This past Tuesday, one of the groups managed to get all 120 of the first-year students together to put on a group performance. It helped that we were all in the same room together. Our performance was to use beer bottles, packets of Pop Rocks, and our own hands, thighs and feet to recreate the sounds of wind, a thunderstorm, and make a symphony of 120 people eating Pop Rocks with their mouths open. It was wonderful.
What I found so special was the way that small, simple movements turned into something bigger than they could possibly have been if we had done them on individually. And, it was fun. Their performance idea was a reaction to the previous week’s speaker, Clifford Ross, whose initial-to-dogged curiosity in capturing the beauty of a mountain landscape in the end revealed a new world.
The performance and the pursuit of more, guided only by curiosity, got me thinking about how basic art pieces can be furthered by exploring new outlets of expression and investigation. For instance, what else could be representative of our performance of a thunderstorm? How would the sound of rain look, if we could make it 3-D? How can wind be visualized by pixels on a computer?
For instance, I was reminded of Synchronous Objects, which was launched this summer as a collaboration between Ohio State University and choreographer William Forsythe. Here’s an explanation: “Synchronous Objects reveals the interlocking systems of organization in William Forsythe’s ensemble dance One Flat Thing, reproduced through a series of objects that work in harmony to explore its choreographic structures and reimagine what else they might look like.” These “objects” include “data volumes” of the outside of the dancer’s body that dissolve into space, an interactive choreographic score, performative furniture as interpreted from the choreography, and a statistical graph of the dance data. There are definitely more, but I’ll let other people explore them for themselves.
In the end, this whole thing is about “Visualizing choreographic information”.
(What?…I mean….what???!!!!)
Wow. I’m just amazed and dumb-founded that this is even happening. One day, I really hope to be a part of this world of this dance-tech-visualization-curiosity stuff. Who cares if it doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Dear Alison, i love it that you “want to be a part” of projects like these in the future and I also love it that it both intrigues you and doesn’t make sense. I’d love to know more about the “wah huh?” aspect of your experience. We created a discovery based research space that doesn’t dictate how you experience the information but that can also leave people wanting more. What would make it make sense for you? And may I also say that from the intelligence of your post I, for one, think you DO get it. Anyway, thanks for your interest and thoughtful engagement with the material, this is all we can ask.
N
Hi Norah,
Thanks for your excellent comment. On the “wha huh” experience I mentioned in my post…. Well, actually, someone made a comment recently about how you cannot learn architecture from music or dance. I actually I think this project contradicts that statement, and demonstrates that maybe there is some connection between what seem to be two unrelated fields. In the sense of truly being awe struck, by the work and the content, I think that the project is truly awesome. I really love that your center has been able to make new avenues for dance, technology and collaboration that are far beyond what might be immediately thought of when combining dance and technology or new media. I’m very interested in participating in some way. I think my interest is not only in the subject areas, but also in the collaboration between them and the idea that together they can go somewhere both subjects have never been. It’s really fascinating. You’re right that it doesn’t make sense, but it does feel right, and I think that’s what matters more.
Anyway, I’d love to hear more. And, thank you (and your students) for your comment and sharing your work.