Thanks to: Anna Giertz for design and layout of the print version, which inspired this version; Chrysa Parkinson, Litó Walkey, Jeanine Durning for supervision; Frank Bock for portals; Martin Hargreaves for unpacking performativity; Rebecca Hilton for the initial push; my NPP colleagues for their feedback, curiosity, and support; Ken Tabachnick for insight from the Merce Cunningham Trust; Patricia Lent, Andrea Weber, Joseph Lennon, and Michael Cole for interviews; Sarah Michelson for devotion; Moriah Evans for searching for forms; Kris Berggren for the ordinary devotion which got me here, and copy editing; Pat Richter for her music; Robert Swinston for class, again and again.

Prologue

Beginning to plan a study is to begin before the beginning. Part of planning a course of study is to differentiate what belongs or might belong, what makes sense or might be sensible, what fits or might come together, and so you begin to study while planning the study, remaining porous enough to keep information coming in while continuing to filter. This state of openness to the new is a kind of practice, as in a way of seeing, and suggests that there is always more to be seen, understood, and folded in.


This collection is comprised of texts written at various points throughout my two years in the MA program New Performative Practices (NPP) at Stockholm University of the Arts. My focus on devotion in Cunningham technique originated as a self-organized Advanced Independent Study. This course was built on readings, a solo studio practice, teaching others, and interviews with former Merce Cunningham Dance Company members. I created exposition on the Research Catalogue as part of my exam, a precursor to this one. In creating the exposition, my notebook became a central tool, a material I carried and used everywhere, from the studio to the classroom to interviews to the library, all places where I carried out the study. I wrote texts on top of photographs of my notes, and the presence of two texts situated together suggests dynamic reading possibilities. This MA is research-preparatory and strictly speaking this is not artistic research. I’ve taken advantage of the liberty being independent of formal academic research offers. The traditional citation models, academic formatting, and impartial address have been left behind at times to favor for a looser, more experimental formatting, multiple styles of essays, and a piece-meal approach to continuity. 


This text is an invitation to offer insight into this poetic and personal practice developed during the course of my study. Through a regular and ongoing studio practice I draw on my personal dance history as material in an attempt to understand the affective and performative aspects of devotion in dancing, the very devotion which both obscures and reveals something intimate, but beyond the subjective. Recalling and amplifying the ghostly present and presences in a film recording of a single Cunningham technique class, I have been exploring the spectral remains in the transmission of a dance technique, from recording of living bodies to a digital, publicly-available video and then to my corporeal reinterpretation of that video. By continuously repeating the same material over the course of nearly two years I have developed a multilayered understanding of the material, which allows me to depart from and return to the class through associative portals. I bilocate between the physical site of practice and the space of recall, between an action from the class and the memory of that action. I enjoy the strange spectral things that arise from this practice: ghosts, portals, other bodies. With my eyes closed, my attention is displaced from image to sensation. It’s about work. “Not to show off, but to show,” as Cunningham said. It’s about toil. It’s about devotion. These slippery materials propose to invert the traditional choreographic relationship to presence, and instead call upon memory, absence, and dislocation to provide an understanding of movement through time and space. 

 

Cunningham Advanced Independent Study Guide

 

Program/course and year: NPP 2017

Study year: 2017/2018

Course supervisor/examiner: Chrysa Parkinson

 

 

Aim: The aim of this course is an imaginative approach to archival analysis, by engaging my own bodily knowledge from Cunningham technique with performance theories of reconstruction/re-enactment, questioning the relationship between devotion and reconstruction/re-enactment. This course will consider questions about perceptions of and desires for both devotion and reconstruction/re-enactment in regards to Cunningham. The course will involve both theoretical work and practice-based work happening simultaneously.

 

 

 

Questions to be considered:

 

How do we perceive and why?

How do I perceive devotion in myself while I'm dancing? 

What is desire and how does it work and why?

Why am I drawn to Cunningham?

What is the relationship between devotion and re-enactment in my own dancing practice?

 

How does devotion function in technique class, specifically in Cunningham class, and how does it function in (a) dancing practicespecifically in my continuous re-enactment of the class from July 30th, 2009 at Westbeth?


 

 

These questions will provide the framework for interviews with former dancers of the Merce Cunningham Dance Company to provide material to think through how these theoretical or conceptual relationships were embodied (or not) and considered (or not).


These questions also provided me with a framework to develop a studio practice of my own.

 

Further, I began to perceive a desire to untwine my research methods and questions from my practice methods, but I continue to struggle to do this. This Research Catologue Exposition helps me a bit.  

 

 

 

Intended learning outcomes:

 

After completing the course the advent is able to

 

-present a reconstruction/re-enactment of Cunningham work from Ocean, Pond Way, Fabrications, Doubles, Crises, and/or Suite for Five (Two) continue to struggle with taking a single technique class repeatedly, and continue to question why it is that I am doing it

 

-critically review the aspects of Cunningham’s work regarding politics of aesthetics technique class and devotion

 

-understand the role of reconstruction/re-enactment in contemporary performance practices, specifically in regards to the work of Cunningham

 

-present interviews with former dancers of the Merce Cunningham Dance Company

 

 

 

 

 

A selection will be made from the following texts:

 

-Performing Remains / Rebecca Schneider

-Where do we go from here? / John Cage

-Steps to an Ecology of Mind / Gregory Bateson

-Aesthetics of Indifference / Moira Roth

-The Varieties of Religious Experience / William James

-The Music of John Cage / James Pritchett

-The Perennial Philosophy / Aldous Huxley

-Sculpture Palimpsets: Michael Asher in Münster / Alexander Alberro from Skulpture Projekte Muenster 2017

-The Function of a Technique for Dance/ Merce Cunningham

-Merce Cunningham : the modernizing of modern dance / Roger Copeland

-Re-thinking the thinking body: the articulate movement of Merce Cunningham / Roger Copeland

-The dancer and the dance / Merce Cunningham in conversation with Jacqueline Lesschaeve

-Ocean, Pond Way, Fabrications, Doubles, Crises, and/or Suite for Five (Two) / by Merce Cunningham, reconstructed by Robert Swinston, Andrea Weber, Lisa Boudreau, Patricia Lent, Jennifer Goggans, re-enacted by me (and other peers)

 

Timeline:

 

Texts are given on November 13th

Studio practice Week 1 November 13th-15th, November 22nd-23rd

Studio practice Week 2 November 24th, 27th-28th

Studio practice Week 3 December 6th-8, 11th-12th

Interviews with Cunningham company dancers January 1-13

Studio practice Week 4 in NYC January 8-12 (Cunningham classes)

Weekly teaching practice on Wednesday evenings at DOCH (Nov 8, 15, 22, 29, Dec 6)

Studio practice Week 5 January 15th-19th

Research Catologue Introduction January 30th

Interviews compiled and presented in audio and/or written form by January 20th

Research Catologue Set-up Feb 1-15 

Examination with Chrysa on January 20th February 15th (studio presentation of reconstruction class + 2.5 hour discussion of Research Catologue)