What are the revealing threads, connections and relationships?
The ‘in-between zone’ is the playground in the work of TAAT. In-between disciplines, in-between spheres, in-between dramaturgies, between performer and spectator, between theory and practice or research and dramaturgy. (S.N.)
This implicates the work of TAAT enables the potentiality to explore and take-up a combination of these positions, by continually shifting and oscillating in-between these roles and positions. (cf. James Frieze, 2016) (S.N.)
As a final extraction, first a simple question: where are we extracting from, if everything is part of the same content?
I have the feeling we came quite far (between HALL01 and now) in deconstructing HALL33 as a project-as-proces, starting from assumptions and dichotomies concearning disciplinary conditions, mechanisms of authorship and modes of collaboration.-> expand on the conversation with the project partners and Pakrante as an 'in between space'.
Within the social mission of facilitating encounters, there is an implicit mission to make the 'institutional' assumptions tangeble and relational. It is in between the social and the institutional we have found a constructive and effective attitude through the performativity of our work in order to raise societal impact. (As mentioned in von Hantelmann's final chapter of How to Do Things with Art).
The turn 'towards the environment' that we took from HALL07, led us into a fundamentally different view on our practice moving from deconstruction to reconstruction of the above mentioned assumptians. -> state how the turn towards the environment - through pakrante, the intitution and working there -
I feel we're on a point that we're not only acknowledging the 'in between' as a way to bridge dichotomies, in favour of finding a natural fluidity between things.
As much as we dramaturgically explore this fluidity between human and non-human elements, we are - on a discursive level - interrelating and extrapolating concepts, ideas and thoughts to an extent that their meanings merge. We're aknowledging the 'discourse in context' as an ecosystem, exploring our collective curiousity of what Kershaw calls the 'ecolacunae', being the elements of an ecosystem we do not yet know. I believe that the only way to practice this discourse in context is to build the discourse from a collective curiousity, in which the environment operates as a third term. (see extraction March 10th).
This collective relational discourse operates as a holistic methodology of knowledge production within the ecosystem of HALL09. It's important to aknowledge this 'in between' discourse as a new kind of speaking and writing, embracing the performativity of the discourse itself to catalyse relational and co-creational mechanisms in knowledge production.
Let us therefor not step into the trap to instrumentalize 'the in between' as a graspable thing, but to embrace the fluidity and relationality of this discursive proces as an 'iterative discours'. (B.H.)
Key moments in the workshop dramaturgy
11. Continuation of the subgroup exercise of the first day
Clearly everybody was committed to making the work. For the introduction/tune in we needed to nurish this enthusiasm and at the same time give some input/inspiration.
>>Why did we feel like giving that input/inspiration? People could have just continued working. We could have then found a moment to inspire/re-align the group if needed. Why couldn't we just follow them?
Isd this about (still) putting our mark on the process?)
12. The different subgroups present their ideas
It was interesting to not only hear the presentations but also immediately get an impression of the dynamics within each sub-group. Did they work together? Is one using the situation as a platform to present him/herself?
13. Finalization of the dramaturgy
The subgroups worked well on the level of focussing the design/creativity. But it didn't solve the decision-making. Maybe it couldn't? Or shouldn't? It felt appropriate that Gert-Jan & Breg channeled the idea into one proposition (flashback HALL06). This turned out to be the missing link and within minutes the piece was finished.
An example of how 'flexible hierarchy' as well as TAAT's hierarchical position is constructive?
It was really great how the different groups took responsibility for their part. The whole thing went really smooth and was very rewarding for everybody. There was a lot of energy in the room during the individual feedback session.
15. Reflection circle:
To move that energy to a group reflection was a bit of a challenge, but it also acknowledged the ending of the workshopprocess. And also it connected the process with the context of the partners who were present and who listened and shared their perspective. This created an added value to the the group process
16. Doorstep moment
After the tune-out we ended up literally at the doorstep talking with a few participants. They were the people we would have picked to continue working with. And they stayed around to communicate they were interested in continuing working with us.
With this Research catalogue we tried to shape an alternative space for discourse and its methodology, that solidifies in a iterative process of writing, reading, reacting, discussing, writing and reacting again. It never aimed to come to a 'grand' conclusion, but to include the 'act of concluding' as part of the HALL09 discourse, that in itself - as for the HALL33 project as a whole - might never come to a final conclusion.