Method/Object/Artifact

Choreography, more than any other art form, entangles the method with the artifact. The artistic objects that choreography produces and shares, are eventually, its methods of creation being put forth.

When watching choreography, what you get to see primarily, is the method that was applied in order to create the work. Unlike visual arts, literature, poetry, or even the other real-time art forms like music, film or theater, in which the method can be easily erased from the final object created, hidden in ways that install a distance between the two, choreographic works can’t avoid exposing (wether intentionally or not) their creative method.

Almost to the point of arguing that choreography, is simply ‘creative method’ packaged and presented artistically.

There’s an inherent impossibility to hide the method in the context of a choreographic work. It’s the first thing that jumps to the eye, as well as the thing being contemplated by the analytical brain of the viewer (again, consciously or not).

There are different levels to this of course, and the readership of the viewer plays a big role, but in the end, a choreographic work, is creative methods being organized into a kinetic, immediate, live event, unfolding in real-time.

What ‘method’ means in the context of choreography (mostly as a result of the fact that the subject matter of choreography, is dancers, as in people, human beings) is first and foremost the way in which the choreographer/dancers relations and interactions are determined and carried out.

The models under which responsibility, creative ressources, decision making, power, etc are operating, pretty much determines the creative method being used, and eventually, they also become the primary material for the choreographic work (regardless of the creator intentions). No matter the story a choreographer is trying to tell, their ideas on esthetics, the themes they’re working with, the concepts at the heart of their process and so on, what will eventually emanate from the work stronger than any of the other layers of content and intentions, is the method with which it was made, which to a large extend, can be summed up as the type of model determining the choreographer/dancers relations.

Inspiration

Inspiration, when the term isn’t being reduced to describe mere copying or imitation of other artists or art works, certain periods, a specific genre etc, is actually a form of reversed engineering.

If one studies deeply the artistic process, no matter the medium, genre or style, one will eventually come upon certain truths related to art making, which in retrospect, will mark the work with traces of resemblance to other epochs and other works of art.

The resemblance, is a consequence, not a starting point. It’s never intentional.

It has to do with the fact all art making, by all artists, since the dawn of time, is basically a study into the same few elements. If you study well, you can only arrive, in your own way, to the same places others have arrived to. That is also why good art is timeless.

In that sense, Inspiration is more a form of confirmation. A sort of validation in the aftermath of the actual process and findings.

It will be reminiscent of a Caravaggio not because you were ‘inspired’ by it or because the Baroque is your favorite period in art’s history, but because you have studied light, situation, composition, clarity of expression, color, dramaturgy, rendering the physical metaphysical and so on. The resemblance emerging, will be more of an unexpected surprise rather than a premeditated work-plan and therefor, it will retain a sense of originality, rather than that of copying.

It’s more of a “oh, now I get it”, rather than a “Hmm, that’s nice, I’ll try to make something like this”.

On the other hand, Inspiration as a phenomena preceding and detached from a specific process, has more to do with the way certain works, or artists, have a way of opening an endless playfield for others.

A sort of a ‘promise land of potentials’.

Endless gratitude to the ones who opened those fields for me.

What Is Art

Ideas are not art.

Agendas, political or social, are not art.

Philosophy isn’t art.

Opinions are not art.

Concepts are not art.

Ideology isn’t art.

Even self expression, isn’t art.

What art is, is a doorway to the spiritual, manifested through craftsmanship.

Art serves as a conduit, for society, communities and the individual, for spiritual essence and growth.

The central weapon of art, its main tool, is beauty.

The current war on beauty, is a war on art, which in turn, is a war against the spiritual.

Art

Art is truth telling.

It’s of prophetic nature. Not in the sense of telling the future, but rather as a manifestation of truths.

Truth provokes in men one of the following reactions: inspiration, fear or enviousness.

Most ‘art’ isn’t art.

Looking With Attention

Choreographing is “looking with attention” without being concerned with the end result, as the choreographic thing, is a constantly flowing and evolving phenomena.

Being focused on the end result while choreographing, negates what choreography is.

Choreography isn’t about arriving. The notion of progress within a choreographic process, doesn’t lie in the resulting works being created. If the notion of ‘arriving’ emerges when choreographing, it usually means ‘looking’ wasn’t practiced with complete attention. ‘Looking with attention’, is the FIX which allows the FLOW that is movement, to happen in the first place.

Choreography is all but a permanent state. Therefore, there’s no possibility for a state of ‘arrival’ to be present. Ever.

All there is, is a constant movement of looking, listening and learning, without accumulation or fixation of past experiences, and without future ambitions taking the form of a pre-planed process aimed at a finite result/object.

The choreographic process, if looked at for what it is, is in service of nothing else but its own flow. The creator, has the role of facilitator. Enabler. Somewhat unconscious of its own activity, in the sense that there is no perpetuation of a self—of a "me" that is seeking to achieve an end.

That is of course an extremely difficult place to reach and maintain, as the realities of the field, the need to build and maintain a career, the economical aspects of financing and producing the work and the need to make a living as a choreographic artist, are all pushing in the opposite direction. Demanding results, predictable products, recognizable artifacts which are easy to reproduce (repertoire anyone?), catchy themes and concepts etc.

How can one reconcile these two opposing forces? Probably, by simply practicing the same state of ‘looking with attention’, and accepting that the question in itself, is all there is and that the only thing we can do about it, is  looking at it with attention.

Choreography/Managment

Choreographing has a lot to do with understanding the power the things you do and say have, as well as that of those you don’t. In that sense, choreographing requires choosing and elaborating a management model.

The position of the ‘know all, decide all’ creator/manager, results in a specific language and a specific type of management, which influences heavily the choreographic process and the works created.

When one makes decisions for others, it frees them from being responsible for their actions. It frees them from thinking. And as a result, frees them from having to study and understand the process they are part of.

The other option, is designing a process, through a different management model, which focuses on how individuals and the group they form, reach decisions, rather than how authority does.

In that type of work and management model, the choreographer concentrates less on coming up with content and solving ‘choreographic problems’ and more on studying and adjusting the process itself.

The hierarchical management model, very much a residue of the industrial age, where unity, conformity, obedience, similarity and elimination of differences are core aspects, had an immense influence on the way choreography was created and is still very much apparent in most of the work being made. An overwhelming amount of choreographic works, are basically a superficial blue print of the choreographer, who gets to decide and determine what dancers are doing and how they do it, rather than being a group endeavor carried out by free individuals with direct agency.   

There needs to be a shift from a centralized model of management that is ‘orders driven’ to one that is ‘intent based’. The role of the choreographer then, is the creation of a space of shared intentions, where the dancers can then self govern themselves within the group through communication, negotiation with one-another and proposition making, guided by what they identify as a shared intent.

Performance

Performance, in the context of dance, equals presence.

Presence is the result of accumulated input, rather than manufactured, deliberate output, and therefore, is inherently a passive occurrence. You don’t DO presence. You ARE present.

Looking, observing, hearing, listening, are the real tools of performance.

Free agency

Question: Why don’t you create material?

The long answer:

Choreographies are designed to be carried out by either free agents, or by puppets.

When free agency, as a core aspect determining the role dancers have within the choreographic thing, is absent, the result is puppets operating under the authority and command of centralized control.

The vast majority of the choreographic work being made, is of the second type, and therefore, bares almost no artistic value, while also being abusive, damaging and degrading for the dancers involved.

Since choreographic practices tend to be accurate reflections of the societies in which they operate, that is not surprising in the least.

The reasons to why it’s impossible to generate artistic value within a choreographic practice, without free agency for dancers being a starting point are multiple, but mainly, it has to do with the fact that choreographies, all of them, are basically platforms for ‘people doing things’.

If people are doing things on platforms in which the algorithme is set in a way so they have no say about what they are doing (or a very restricted one), then they are denied access to that which makes them people in the first place. Hence, they are a reduced form of people. And since people are the subject matter of choreography, reduced people make for reduced choreographies.

The short answer:

I’m a choreographer.

Creation

Creation, when working with people as your subject matter and main creative substance (which is the case when looking at the art of choreography), can not be about producing content. That seems too small, limited, finite, self indulgent and somewhat narcissistic.

So if creation is not about the production of content, it would seem it has more to do with the creation of conditions, which in turn, enable the emergence of ever evolving content.

Acts of Creation are measured in their ability to become, and then hold, a space in which content of all sorts, happens without being interfered upon or managed by the creator. The setting forth of that space, through the definition of sets of conditions, is the primordial act of creation, which once in place, renders the creator neutral regarding the emergence and happening of content.

Content/Behavior

When looking at choreography, I hardly ever look at the content, as in, the material, the movements, or what it’s trying to say. But rather at how it behaves.

The HOW, not the WHAT.

The manner in which a choreography behaves, as in, the way in which decision making manifests through the actions of the dancers, is all you need to know in order to ‘understand’ the nature, as well as the artistic value of the work.

The HOW, in itself, is content.

Any form of choreographic work that tries to bypass the HOW, in order to control the WHAT, is nothing more than a poster.

Performance art

Performance art, is probably the worse thing that happened to the art of choreography. It’s what fast food has done to cooking, or what tv realities have done to screen plays.

It’s a door wide open to perverted ambition, hiding absolute lack of talent, valuable content or craft.

What’s needed

One way to look at the choreographic thing, is through the relentless questioning of “what’s needed”. At every single moment, in regards to every aspect of the thing happening.

Looking through the lens of “what’s needed’, is a simple and efficient manner to navigate the artistic process. It’s also the hardest one to stick to, not to deviate from, identify and put into practice.

Demise

The demise of any artistic form, occurs when talent and craftsmanship are no longer indispensable values. The reasons to why such a destructive attitude has become fashionable, are multiple. They reside way beyond the artistic realm.

A society which praises and encourages such vison, is a suicidal one. Art trends are a litmus test for the health of a society. Our societies are sick, and the tendencies of the current art world, are the proof.

Me Me Me!!!

Mediocracy, not to say downright absolute lack of competence, is the norm in the contemporary dance world. When it comes to choreography as an art form, the frantic escape from craftsmanship, towards the reassuring, self affirming, self indulgent and all welcoming shores of performance art, has become a plague.

Also, if it screams Me Me Me, it can’t be good. Ever.

Talking

The choreographic process, as well as the dancing of it, doesn’t react well to talking. It requires looking, listening, being and doing as its main developing, examining and reflecting tools. Talking creates cracks in the perception of the choreographic/dancing thing (not the ones from where the light shines through, but rather those who fragilise the whole) and therefor, should be used with caution and moderation.

Drafts

A choreographic work, as well as all of its components, must remain a permanent draft. Being a living thing, carried out by living beings, and happening through real time, it can never be a ‘finished’ entity.

Nothing which is finished, is alive.

Wound/Heal

Art is made with either the intention to wound, or heal. Both the participants and audience.

Execution/Creation

If there’s an aim, a goal, a plan, then it’s EXECUTION.

CREATION happens when non of these are in the way.

What it is

At the end of the day, after everything else has been stripped down, the only two things to choreograph, the only two substances at play, are FEAR and LOVE. All the rest is noise. That’s why dance, like music, is mostly a religious endeavour.

The craft thought, is a whole separate thing.

Music

Some Music works cause it’s insanely good. Some, cause it’s so stupid it just works.

Also, good music is truth measured in sound waves.