Dance Central May June 2014

Dance Central May/June 2014

Dance CentralA Dance Centre Publication

Content

"I Love Dance Deeplybut I also Hate It"A conversation with Lee Su-FehPage 2

From the Executive Directorby Mirna ZagarPage 6

Rethinking 12 Minutes Maxa conversation with Claire French and Mirna ZagarPage 9

Thinking Bodies Karen Jamiesontalks about her solo|soul Project0

2 D a n c e C e n t ra l M ay / J u n e 2 0 1 4

Su-Feh Lee is a dancer, choreographer, dramaturge and teacher born and raised

in Malaysia, where she trained and performed in theatre and dance. Since arriv-

ing in Vancouver in 1988, she has created a body of work that interrogates the

contemporary body as a site of intersecting and displaced histories and habits. In

April 2013, she received the Isadora Award from The Dance Centre for her contri-

bution to the dance field as choreographer, performer, teacher, thinker, writer and

speaker, and in March 2014 she received the second Lola Award. She is currently

working on building a Dance Machine, with the help of dance artist Justine Cham-

bers and architect Jesse Garlick; and is also participating in Migrant Bodies, a

two-year international research project hosted by The Dance Centre and partner

organizations in Montreal, France, Italy and Croatia. www.batteryopera.com tour.

AK: Did the Lola Award come as a surprise to you?

LSF: No. I got people to nominate me, shamelessly, because I

thought I deserved it, and because of the timing of it in relation to

things I am doing.

AK: What do you make of the 'guided nomination' process?

LSF: It's awkward; it feels like a passive-aggressive way of getting

something. I should just be able to apply and speak about why I

deserve it instead of getting someone else to say it.

AK: Did you have a strong connection to Lola?

LSF: Yes and no. Lola was a friend, but I had also been angry with

her, in the way friends and colleagues get angry with one another

over time. And when I heard she got sick, but was told that maybe

she didn’t want people to know, it became hard to express my

care or concern openly. Which, coupled with my anger, became a

A conversation with Lee Su-Feh

Welcome to the May/June 2014 issue of Dance Central.

This issue features a conversation with Lee Su-Feh, the

Artistic Director of battery opera and this year's recipi-

ent of the Lola Award, about her relationship to dance,

to the tension between disciplines, to what we call his-

tory, and what we hope for as critical discourse.

Mirna Zagar and Claire French offer some of the think-

ing behind the re-launch of 12 MINUTES MAX which

begins with a studio showing this June, alongside the

first call for works, that will be curated for a studio

showing on June 5th of this year.

The 'Thinking Bodies' series continues with a conversa-

tion with Karen Jamieson, whose two-year Solo|Soul

project is about to be presented at Scotiabank Dance

Centre this July.

As always, we thank all the artists who have agreed to

contribute and we welcome new writing and project

ideas at any time, in order to continue to make Dance

Central a more vital link to the community. Please send

material by mail to [email protected]. or

call us at 604.606.2264. We look forward to

the conversation!

Andreas Kahre, Editor

"I love dance deeply, but I also hate it."

D a n c e C e n t ra l M ay / J u n e 2 0 1 4 3

continued on page 4

complicated set of emotions that didn’t get resolved before

she died. So part of what is special about getting the award is

that it is a way of continuing to have a relationship with Lola. It

represents support from the community, but it also represents

a connection with history, with someone who has left traces of

what they are in you.

AK: Do you have of sense of how you might use it?

LSF: I have a number of projects going on right now for which I

have funding, but this allows me to take liberties—if an aspect

of a work needs more attention or resources I will be able to

meet that. It's nice that the award isn't project specific and that

it is designed to acknowledge the whole of a practice.

AK: Crystal Pite, the first Lola Award recipient, pointed out that

it had been critical in allowing her to take time and consider

the next step in her practice. But there is still some confusion

whether the award is intended to support a mid-career artist

A conversation with Lee Su-Feh

during a critical juncture in their development, or, more like an

Isadora, perhaps, to recognize achievement. Where do you

think the Lola fits into Vancouver's 'dance award ecology'?

LSF: The Isadora, like the Alcan Award—tends to move around

the community in a certain pattern: No one gets it twice, but

eventually everyone gets it. I think the Lola is different, but I am

not sure which part of a career it should support. In any case, it

would be cool if it was open to other disciplines.

AK: It is; at least according to the original mandate which explic-

itly includes artists from other disciplines, provided their work

embodies the ethos of the 'Gesamtkunstwerk' (the fully integrat-

ed, or as it sometimes translated, the 'total' work of art, Ed.)

LSF: The cool thing about the 'Gesamtkunstwerk' is that it

challenges dance artists to situate themselves among other

"I love dance deeply, but I also hate it."

disciplines, and it challenges other disciplines to take dance

seriously, because this award comes from the dance world

and we are confident enough to give it to someone who is not

a dancer. Politically, that could be important, to help dance be

taken seriously.

AK: Do you find that there is a growing dialogue between

dance and the larger artworld; that artists from other disci-

plines are learning to look at dance differently?

LSF: No. I don't feel that people take dance seriously as a dis-

cipline, or as a form that has teeth in influencing performance.

AK: Visual art, through the apparatus of critical language, has

long been in the role of the arbiter of what is deemed 'im-

portant' work. Perhaps that explains why the—often heard—

observation that other artists rarely take dance seriously

seems directed, if obliquely, at visual artists, rather than say,

musicians. Do you encounter visual artists who show an inter-

est in dance or movement-based practice?

LSF: I have not met visual artists

who have shown an interest in

dance in the way that I have an

interest in visual art; certainly noth-

ing like the situation in 1960s New

York where visual artists like Rich-

ard Serra were influenced by the

Judson Church Group, for example.

But it goes both ways: Dance art-

ists need to step outside the world

of dance and consider other forms, and take them seriously,

as more than decoration. I wonder if the Lola Award has the

potential to create that space, and I am curious if the notion

of the Gesamtkunstwerk will remain as central. There are only

so many people who make that kind of work, possibly only

as many as can pronounce the word! So there may be years

when the Lola may not be awarded.

AK: The notion of the Gesamtkunstwerk, at least as it was

first envisioned, does not enjoy much currency among visual

artists at the moment; between the whiff of antisemitism at-

tached to Wagner, and the shift to newer 'integrated media',

"I want to reveal a body that is in constant negotiation, not just

with other bodies, but also between the history it carries and the layers

of history beneath its feet."


Dance CentralThe Dance CentreScotiabank Dance CentreLevel 6, 677 Davie StreetVancouver BC V6B 2G6T 604.606.6400 F [email protected]

Dance Central is published every two months by The Dance Centre for its members and for the dance community. Opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent Dance Central or The Dance Centre. The editor reserves the right to edit for clarity or length, or to meet house requirements.

Editor Andreas KahreCopy Editor Hilary Maxwell

Contributors to this issue:Lee Su-Feh, Claire French, Mirna Zagar, Karen Jamieson,

Dance Centre Board MembersChair Ingrid M. TsuiVice Chair Gavin RyanSecretary Simone OrlandoTreasurer Roman Goldmann

Directors Kate BilsonBarbara Bourget Matthew BreechSusan ElliottMargaret GrenierBeau Howes Anndraya T. Luui Josh Martin

Dance Foundation Board MembersChair Michael WeltersSecretary Anndraya T. LuuiTreasurer Jennifer ChungDirectors Santa Aloi, Linda Blankstein, Grant Strate

Dance Centre Staff:Executive Director Mirna ZagarProgramming Coordinator Raquel AlvaroMarketing Manager Heather BrayServices Administrator Anne DaroussinDevelopment Director Sheri UrquhartTechnical Directors Justin Aucoin and Mark Eugster Accountant Lil ForcadeMember Services Coordinator Hilary Maxwell

The Dance Centre is BC's primary resource centre for the dance profession and the public. The activities of The Dance Centre are made possible by numerous individuals. Many thanks to our members, volunteers, communi-ty peers, board of directors and the public for your ongoing commitment to dance in BC. Your suggestions and feedback are always welcome. The operations of The Dance Centre are supported by the Canada Council for the Arts, the Province of British Columbia through the BC Arts Council, and the City of Vancouver through the Office of Cultural Affairs.

performances like the Ring Cycle in Bayreuth have become

museum pieces of their own glorious past—rarefied affairs

that cost twenty million dollars to produce, and are popu-

lated by people who pay upwards of $5000 for a ticket.

LSF: Nothing very 'Gesamt' about it....

AK: Considering that dance almost always appears in

the context of other disciplines, it is interesting that it

isn't more generally valorized as an 'integrated' artform.

Can individual works still hold the frame of the Gesamt-

kunstwerk, or does it apply more to an artist's approach to

their entire practice—as it did with Lola?

LSF: More to the practice, I think—I can't think of a single

work of Lola's that fully embodies the concept, but her

entire oeuvre certainly shows evidence of it.

AK: Does the idea of a 'total work of art' play a role in your

thinking about your own work?

LSF: I don't walk around with 'Gesamtkunstwerk' ringing

in my head, but I live and work by certain principles, or

hypotheses, that I play with and put out, and in that sense I

don't experience a separation between what I am trying to

achieve in art and in my own life. Currently, I am working

on two projects, which are trying to arrive at the dancing

body through scenography and costume rather than by

making steps. My first collaboration is with architect Jesse

Garlick and dance artist Justine Chambers, constructing

a 'Dance Machine', striving for a performance that is both

costume and environment: An environment that clothes both

dancer and viewer, provoking and revealing the interconnect-

edness of our human bodies so that we may all dance together.

The other project is a collaboration with visual artist Edward

Poitras and performance artist Robin Poitras, where we are

making a “Habitacle” - an as-yet-unknown thing where habitat,

habits, clothing (habiller being the french word for to clothe)

and spectacle meet. In these projects, I am concerned with the

permeability of the body, of the relationship between body and

place, body and objects. I want to reveal a body that is in con-

stant negotiation, not just with other bodies, but also between

the history it carries and the layers of history beneath its feet.

Dance is how we make that negotiation. I am less interested at

the moment in choreography as something that I invent on the

dancer’s body but something that I do to or with the body of the

audience, or to the relationship between artist and the audi-

ence. I feel that this is all Gesamtkunstwerk territory.

AK: Where will your curiosity take you next?

LSF: I am not sure; one's relationship with dance is always

fraught with disappointment. I love dance deeply, but I also

hate it. I am not sure how I am going to come out of this pro-

cess, which will take two or three years.

AK: What is the source of the disappointment?

LSF: That dance is ineffectual, that it is concerned only with be-

ing beautiful, pretty, or pleasing. That it speaks from a place of

entitlement and privilege, without being actually conscious.

"I want to reveal a body that is in constant negotiation, not just

with other bodies, but also between the history it carries and the layers

of history beneath its feet."


"I love dance deeply,A conversation with Lee Su-Feh

but I also hate it."

continued on page 16

D a n c e C e n t r a l S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 4 3

Re-thinking12 Minutes Max

The Final 12 Minutes Max Poster, ca. 2009

AK: What happened? What is going to happen?

MZ: We wanted to go back to the core mission: 12 Minutes

Max is about dialogue and discourse around the practice of

movement–based work. It is not a showcase for completed

work, but an opportunity to open the doors to new ideas.

There are several different platforms related to presenting

short work, and we have dialogue about open rehearsals and

processes, but we don't have focused dialogue around di-

verse practices in space, and we don't have a critical frame-

work for new ideas to be presented in development. We feel

that there could be an opportunity to share ideas and to have

fun, to be informative about the artist's process of embodying

ideas. We also want to create an opportunity to encourage

dialogue between audiences, both from within and outside

the dance community and to encourage them to respond to

developing work. We want to create a 'tasting and testing'

ground, a springboard that can lead to new works and new

collaborations. That was the source of 12 Minutes Max, and

that's what we want to get back to.

AK: Early on, the series was focused on creating opportuni-

ties for emerging choreographers to share work in progress

with an audience, in a frame that provided basic production

values and encouraged informal feedback, but over the years

it became much more presentational. Why did it change?

CF: I co-curated the series with Daelik toward the end, and

we became aware that we were losing the focus on work in

development and dialogue. One reason for this development

was that the selection had to be based on who auditioned,

rather than an independent curatorial process. The diversity

that resulted became part of the series' draw, but it also cre-

ated a challenge, because established dance groups were

using it as a way to enhance the profile of finished work. Over

time, it became more and more of a showcase. That hadn't

been our intention, and that is one reason why we wanted to

re-imagine it. Another was that there had developed a blur

between series such as Dances for a Small Stage, Brief En-

counters, programming at The Dance Centre and events like

Dancing on the Edge. The community shifted in how it used

these opportunities, and when we put 12 Minutes Max to rest,

we realized that nothing existed which addressed its original

mandate: A framework for critical reflection on developing

ideas in movement-based practice. That's why we have been

going back to the roots, and why we want to reach a whole

generation of dance artists who aren't aware of what it can

offer and how it could work.


From the Executive DirectorOn a rainy Spring day in Vancouver, funneled by a desire for the sun to break through, I reflected on how our sea-son comes to a close, and on future moves and oppor-tunities. Over the past two years, I have been involved in several EU projects which provide support to the development of a new generation of dance makers, and new opportunities for collaboration. Through all these encounters and travels I realize how much Vancouver has evolved since I first came here, and that while aus-terity measures continue, it is also worth noting that investments into the art continue, albeit differently— channeled towards audience development, collabora-tion across disciplines and across national borders. Each trip brings more clarity on how The Dance Centre fits into a global context and how we can connect to the world, with projects such as Migrant Bodies, which now makes its way to Italy (May) and to Croatia (June), and will provide Vancouver dance, media and literary artists with an international context to work in, and enable staff to explore different ways of international collaborations.

I was pleased to attend Judith Marcuse’s launch of her new project in arts for social change (The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) provided a $2.5 million grant to support the ASC! Project, a five-year, national research initiative on art for social change, the first study of its kind in Canada!). It also reminded me how much effort and time it took her to get to this point. Yet she persisted and kudos are in place and to all who recognize the power of the arts for a healthier community.

I look at what we here at The Dance Centre have accomplished: from a small organization in a side street of Vancouver to a world-renowned centre for dance on one of the busiest intersections in town. How what we managed to accomplish together with the many who joined and supported us, we set a standard and put into motion events that just keep on transforming our com-munity. I look at the many partnerships we continue to expand, the numbers of artists whose works we have supported and continue to support. The world reaching out to us, as much as we to them. And, as I look over that list of events past and present, I start looking with more optimism into the future! I am reminded that much of this destiny is in our hands. Hence, as we approach next year’s elections we have to think now what we expect of our governments of tomorrow not only as citizens, but as artists whose role is to contribute to the shaping of the world. Our world. And, this is where the sun comes out. Looking forward to the Summer.

Mirna Zagar, Executive Director



A conversation with Mirna Zagar and Claire French


The Fine Print:

12 Minutes Max is Back!

We are thrilled to announce the re-launch of the community fa-

vourite 12 Minutes Max. Following extensive community consul-

tations held in conjunction with our longstanding partners at the

Firehall Arts Centre, we have revised and updated the concept to

better meet the needs of dance artists today, with a strong focus

on studio showings, choreographic development, feedback and

discussion.

There will be three opportunities per season (fall, winter, spring:

submission deadlines tba) for artists to submit dance and

movement-based works in development running between 7 and

12 minutes.

• A rotating panel of guest curators will select up to four artists

per module.

• Selected artists will receive up to 16 hours of fully subsidized

studio space at Scotiabank Dance Centre to develop their works,

with input from the guest curators. Additional hours may be

available at a special discount, if required (subject to availability).

• At the end of each research and development module all four

artists will share their work in an informal studio showing open

to the public.

• At the end of the season, the guest curators will select a number

of works for presentation in two ticketed performances at Scotia-

bank Dance Centre. (The first year only will have four modules,

with the performances in June 2015.)

The new 12MM format seeks to foster experimentation and the

development of new work, along with critical feedback and

community dialogue.

Module #1 Summer 2014

Application deadline: April 7, 2014

Studio showing date: June 5, 2014

Eligibility:

• Applicants must be Full Artist or Company members of The

Dance Centre.

• The applicant must be the author and primary creator of the

work.

• Proposed works must be in the early stages of development:

finished works are not eligible.

• Proposed works must run between 7 and 12 minutes when

completed.

• Artists at all levels of their career – emerging, mid-career and

established - are eligible to apply, however mid-career/estab-

lished artists must demonstrate that they are experimenting with

new directions, ideas or collaborations.

• Emerging artists must have completed a recognized profes-

sional dance training program, or the equivalent.

If you have questions please contact the Programming Coordina-

tor at The Dance Centre:

T: 604 606 6405 E: [email protected]


3 D a n c e C e n t r a l S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 48 D a n c e C e n t ra l M ay / J u n e 2 0 1 4

MZ: 12 Minutes Max was modelled after a very successful

series run by On the Boards in Seattle, which still exists and

continues to be vibrant, because it was well maintained as a

place for dialogue, for dialogue, for understanding and setting

trends, and for seeing who is doing what. We are looking at

how we can facilitate the dialogue that begins in the studio

and how to engage and invite all generations of choreog-

raphers to test an idea, to give and receive feedback, and

to explore new ways of how we see dance now and in the

future.

AK: How will the new format support this idea?

CF: As I understand it, there will be studio showings, three

times per season. From among those, the curators will select

what represents that year's interesting developing work for a

more developed presentation for a more formal setting like

the Faris Family Studio, and that will come from investment

in an idea or an artist. There will be three annual opportuni-

ties for dance artists to submit applications, from which the

curators will select those who will participate in one of three

hosted studio showings, with dailogue sessions to provide

feedback that artists can consider as they refine and focus

their work. The second 'module' will present a curated selec-

tion from the studio showings in a performance at Scotia-

bank Dance Centre. Those works—depending how far they

have developed—may then receive ongoing Dance Centre

support for further development.

AK: In what way?

MZ: We are going to use the showing as a potential entry

point for residencies with more resources, and where we

may not have the means to develop the full potential of an

idea, this process will provide opportunity to source partner-

ships for their future development. In previous versions of 12

Minutes Max there was an expectation that other present-

ers might see the work and pick it up for presentation, but

that didn't happen because the work was already seen as

completed.

AK: What inspired the original 12 Minutes Max?

MZ: It was named after a very successful series that is still

running in Seattle's On the Boards. We have seen increas-

ing investment in dance, and we have seen it blossom in

the community, but we haven't had the opportunity to

develop work outside of the confines of a project grant, and

here we have an opportunity to support development for a

year, in order to allow artists to get feedback while they are

developing an idea into a larger work.

AK: Artists have been wandering back and forth between

the different series—especially Dances for a Small Stage,

Brief Encounters and 12 Minutes Max. Do you expect that to

continue?

CF: Yes, and it's great that there is a whole network, to have

consistency, and to make artists understand why they are

chosen in a transparent and supportive relationship.

AK: Will the same curators select all three shows as well as

the final showcase?

CF: That will probably be too much of a commitment,

which is why we will be working with groups of three out of

a total pool of eight.

AK: How will the dialogue and relationships that develop

out of the series relate to existing Dance Centre programs.

MZ: We facilitate and produce a lot of content, but we

don't have a dedicated space within our programming and

operations to critically assess that content. That is why I

believe we saw a very positive response that confirmed a

sense of great value around the dance publications like the

series we produced in the past year. I think that looking at

how we discuss dance, how we listen to others, and make

the transposition into the spatial complex and then back

into the oral and written form is really important. For dance

to continue to be vibrant we need to bring more and varied

expertise into contact with the form. This is our contribu-

tion to the space for exchange of ideas, and experience,

and our chance to encourage interest and desire in cross-

disciplinary collaboration. That is why the feedback ses-

sions for the studio showing are especially important. We

need to hear the voice of both the public and the profesion-

al audience. The series will encourage focused dialogue

about embodied pactice.


A conversation with Mirna Zagar and Claire French



AK: Will the curators play a part in the dialogue following the

events?

CF: That is definitely a part of the plan. We have chosen cura-

tors who are informed, and have a broad range of practice, and

we want to encourage artists from the visual art world to take

part in the discussions. We want to develop a lineage and a

perspective on dialogue and feedback.

AK: There was a time when 12 Minutes Max was one of the few

dedicated 'interdisciplinary' performance opportunities. Will

that be an important aspect of the new series?

MZ: Yes, although the focus did shift over time. In the beginning,

Mark Lavelle, who had a strong connection to young theatre

makers was interested in an interdisciplinary approach, but

after he left and it the series was run jointly by the Firehall and

The Dance Centre, it shifted toward a dance-centered perspec-

tive. The new 12 Minutes Max series will continue to encourage

interdiscplinary work and dialogue as part of the process, and

we will bring in curators from other disciplines.

CF: For the new series, we refer to 'dance and movement-

based research and practice'. There are of course many inter-

disciplinary collaborations going on in the city and presentation

venues that didn't exist back then, like Theatre under the Gun,

and HIVE, but our agenda is different. The series will encourage

interdisciplinary work but from artists with a movement-based

practice.

AK: Will the Firehall Arts Centre be involved at all?

MZ: Not for the time being. We approached them, of course,

and they were very much part of the process of re-thinking the

event, and they have been an important partner and generous

supporter. However, they have developed other programs and

while the door for future collaboration remains open, for the

time being they are focusing on their own developments.

AK: Do you see any risk?

CF: There is a risk in bringing something back, or having it per-

ceived that way, even though it is new. We thought long and

hard about the title, for example, because the perception needs

to shift. The other question is whether we will still be meeting

the demand of the community by focusing on studio showings

with minimal production values. If presentation turns out to be

a bigger need, we will have to find a way to negotiate that with

the focus of the series, but that is a factor we will have to meet

in the selection process.

AK: Will there be an audience base for a long-term commit-

ment?

MZ: We could have kept going with the old version, which had

an audience although many felt that the original excitement had

given way to a predictable pattern. We really want to focus on

dialogue and development, and we will have a good indication

of interest after a year. As with everything we do, evaluation

will be an important part of shaping the new 12 Minutes Max.

AK: Thank you!


1 0 D a n c e C e n t ra l M ay / J u n e 2 0 1 4

Dancing Through Doorways

AK: You are in the middle of building the solo|soul performance

How are you finding the process?

KJ: It's good, and I'm terrified at the idea that I am going to move

around on stage for forty minutes, now that I don't have all my

partners. But I am enjoying building a structure that helps me

makes sense of all these people and ideas...

AK: This will be the third year of the project. When does it go up?

KJ: July 10th.

AK: What have you discovered?

KJ: I am still in the process of discovery. Driving the whole proj-

ect is necessity and curiosity. To continue to dance at my age,

I feel the necessity to cross over the bridge from one body to

another — from the muscular body to what I am calling the en-

ergy body. At the same time, I am very curious to discover if the

inward, meditative practice of the energy body can be connected

to the outwardly focused, visible practice of performance. These

are the questions I started with—that tumbled me into this amaz-

ing journey of discovery. I have found it very exciting to bring

other people into the process, to see how they bent and shifted

and reconfigured the outcome. I could observe my process mov-

ing along a path and then, as another person's perspective came

in, the bending and shifting change that takes place. Now I am

now trying to make a coherent choreographic whole of it all.

AK: Who came to work with you?

KJ: In no particular order, Serge Bennathan, Meredith Kalaman,

Darcy McMurray, Josh Martin, Jennifer Mascall, Peter Bingham,

Margaret Grenier, and Lee Su-Feh.

AK: Are you finding that you are now experiencing a form of mul-

tiple personality disorder?

KJ: It has been insane at times, but at this point, I may just be

working with one idea that each person brought in, one place

where the bending of the trajectory took place.

AK: Do their voices play nicely with each other in your mind?

KJ: Yes, although there are times when two people are bringing

up radically different ideas on a subject at once, and sometimes I

have had to let them accumulate and overlap.


D a n c e C e n t ra l M ay / J u n e 2 0 1 4 1 1

Karen Jamieson at work. Photo: Chris Randle

A conversation with Karen Jamieson

Thinking Bodies:

AK: You had a specific set of inquiries in place at the

beginning. Did your collaborators have to learn them

before they came into the process?

KJ: Some did and some didn't. Some where interested

and willing to go into the energy body practice, some

had no interest, and some a little—It was the complete

spectrum, but it didn't really matter because I was

still working on the premise that I take and work with

whatever perspective they brought.

AK: There were several systems at work, which you

explained before each showings. Could you give an

encapsulated form of the different systems, keeping in

mind that this is a radio play...

KJ: The core of the investigation is the energy body

practice, a meditative practice coming out of yoga,

specifically the research of two teachers I have been

studying with for almost 20 years. From Orit Sen Gup-

ta, the vayu doorways- connective tissue doorways,

opened through attention to breath focused on spe-

cific locations on the vertical axis of the torso. From

Gioia Irwin, the bandha system, harnessing at specific

locations the weight of your body as it bounces back

as energy, tracking it with attention... I am finding this

harder to explain while sitting.

AK: I have seen you explain it on your feet, and that

seemed much more natural...

KJ: I am overlaying more systems which are based

on the connective tissue body. There is communi-

cation all along the connective tissue body. It’s all

push-pull of gravity and levity. Another system I am

investigating is based on the principles of tensegrity,

which comes from architecture. Buckminster Fuller

joined the terms tension and integrity to describe

geometric structures that consist of floating compres-

sion elements stabilized in a web of tension elements.

The web is the connective tissue body. This is a new

paradigm in anatomy, and tensegrity anatomy is now


Thinking Bodies: A conversation with Karen Jamieson

quite widely practised among healers and some danc-

ers. All this overlays on Tai Chi and Chinese martial

arts, which also has a lot of connections to tensegrity,

and the meridians seem related to the tensgrity lines of

connection.

AK: Will any of this be explained to the audience?

KJ: I would like to. I am looking for the words... I want

to have some spoken word in the piece, and some of

the people who were partners will also appear speak-

ing on video to help make it clear...

AK: Three years ago you explained your starting point,

and at the time it seemed to be pure exploration to

see how the body would behave when paid attention

to in a certain way. Where has it taken you?

KJ: On a very non-linear journey, because each person

would take me somewhere new, and different from

where I was. Some would question certain aspects of

the systems, and there have been shifts and changes

in the driving idea...

AK: Such as?

KJ: A lot of information emerged about what I call the

'rooms' of the vayu's. You asked me last November

after watching the work in progress why I never left

the ground as I had in earlier stages of the research.

The reason was I had shifted my focus more onto

gravity, because I felt that my training and sense of ap-

propriateness kept me emphasizing the 'up'. That was

where I was in the process by then. At that time, I was

completely at the mercy of gravity, perhaps because

that was where I felt I hadn't gone, and I had to really

experience the power of gravity. It became almost

the centre of the whole project—that huge downward

force, and how we live with it. Now the question is

how to get off the ground and live in relation to this

hugely powerful downward pull.

AK: How do you generate 'performance movement'

in the context of this process of self-observation and

analysis. How do the impulses find their way through

the analysis?

KJ: It's not constant analysis any more, because now

I am building and creating a structure, so now I am

wrestling with questions like "In moving from this to

that, does Darcy come in first, or Jennifer? And I am

asking 'does it work?”, in terms of some intuitive cen-

tre of decision making.

AK: After three years of this process, do you find that

you have a different body?

KJ: Well, our bodies are changing all the time, but

I think it's a different kind of attention. That's the

mystery, and finding a way to access a body that is

always there, while constantly changing.

AK: What I meant is that if you commit to sound

walks, or drumming for a year, you come away with a

body that has different relationship to the world.

KJ: In that sense, yes, I am differently aware, of many

more things than I was before I started. It is exciting

and odd, because it isn't a new me: It's a new and dif-

ferent language.

AK: Speaking of language, what language did your

partners use?

KJ: Very different languages. Take Margaret Grenier

who comes from a ten thousand years old Gitxsan

traditional form as an example. With each person, I

was interested in some aspect of their practice.

AK: Did you dance with them?

KJ: Yes, but each had a different role. You saw the

work with Serge, who didn't want anything to do with

the system. He wanted the role of choreographer,

because that is his practice, and that was challenging,



a case of me trying to maintain the practice while meeting

the demands of the choreographic process. With Meredith

it was more a matter of call and response, as it was with

Darcy. Then I started dancing with people, and that was

quite different and interesting. Some brought a distinctly in-

ternal body focus, like Jennifer Mascall. She wanted to know

if her mind-body practice could dialogue with the energy

body practice. Margaret brought the Gitxsan energy spirit

call the Nox Nox into a dialogue with that practice, which

was difficult but really interesting. We will probably make

that into a duet down the road. With Josh Martin I was inter-

ested in how much he worked with the weight of the body.

He brought into focus the bounce of the rebound energy

that opened up new understanding for me. I learned a lot

about where people work from. Peter Bingham, for example,

flows constantly and senses his way through space. With

Peter it was more a dialogue between artists. Su-Feh came in

with a very specific proposition, and we decided that in the

showing I would talk about her practice and she talked about

mine. Su-Feh comes out of Chinese martial arts, which has a

connection to this work, and she wanted to learn the prac-

tice, so it was a dialogue between practices. Darcy brought

more of her anatomy knowledge to the work of 'populating'

the vayu 'rooms'. There has been an awful lot of information

to distill and focus. What I am looking for now is to just let

the piece emerge and let a lot of this stuff fall away.

AK: You were working on other things doing that time?

KJ: Oh yes, especially the community-engaged work at the

Carnegie Centre, which culminated in a large piece called

CONNECT last November and took a lot of time

AK: What was it like to go back and forth between the out-

side world and the vayu 'rooms' within?

KJ: I did introduce the energy body practice into the work

with the Carnegie dance group, and it became a form of

laboratory. I have been amazed at how receptive they have

been, and it really makes me think that to work with non-

professional dancers it makes much more sense to go from

an internal sense of entry rather than from how it looks. The

work has transformed them, I think. I also did a commis-

sion for Edmond Kilpatrick, a former Ballet BC dancer. It was

really interesting; we focused on the practice, because he

was interested, it being so different from ballet's focus on

form. It was both challenging and exciting for us. I also did a

'Brief Encounter' and was paired with Nathaniel Justiniano, a

Dancing Through DoorwaysThinking Bodies: A conversation with Karen Jamieson


San Francisco-based Bouffon clown, who, for the entire

piece, mocked me as I went through my energy body

practice. He was very funny, and I got to see the absurd

side of this thing—and at the same time feel very strong

with in it,.

AK: Systems are jealous mistresses... Now you are in the

middle of constructing a piece?

KJ: Yes, and I am carrying all the incubi with me, torment-

ers and fountains of wisdom.

AK: Will they see it before it gets shown? Will they be

part of the creation except in what they left behind?

KJ: They will be brought in for video and so on, but I

am not interested in verbal dialogue about the choices

I am making now at this stage. Now it is about: It goes

here and goes there, does that and that. That part of the

process of creation is quite blind, because there is so

much material. I actually have created a grid that I am

using, and a whole notebook full of diagrams. This is just

part of the process of trying to create structure. It moves

along a timeline and includes video, spoken word, and

music. John Korsrud has been locating sounds of wind

and sounds from the inside of the body, and since vayu

means wind, he is working with

the breath, and the trumpet.

AK: How does this work relate to

what you have done in the past?

KJ: I have made very few solos,

perhaps only four or five in my

eighty–something works, and that seemed like a natural

next step. Things keep coming back, like the vertical axis.

I think it is a different kind of process. It is a new adven-

ture. I have never included others in the research process

in the way I have in this work. And I haven't used words;

usually I don't like using words, but I would like to let

people know what is being worked on, on as many levels

as possible.

AK: What will you do after that and how does it relate to

this process?

KJ: The process has actually seeped into everything I do.

After this performance, I am planning to develop the duet

with Nathaniel Justiniano for the Vancouver International

Dance Festival in an extended version. The other project is a

duet on themes of colonialism called Broken, with Margaret

Grenier. I am also mentoring quite a few people, including a

project with elders that has been brought to us in partner-

ship with Coastal Health, the Vancouver Parks Board and the

Vancouver Foundation, which they want to happen at Carn-

egie. Underneath much of this work is question of the aging

body. At some point, you can't dance just with the muscular

body, which is one reason for all this research. There is a

change in how impulse and focus function.

AK: Are you aware of anyone else who is working with this

set of systems in dance?

KJ: No, perhaps because a lot of the people I have been

working with are not dancers; they are completely in the

world of yoga, whereas I have been straddling different

worlds. There is a lot of interest in so-called somatic prac-

tices now in dance, but I am not aware of anyone who has

worked in this way

AK: If a young dancer would come to you and say: I am

interested in learning this, would you teach it?

KJ: Oh, yes. I have been teaching this work to the dance art-

ists who are studying with me in a mentorship relationship.

And I have been teaching it in the community engaged

context. At the same time, it is challenging when you go

back to established dance forms. You never leave anything

behind: it transforms and changes, but you never break from

it. It is interesting for me to see how often I fall into a form,

or a way of moving that I spent so many years in. Still, the

process has become so central that I would end up there in

any context. It extends range. Every dancer has a favorite

way of moving and doing things, and this is a way to expand

dance practice.

AK: Many thanks!

You never leave anything behind:

it transforms and changes, but you never break from it.


AK: Is it possible, given that we live in a global corporate 'culture',

to create work that isn't contaminated in some way? Can we make

work that actually operates outside of imperialist conditions, in a

kind of utopia?

LSF: No, utopia is bound to fail. It means “no place” after all. And

I think you have to engage with the global corporate culture, be-

cause that is the paradigm we live in, because that is how we have

been socialized to understand our relationship with each other.

The question is: How do you subvert the structure?

AK: At the 'professional' level, the material conditions of dance are

themselves corporate, from organizational models and funding

structures, to how it is branded and marketed. Do you think that

there is a kind of work that can subvert these conditions, or make

the conflict more apparent?

LSF: I think that we need to make the conflict apparent, but we

haven't developed enough tools to hold that conflictual place.

AK: The paradox is especially striking in the visual art world, which

valorizes critical theory while the conditions of the international

art market follow a monetarist model.

LSF: They are object-based. In that sense, I think the practice

of the body can serve as a counterpoint to the obsession with

objects. Dance - especially somatic practices - can insist on the

importance of the living, breathing, sensing and ultimately, dy-

ing body. It is perishable and there is power to be found in that

perishability. The power of the dancing body is something deeper

and older than this monetary system. Dance can offer a dialogue

between that older, ancient body with newer man-made power

structures.

AK: Is there such a thing as a body that is not a slave—is there a

free body in dance?

LSF: I think freedom is something you get an inkling of when

you are in dialogue with your chains; if I meet someone who

says "I'm completely free" the question is...

AK: ...at whose expense?

LSF: Yes! I feel that one of the major narratives in the world

today is the narrative of the victim. You are enslaved and you

are looking for freedom. We talk about our lack: If only I had

this or that, I'll be free. And in dance, being a poorer discipline,

we get entrenched in this poverty narrative. I don't find this

narrative useful. I think it is more useful to talk about what our

privileges are and what we are going to do about it, or with it.

Because even if we are at the fringe, these positions carry their

own privilege and can offer a point of view or a set of abilities

that the centre cannot know. I like the question 'What is my

privilege and what could I do with it?’ Someone told me that

that's very Christian. Maybe that's 'charity’.

AK: Dance may be a poor discipline, but is presented in a

visual and physical frame that lifts it out of its actual material

circumstances. There is so much control over how the body

appears through the machinery of lighting, sound, media, that

no matter what the intent might be, the body enshrouded in all

this has a privileged aura. In what we think of as the 'profes-

sional dance milieu' it costs a quarter million dollars to put a

dancer on a bare stage. In that sense, it isn't exactly a poor art,

and it certainly rewards those who make clever use of all that

apparatus...

LSF: ...and yet the thing that moves us is chaos, and no matter

how much money you have and how much control you have,

when dancers go on stage, whether they admit it or not, they

"That's the choreography: The self and group. It's politics. For me, choreography is government. Or a proposition for government. Either you propose a government that is exactly the same as what we have, or you propose something different."


"I love dance deeply,A conversation with Lee Su-Feh

but I also hate it." continued from page 5


are looking for a moment of chaos, and so is the audience. So the

question becomes: How do we stay in touch with chaos?

AK: When you say chaos, do you mean a moment where recon-

figuration is possible?

LSF: Perhaps. A moment when you don't know what's going to

happen. And that not knowing has to happen for both the artist

and the audience. I think that often the artist knows exactly what

is gong to happen and tries to fool the audience into thinking they

don't know. That’s representational chaos. To have real exchange

and a real opening for communication with the audience, the

artists have to get themselves into a place where they don't know

what will happen; then we can all be vulnerable together.

AK: Do you like working in the formal frame of the black box?

LSF: I hate that I do. I hate that space, and I hate watching stuff

in that place, but I recognize as an artist that I own it. I know that

space so well; it's my material. I long to be an artist that works

outside of that framework, and I have and I will, but I think despite

those longings, my instinct is to work in the black box; and I am in-

terested, when I am there, to see how I can pull it apart and loosen

the screws...

AK: Interesting—you use ritual in your work, which if anything,

seems to contain the chaos and double the frame of containment

and control.

LSF: I suppose ritual IS a controlled negotiation with chaos. But for

it to be real ritual, there has to be real chaos. Otherwise, it’s just a

representation of ritual. I hate representation, and yet I recognize

that there is a power in it—the paradigm of corporate imperialism

trains us to buy the representation. How do you, as an artist, make

that representation flicker with the real? I long to make work that

is more than pretty; that's the love-hate thing with dance. I hate it

when it's just charming.

AK: It's been a while since I have heard of anyone talk of dance

as charming. Are those judgements that come back from the

dance community? Who says that?

LSF: I do. I see things and want to say: That's just charming! My

therapist said charm is C+ harm. I don’t want to see charming

work and I don’t want to make charming work.

AK: Do you find opportunites for dialogue?

LSF: You can't just go up to the audience and demand dialogue,

but I know that in the Talking Thinking Dancing Body there is a

space where we can talk about the viewer's relationship with the

work that is rich.

AK: Two years into the project, is a new language developing?

LSF: I wouldn't say that a language is taking shape, but we have

developed certain protocols for the discussion, which are about

the viewer's relationship with the work rather than the artist, and

that is interesting. We don't concern ourselves with the artist’s

intention at all. We try and talk about our physical as well as

intellectual response to a work. It is about getting in touch with

your capacity for pleasure. To get a sense of what is pleasurable

and your capacity for recognizing what is not pleasurable and

meeting that instead of submitting to someone else's notions. I

think of pleasure as an antidote to imperialist structures.

AK: Does the love/hate relationship enter into your teaching

practice?

LSF: No, I love teaching. And in teaching, my love for dance is

rarely threatened. When I teach I feel like I am a lover charged

with bringing pleasure and bliss to the dancer. I teach or share

tools and strategies for getting to the pleasure of moving. It's

about how to be an autonomous human being, how to be re-

sponsible for yourself and the negotiation of the self in relation

to the world: That's the choreography: The self and group. It's

politics. For me, choreography is government. Or a proposition

for government. Either you propose a government that is exactly

the same as what we have or you propose something different.

AK: Thank you!

"That's the choreography: The self and group. It's politics. For me, choreography is government. Or a proposition for government. Either you propose a government that is exactly the same as what we have, or you propose something different."



Dance Central May/June 2014

Dance Central May June 2014

Documents

Transcript of Dance Central May June 2014