and from an outside observer position, and by trying to complement each-other in the approach chosen and the aspects discussed, it is evident that still only a limited scope can be covered. It becomes clear, therefore, that this article must remain incomplete in the attempt to cover the complex state of affairs that are the artistic and investigative development processes taking place through a large number of activities over a considerable span of time.
To round off the collection of materials presented here we'd like to acknowledge that many questions are left unasked. By pointing to some of those questions, and by sketching out only the briefest hints of thoughts directed at their answer, we hope to incite further reflection, discussion and dialogue with fellow artists, critical observers and curious audience members.
– What is the influence of choosing a conventional stage context on the meaning of the pieces?
One definite effect of the conventional context is that the two pieces get compared to more traditional forms of music and dance. Since some of the relationships and interactions are unknown to the public, the pieces may not be properly understood. Communicating the intentions and ideas of the pieces to the audience before the performance may help alleviate this problem.
– Is the concert format appropriate to explore and show different modes of addressing the body in current music and dance practices?
Choosing the concert format eliminates some of the pressure of having to redefine the frame as well as the content of an artistic work. At the same time, it provides the audience with an already established frame of expectations and experiences, which is essential to measure their experience against. Removing the known frame of reference or situating the works in a completely different frame of reference brings questions to the foreground that may not have been the topic of the artistic work.
– Can the two pieces be read as mirror images or is this a conceptual construction that doesn't translate to the audience's experience?
This remains to be seen, since the comparison lies in the capability of the audience to recognise underlying principles that are active in both pieces. From the artist's point of view, this question is impossible to resolve, since the bias is too strong.
– Taking the sensing technology for granted, does this remove an important issue from the analysis of the pieces (wearables, cyborgs, technical dominance, submission to the constraints of limited flexibility given by the casualty functional structures of software design)?
A large topic in itself, the use of technology is thematised only insofar as it affects the agency of the performers and serves as a substrate for the corporeal performance. Addressing the significance of wearable technology in this context may be less fruitful than asking questions about control and interdependence, as shown in the quote by Suzan Kozel (2007, p. 271) and as adressed in the symmetries graphic from `Moving Music'.
– Can this type of work be considered a radical form or is it merely an advanced application of conventional concepts? What are the weak, strong or radical forms of performing?
Again, this depends on the point of view. Is a work more radical if it defies all conventions? Can work be read, if it doesn't contain any recognisable references? Does radical mean an approach that is without compromise, or does it imply a core question that is radically detached from common practice?
– What would a more radical performance mode look like?
Performance art's reduction, for example, would shift the focus more to the framing format, and by that the attitude and significance of such pieces would move from compositionally calibrated explorations to a situational mode of performance. This shift may be interesting to explore in a situation where the given pieces could function as mere springboards for new forms of performing.
Adding other media and scenographic elements would move the pieces into a more theatrical context. Again, the focus may slip from the key question about the relationship between body and sound to the atmospheric, visual or spatial staging-situation.
– How can working with embodied presence in the way shown here provide the desired shift in significance?
The shift in significance is one that moves away from the material towards the changed quality of performance. It probably takes an increased level of knowledge and sensitisation to these issues in order to perceive and recognise the effects this has in the two pieces. Depending on the familiarity with the idiom, other aspects, such as sound materials or the use of space may come to the foreground for a viewer.
– Is it possible to address the socio-political situation by working in a black-box environment in a specialist, expertise driven mode of creation? What would other methods look like that bring these practices into an environment where the social impact would be more pronounced?
This is a difficult, ethical question (Cobussen and Nielsen 2012) for all performing arts, since we are tributaries to many cultural norms and socio-economical power relations. Obtaining access to a proper theatrical space and performing work that stretches its boundaries already depends on and exposes the artist's status within the society. Embedding this practice in extended forms of communications such as sharing experience in workshops and intercultural encounters could potentially generates a different social meaning. On the other hand, developing an expertise and opening a time-span that allows to engage fully in artistic development and research by itself already constitutes an elitist and excluding setting, so the contradiction is difficult of not impossible to resolve.
"In performance, the body abruptly and explicitly comes into visibility and resits forms of objectification that may put it to rest, to clarity and obviousness. The body becomes maniacally charged, in the sense that it enacts, fears, fantasies, beliefs and so on, and in the sense that it confronts and makes us suffer as soon as we have to turn to its bold presence. The body, in its distressing explicitness–which may be an explicit absence–exhibits an existential level that is usually concealed, partly because it functions without (and even underlies) our ordinary and superficially guaranteed awareness." (De Preester, 2007 p.352)
'Double Vortex': video-stills of performer movements and movement traces of three markers mounted on the trombone; motion-study 30/11/2015 (click to enlarge).
'Moving Music': sceen capture of the body-silhouette analysis used for spatial sound positioning; rehearsal 09/07/2015 (click to enlarge).
The two works discussed here are embedded within a research process that brings a defined hypothesis and research questions to the table (see http://mgm.zhdk.ch). The composition, development and performances of the pieces form one axis of research, with the aim of generating insights through praxis. In the wider research project context, there are other practices that run in parallel, provide cues and guide-lines, and are in turn informed by the process taking place with the musical creation of `Double Vortex' and `Moving Music'.
A key questions posed by the research project is how a musician's corporeality, presence and movements influence, colour, charge a musical performance, in other words what effect the embodied presence has on musical performances. Conversely, the the question concerning the dancer is how musical principles that govern timing, density and polyphony are active in movement performance and perception.
This investigation into `Gesture', movement's crucial entwinement with expression, is not merely carried out by analysing existing works, although that method forms part of the wider circle of the research context. The opportunity to modulate the aspects of corporeal presence, and to actively shape movements in a musical-, and later also dance-performance, falls within the domain of Art as Research. This is a crucial step in the search for understanding those elements that reside inside the practice, be it during the development process or in the particularly dense moment of performance (the `actual').
The complexity of the encircling ambitions engenders the need for the development and reflection on methods and means that can accompany in parallel the artistic work. This forms a counterbalance to the doing and exploring that constitutes most of the concrete activities. A mode of collection of traces and of observation is necessary, in order to provide materials for analytical work as well as the processes of mapping, making diagrams and building assemblages that is the basis for this exposition.
In this sense, the artistic practice is scaffolded and contaminated, informed and subverted by attitudes and modes of operation that are important in adjoining or outside fields and obey other laws of relevance than the ones at play in the musical practice itself. An example of this is the necessity for textual sources of some sorts (scores) necessary to carry out semiotically informed systematic analysis from a Music Theory point of view. Without the symbolic representation of notation, the methods and tools used in that discipline are of limited use and produce interpretation that might miss the point of the work.
`Double Vortex' is situated in an electronic music performance practice that is based on real-time sound processing and gestural interaction. This practice lives on concert-hall stages, for example in the context of a festival, or in an extended mode on dance stages, through performances with technology. Through this filiation it inherits a number of assumptions and tropes that limit the potential for altering the format. The piece is built on a framework that falls within the current practice of electronic music making.
`Moving Music' takes on the principles of live-electronic performance and lets a movement expert – a dancer – take on the role of a musician by tying single, measurable aspects of movement to sound generation and expressive shaping. The dancer's movement is translated to elements of sound, the control over and responsibility for temporal and dynamic structure lies with the performer. This form is proves to be less common both in the domains of music and dance. The particular mode of linking the disciplines and of shifting the agency in an open-form, instant composition manner is relatively unusual.
In both cases, the focus on the larger social context is reduced in favour of creating compact, convincing pieces for the stage. In both cases, however, the staging takes into account the use of the black-box as an abstract space, where presence shows up in different degrees: the performers are in the limelight, and therefore occupy the centre of attention; the composer-performer sits at the front edge of the stage and is perceived as being part of the performance, even if the physical presence is less pronounced his contributing role is clear. The audience partakes from a vantage point situated outside the stage space and contributes to the intensity of the performance by their focussed attention. The choice of such a conventionally staged situation is based on the conscious decision to leverage the cultural trope of the frontal performance. By keeping the issue of space and stage situation in the field of the known, a cultural invariant as it were, the artistic statement and associated questions are directed towards the exploratory movement that engenders the unexpected and unusual within the pieces themselves.
This is beneficial for the artistic development process. The conceptual framework for both pieces is well defined from the start, and one type of outcome can already be described at the beginning, albeit only in its outer form. The choice for framing the outer form of the outcome in a traditional, frontal concert performance is taken in order to be able to focus on other aspects of the process that seem more conducive to generating insights about the core questions asked. At the same time the traditional framing establishes a sort of base-line or ground truth with regard to musical practices, such as composition, development of interactions and sound processing, the process of rehearsing and performing of such live-electronic pieces, and ultimately the mode of perception by an audience as well.
This framework allows for a `differential' method in composing and at the same time provides easy to follow guide-rails, such as for example duration of the work, placing in the performance space of performers and audience, or the information and narrative provided alongside the piece. The frame doesn't exclude a deliberate stretching of those boundaries but it helps to focus the energy on those elements that are deemed essential to fulfil the intended goals of the piece. The `differential' achieved stems from the fact that for most novel solutions a traditional element can be juxtaposed and therefore reveal the impact or value of the new. An example of this would be the posture of a conventional trombone player and the way it expresses her conscious application to presence. In the new piece, this element is consciously shaped and results in making evident or even central the corporal presence of the performer.
The piece for interactive dance and electronic sound 'Moving Music' is a collaboration between the dancer Angela Stoecklin and Jan Schacher.
The framing and concept for this work are mirror-images of 'Double Vortex' insofar as the underlying question of how gesture influences the perception, affect, and impact of music is shared, but in the relationship between dancer and sound they come to exist under an inverted sign. A clear view of fundamental differences arises, when comparing not just the manner that the discipline of dance deals with time and movement materials, but also when considering how in one sense a dancer's movements are always-already their material, how the dynamics of movement are self-evident in the dancer's body, compared to the musician's dynamics and expressions that need translating to the sound-domain to take their effect.
One of the core issues in this collaborative exploration is to learn to understand the inter-relationship and dependency between movement and sound through the use of electronic sound-processes that are controlled by technically sensing movements. Rather than being based on a cultural or narrative concept, the work in question serves both to investigate a specific research question as well as a to bridge systematically structured methods with the open exploratory processes typically found in artist's processes. By juxtaposing, and overlaying these two positions and their respective methods, the aim is to shed light on principles and commonalities present and active, when actively shaping (expressing) and perceiving movement- and sound-phrases (Gestalts: in dance and music, in movement and sound).
One of the central challenges is that the two domains only share a limited set of fundamental characteristics and principles. Whereas dance and movement is inherently multi-dimensional, multi-modal, and based to a very high degree on physiological as well as psychological human factors (Kozel 2007), technical processes in the control and production of electronic sounds are much more limited and are always based on models of mathematical abstraction and formalisation (Xenakis 1992).
The exploration of materials for this piece runs along an axis that is heavily informed by a terminological inquiry that had been done earlier in the research context (see here), but above all by the categorisation of movements and their qualities as defined by Laban (1950). In his system the term 'Effort' is one way of defining the central aspect that human perception is sensitive to when identifying movement qualities. Using the term in its most literal form enables a direct linkage of measured effort (i.e. energy) with sound energy. Under the fundamental dimension of time, the piece explores shaping or phrasing of time with the aid of linking individual limbs to sound processes. Contrary to music, in dance space in its absolute form plays an essential role. The exploration of the relationship of this fundamental element to sound is realised with a depth-camera, positioned in front of the topographical space of the dancer, with the basic function of controlling localised sound-pools that react to her presence.
The overall structure of the piece echoes that of the original version of the trombone piece, in that it has a traditional three-part form. As a working model established at the beginning of the process, the thesis, antithesis and synthesis structure was given, but this is something that might disappear in a future version. The advantage of this classic tripartition is the ability to clearly focus in the first two sections on single aspects during the performance, in a mode of new discovery both for the performer and the audience. This is a quality or attitude that functions well in terms of establishing a rapport to the piece and working principles for an audience that sees the piece for the first time. Feedback from viewers who have repeatedly seen the piece indicates however that the effect of this can flip to the opposite, becoming slightly annoying.
The third section finally leaves the mode of systematic separation, minimalistic focus on single gestures or actions and obeys the laws of full performance and complete expression in the domains of movement and sound. Under the topic of 'transformation' the dancer's tasks and focus is set to take the materials, forms, and interactions of the first two sections and transform them with an intent of shaping and phrasing without restraint, and to explore less the materials and rather the dynamics and forces that have accumulated over the time-span, and put them into a succinct order of movement phrases and sound-'gestalts' through the electronic sound-generation 'instrument' that is at her disposition.
More can be said about the insights obtained during the exploration and development phases of this piece (see Analysing Development and Observing Singularity sections). The central ideas and the methods used, those of sketching, iteration and the compression, decompression cycle is also present in this piece and complements, echoes, mirrors, and parallels in many ways that of its sibling, the trombone piece.
What is never visible in a single performance but is implicitly understood by all, is the fact that preparations have gone into this presentation and that what is shown is the result of a longer previous process. In music performances this includes an expectation by the audience that the musician exhibit expertise and the notion that the music is what is actually intended. With this blanket statement are also included musical practices and styles that might not subscribe to the concept of piece or work, such as exploratory improvised playing. But even in these practices an understanding is implicitly agreed upon between audience and musicians and these boundaries are not questioned.
In the current project, this observation holds true, and preparations are acknowledged explicitly by communicating the context within which the work is located. But even if that is the case the iterative nature of the methods and processes is not self-evident. Rather than considering a performance of a piece, even its first, to be the only element that is relevant and valuable, we contend that the entire iterative process of sketching, exploring and developing that occurs through rehearsals and preliminary showings is part of the entire process and can be shown when questions about origins of certain musical choices or conceptual decisions asked.
Seen through an even wider lens, similar processes undertaken for the other works that are part of the wider project also come into play, and can be considered to contribute to the sounding outcome that is shown on stage during performance as well. For the artists who are involved in parallel in creating and performing these parallel works and furthermore is also in charge of comparative analysis across disciplines, the repetitive, iterative nature of these activities becomes a central characteristic of all the methods used.
Going through a cycle of development again and again provides a number of advantages. Correcting one's preconceived ideas about how to develop work is the main one. Understanding that the cyclical nature of a working processes enables the revisiting of decisions and assumptions is an essential part of maturing a piece as well.
When observing the development cycle of 'Double Vortex' and 'Moving Music', as seen in the timeline-graphic (see below), this repetitive, iterative model is clearly visible: after an initial development phase that was mainly focused on reaching a first concert version, a few sessions took place, where basic elements of the piece, such a postures and gestures were re-examined. A limited number of working sessions then led to the intermediate showing milestone, where new sounding material was combined for the beginning of a second version of the piece.
A series of rehearsals, including a motion-study session where an in-between state was recorded with a motion-capture tool, finally led to the second concert version. In two large arcs at least four versions were performed for audiences, either in a full concert situation or (still crucial) evaluation and measurement performances. At each step, the video-traces were analysed, the decisions concerning sound materials, playing techniques, interaction models and performative body aspects re-evaluated.
Being able to reach an overview of this kind enables us at this point to discern the important connections that exist between the compression and relaxation in each cycle on the one hand, and the as well as the cross-contamination to and from the parallel tracks on the other hand. As described in the section 'Through the Vortex' the compression-relaxation cycle is what fuels refinement or maturation. The experience of the work in the 'actual' environment of the performance makes the value of choices become evident or at least easier to discern. As described in the section 'Observing Parallels' the cross-fertilisation or -contamination is an important factor to take into account in terms of clarification of the core-questions and concepts and the ability to more clearly formulate to goals that each work is aiming at.
A performance on stage in front of an audience possesses an density, a compression that brings together countless sub-personal, individual, collective, and social significations together in an inextricable mesh of intertwined fragments, layers, planes, vortices and circles.
This moment of doing, as opposed to preparing or repairing, this condensed presence of all participants, but in particular the performers, is what Schechner (1977) calls the `actual'. This term denotes shift from potentials and pre-given norms and structures to the realisation of action, rituals, drama in performance. The actual is in evidence as long as the performance is ongoing. Once the piece is played, the concert is finished, the play has its final curtain, this evidence disappears and cannot be fully recreated, except through another full-blown performance.
Apart from the ritual role of collectively sharing of a single individual's performance (for the benefit of her entire tribe, in traditional cultures), not much magic has survived. Nevertheless, an essential element remains, even in extremely organised and streamlined performances that are common in large-scale entertainment industries: the shared and co-performed dedicated attention by both audience and artist, expresses a pact, an agreement on the roles, the boundaries and the expectations in play during this time-span.
What is left of these moments of `actualisation' is only a trace in the memories of the persons who were present. These memories are highly multidimensional since they encompass not just the sensorial inputs but also the affective, physiological reaction, feelings and emotions that arose through the performance. Technological recording techniques are merely capable of capturing a few modalities, mainly audio and visual. The outward appearance and timing of things can be recreated, the sounds replayed, but the deeper physiological, emotional and conscious reactions and their correlation can be re-triggered only to a minimal degree.
The `actual' therefore has a unique status as a cultural element, as a human experience that exhibits a high degree of complexity and a multitude of intertwined and interrelated perceptual, cognitive and above all embodied effects. Every single sensory channel is affected, for the performer and the audience.
With all the `stains' and `biases' gathered during the project, it is surprising to manage to return to a naïve spectator mode while watching the performed pieces, especially in the intermediate and final showings. This state enables letting go of the continuous interpretation efforts and allows diving into the different tiers of mere sound, mere movement, as well as into an interesting mixture of the two which can be described as "focused on the sound, but aware of the movements". With a particular focus and `divided attention' it becomes possible to share and experience the performance in an empathic, embodied manner while experiencing intrinsic pleasure, without the constant urge to understand and explain. This produces semantic reverberations and a perceptual immersion in the sound and movement. The urge to interpret and analyse returns nevertheless, it is possibly due to the direct involvement with research process: Despite experiencing bliss and intrinsic satisfaction, the inner process of constructing narratives and interpretations when thinking of the pieces is the direct result of thoroughly following their creation and iterations.
In the case of the dance piece the personal narrative evolves around an organism or being which comes into life, experiences and explores the world around it, starts to interact, and finds its place. This story continues with the `catastrophic' collapse towards the end representing defeat or death. Subsequent resurrection and continuation is only a logical consequence of the constructed narrative and closes the perceived `circle of life'. It contains aspects of life evolution with the prominent notions of exploring and integrating, or `learning and failing', which is realised in the (evolving) mastery of the gestural sound control within the performance. The specific nature of sounds matters less (they changed substantially during the development of the piece) than the tangible `interaction' of the fictional being with this natural habitat.
The trombone piece contains aspects of a personal narrative about a developing life or general evolution as well. Nevertheless, it has other obvious qualities which are more prominent and interesting since it lacks abstract sound generation and movement throughout the given space: The directionality and axes represent the prominent `salient' features in this performance; the variation of tempi, `curvy' and `edgy' movements, and abrupt changes in axes and directionality create a stark contrast with the rather fluent and organic dance performance. The changes in directions and the mode of exploring the (sound-)space through directed sounds leads to a similar interpretation of `learning and failing'. In the trombone piece the epistemic impulses (cultural codes) are provided by the stage setup and instrument whereas in the dance piece they are delivered directly to the place in space.
The parallelisms and mirrorings between the pieces are evident, they occur between the actual performances and developmental phases, as well as between performer and audiences. Finally, our minds are incapable of _not_ generating patterns, connections and meanings. But the question remains: Are these patterns or narratives (partly) intended by the artists or are they the result of a biased perception?
The entire process of developing, rehearsing and performing the two pieces, as shown in this article, leaves behind a diffuse sense of understanding, of having learned how to better navigate and negotiate a territory that is fraught with pit-falls. Since the essence of performance resides in its fluidity and ephemerality, and is a manifestation beyond words, it is difficult to capture it in any other than the primary form. Although it is meant to be experienced live and directly from person to person, thinking, writing and arranging traces forms an important part of communicating the outcomes of this process. In order to understand the unfolding continuum of ideas and perceptions, and in order to see how the threads and links weave a pattern over an extended period, memories should not have to be the sole resources, the collection of traces becomes an indispensable part of a method that aims to reach beyond the immediate domain of the performance.
Finding and defining forms of assembling the traces and elements of such processes is essential in order to put them out into the world again as second order works but works in their own right nonetheless.
This leads to a more open form, such as the one presented with this exposition, in a contradictory way wants to stay fluid, despite its apparently fixity presented through fully decided content and form on this page. Each solution found for explicating and making understandable one's artistic work is by definition incomplete and, to make matters worse, only valid during a brief period of time, before shifting again and entering into mutual exchange with and being influenced by other projects, elements, ideas, practices.
As artist creating work, the core resonance of developing and performing pieces remains the experience itself, which can be accessed through the memories, sometimes triggered by similar situations, sounds, and spaces.
As with any fully realised cultural and human endeavour, the experience is singular and is almost impossible to properly shared with anyone, since memories cannot be transferred, but also since the artist's position, tasks, awareness-level and field of association during the performance is unique.
Nevertheless, it is exactly by sourcing from the unique position within the performed moment an additional effort of presenting materials, that a a richer and more satisfying interpersonal exchange can take place, that multiplies the impact of an art work. In this regard persevering in the conflictual state between doing and talking, between performing and communicating provides a worthwhile and fruitful attitude in the specific kind of performing art presented here.
Artaud, A. (1964). The Theatre and Its Double. Richmond, Surrey: Alma Classics Ltd.
Benjamin, W. (1940). Theses on the Philosophy of History, Illuminations, trans. Harry Zohn, New York: Schocken Books.
Bevilacqua, F., Schnell, N., and Alaoui, S. F. (2011). "Gesture Capture: Paradigms in Interactive Music/Dance systems." In Klein G., Noeth S., editors, Emerging Bodies: The Performance of Worldmaking in Dance and Choreography, pages 183–194. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
Bermudez, B., deLahunta, S., Hoogenboom, M., Ziegler, C., Bevilacqua, F., Alaoui, S. F., and Gutierrez, B. M. (2011). "The Double Skin/Double Mind Interactive Installation". Journal For Artistic Research, (0).
Boulez, P. (1981). Répons for orchestra, soloists, live electronics and computer generated tapes. London: Universal Editions.
Casserley, L. (1993). "The ircam signal processing workstation: A composer/performer’s view". Journal of Electroacoustic Music, 7:25–32.
Cobussen, M., and Nielsen, N., (2012) Music and Ethics. Farnham, Surrey, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Delahunta, S., McGregor, W., and Blackwell, A. (2004). "Transactables." Performance Research, 9(2):67–72.
Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari. (1988). A Thousand Plateaus. London: The Athlone Press.
De Preester, H. (2007). "To Perform the Layered Body–A Short Exploration of the Body in Performance". Janus Head, 9(2):349–383.
Edmonds, E. Z. Bilda, and L. Muller. (2009). "Artist, evaluator and curator: three viewpoints on interactive art, evaluation and audience experience." Digital Creativity, 20(3):141–151.
Esler, R. (2006). "Digital autonomy in electroacoustic music performance: Re-forging Stockhausen." In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, pages 131–134.
Held, K. (2003). "Husserl’s Phenomenology of the Life-World." In D. Welton, editor, The new Husserl: a Critical Reader, pages 32–64. Bloominton, IN: Indiana University Press.
Jorda, S. (2005). Digital lutherie: Crafting musical computers for new musics performance and improvisation. PhD diss., Barcelona, Spain: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Departament de Tecnologia.
Kirsh, D. (2010). "Thinking with the Body." In Society, C. S., editor, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Austin TX, pages 2864–2869.
Kozel, S. (2007). Closer, Performance, Technology, Phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Laban, R. (1950). The Mastery of Movement. Alton, Hamphire, UK: Dance Books Ltd., revised 4. edition, (1980/2011).
Luria, A. R. (1973). The Working Brain. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books.
Maletic, V. (1987). Body - Space - Expression; The Development of Rudolf Laban’s Movement and Dance Concepts. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The Visible and the Invisible. Paris: Gallimard / Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press,
DeLahunta, S. (2013) Motion Bank | a context for moving ideas, http://motionbank.org (URL accessed July 2016)
Nakakoji, K., Tanaka A., and D. Fallman. (2006). "Sketching nurturing creativity: commonalities in art, design, engineering and research." In CHI’06 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, pages 1715–1718. ACM.
Paxton, S. (2008). Material for the Spine: A Movement Study. DVD-ROM, Contredanse.
Reynolds, D. (2007). Rhythmic subjects: Uses of energy in the dances of Mary Wigman, Martha Graham and Merce Cunningham. Alton, Hamphire, UK: Dance Books Ltd.
Rokeby, D. (1995). "Transforming Mirrors". Critical Issues in Interactive Media, pages 133– 158.
Schacher, J. C. and Bisig, D. (2016). "Face to Face – Performers and Algorithms in Mutual Dependency". In Proceedings of the International Conference on Live-Interfaces ICLI, Brighton, UK.
Schechner, R. (1977). Performance Theory. London, New York: Routledge. 2nd 1988/2003 edition.
Schwab. M. (2014). "The exposition of practice as research as experimental systems". In D. Crispin and B. Gilmore, editors, Artistic Experimentation in Music, pages 31–40. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
Shaw, N. Z. (2011). "Synchronous objects, choreographic objects, and the translation of dancing ideas". In Klein G., Noeth S., editors, Emerging Bodies: The Performance of Worldmaking in Dance and Choreography, pages 207–225. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2009). "Thinking in Movement". In Sheets-Johnstone, M., editor, The Corporeal Turn: An Interdisciplinary Reader, pages 28–63. Exeter, UK: Imprint Academic.
Siegel, W. and Jacobsen, J. (1998). "The Challenges of Interactive Dance: An Overview and Case Study". Computer Music Journal, 22(4):29–43.
Sonami, L. (1991). The lady’s glove, a brief history. http://sonami.net/ladys-glove/ (URL accessed July 2016)
Tanaka, A. (2000). "Musical performance practice on sensor-based instruments". In Trends in Gestural Control of Music, Volume 13, pages 389–405. Paris, France: IRCAM—Centre Pompidou.
Waisvisz, M. (1985). "The Hands, a Set of Remote Midi-Controllers." In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, pages 313–318.
Xenakis, I. (1992). Formalized Music: Thought and Mathematics in Composition. Harmonolgia Series 6. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, new expanded edition.
This work was carried out within the `Motion Gesture Music' Project at the Institute for Computer Music and Sound Technology of the Zurich University of the Arts, and was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation Grant No. 100016_149345.
Many thanks to Angela Stöcklin and Beat Unternährer for their unwavering support for this project.
Comparative timeline of composition processes and performances during the project (click to enlarge).
