2024 / on VIEW.POINT.MARY

Moving the Horizon: Amidst Polymodern Œcologies

Der Essay, den Mariella Greil zur Vorstellung von VIEW.POINT.MARY 2024 geschrieben hat ist im Moment nur im englischen Original veröffentlicht.

Cranky Bodies a/company’s VIEW.POINT.MARY – Entanglements at Eden

In an era where the navigation of shifting lines and viewpoints gets more and more complex and confusing, Cranky Bodies a/company’s dance project View.Point.Mary invites the audience to EDEN Studios.

Eden, a “delightful place,” the etymological origin of the word is referred to Hebrew edhen, “pleasure, delight”.

Jacques Rancière states in the foreword to “The Time of the Landscape – On the Origin of the Aesthetic Revolution” (2023/2017) that the birth of aesthetics coincides with “a revolution of the very idea of what binds human community together (…) a revolution that is no longer concerned solely with the laws of the state or the norms of art, but with the very forms of sensible experience (my emphasis).” The audience, embedded in an œcology of collaborative practice, is invited to sense, to experience and to use their imaginative muscle while Cranky Bodies are opening up a space for weaving together diverse artistic methods, traditions, and narratives.

Œcology, describes a dwelling in the complex field of ethico-political agency in resonance with deep ecology’s (Arne Næss, Joanna R. Macy et al.) recognition of the interrelationships of organisms. In this context, the focus is on Cranky Bodies a/company’s ethico-aesthetic relationships with its ecosphere – including the more-than-human actors. Choreography becomes the most sublime form of socio-aesthetic erotic, manifesting as choreo-ethical œcology.

Choreo-ethics set ethics in motion, in Greek khoreia, dance, and ethos, mindset or attitude, in other words it is a negotiation of ethical positioning through continuous transformation of and within choreographic-performative settings. Choreo-ethical practice emerges through the body: however, the body is neither subject, object nor work of art, but instead becomes an instrument to generate an expanded sense of self with and through (other) others by creating a shared ethico-aesthetic œcology through dance. Choreographing relations creates a complex field for exploring experiences, epiphanies and doubts, affects and tire based on motion, aesthetic perception, collaboration and imagination, that constitutes an œcology for choreo-ethics.

“The imagination no longer goes from the idea to the form that realizes it. Instead, it goes from the experienced effect towards its still-indeterminate idea” (Ranciere, 2023, p.47).

The work was widely carried by Mary Overlie’s Viewpoints Method and Authentic Movement, both methods emphasize the experience, sustaining the space for not-yet- defined ideas. Though differing in their approaches, they each offer tools and protocols for critically scrutinizing – seemingly incontestable – artistic statements. What do these danced statements actually mean artistically, personally and politically and how do they come about? While their underlying principles of open form and situatedness resonate with the philosophy of Polymodernity, this way of thinking deliberately affirms still-indeterminate ideation and process while actively acknowledging the simultaneity of diverse, values, attitudes and ethics. Situated at Eden, this performance – at least in my reading – expanded choreography towards the art of landscape gardening, inviting to spend time dwelling in dance. The choreographed landscape shared with the audience was not exclusively un jardin de la joie, but rather a garden composed of diverse affects. It presented a nuanced, embodied conversation about space, agency, allowance and relation in our contemporary world that demands co-creative modes of imagining (therewith traversing one’s imagination) and being, ideation and embodiment.

The Œcology of Jamming and the Body as Ensemble

At the core of Cranky Bodies a/company’s approach lies a collaborative ensemble that thrives on the synergy of its artistic team, where each brings relentlessly (!) their co-creative, choreographic and performative experience to crafting the work together.

Togetherness could be romantic, but might as well emerge as a form of throwntogetherness (Doreen Massey) which attends to and celebrates its anarchic dimension.

For this creation, the process was guided by research of choreographer Peter Pleyer, artist Michiel Keuper as well as the dramaturgical dialogue partners Jette Büchsenschütz and Mariella Greil, who developed a score for View.Point.Mary.

“Scores are frames that allow us to see what is actually there. And although framing can be disciplining thoughts and habits into preconceived pigeon-holes of imagination, in a creative artistic research a score more often than not functions as a tool to create the attention and intensity needed to let something of the unexpected enter into the social field of knowledge and practice process.” (Elke van Campenhout, Supplement Scores Glossary in Mestre, Lilia, and Elke Van Campenhout, eds. 2014. Writing Scores: Scores Revisited. [Brussels]: Apass.)

Following through Peter Pleyer’s longstanding passion for “History in Practice” within the field of Choreography and Performance, various of the projects of Cranky Bodies a/company have a focus on methods of training – frequently rooted in dance forms developed during post-Judson-avantgarde. The creation process often radically relates works, vocabulary and discourses that emerged from that era with contemporaneity, therefore Cranky Bodies a/company’s work navigates with fluency from understanding history to drafting speculative future practices. As Stephanie Skura argues for a “Politics of Method”, practicing politics or institutional critic is performed through the way dances are created, the modalities and working conditions that form the field, the milieu as Deleuze and Guattari name it, that forms how choreographing relations can take place – here in this concrete production – in a cranky while tender way. The somatic exchanges, generous sharings of her/his/theirstories, lightness and depth of discussions and the dedication to the cranky collective mark both process and performance resting on trust in the collective and individual performative- improvisational vocabulary. The performers – ranging across various generations – are trained in a variety of post-Judson movement practices, including contemplative movement, underscore and Contact Improvisation.

Cranky Bodies a/company’s studio performance View.Point.Mary brings together Mary Stark- Whitehouse’s Authentic Movement Practice for exploring the inner, psychophysical space and Mary Overlie’s Viewpoints Method that is focusing on crafting the performance space. The combination of these two techniques with contemporary performance approaches informed by queer, community-based and activist practices, proofs as a promising – if not urgent – polymodern experiment. Together the group of artists creates a fluid and responsive collective that prioritizes active listening and mutual care. This intergenerational ensemble-based working model underscores the importance of open, unstructured space in which the body, mind, and environment communicate freely, unimpeded by hierarchical structures. The method of working through touch and embodied interactions cultivates a sensitivity to what Mary Overlie calls “the materials”, the six SSTEMS —Space, Shape, Time, Emotion, Movement, and Story—providing a framework for navigating both the intimate and the collective dynamics of the performance.

In precarious times, marked by social, political, and environmental as well as economic uncertainty (in November 2024 the Berlin fringe scene was hit hard by austerity measures), the performance collective Cranky Bodies a/company recognizes the vital importance of maintaining spaces where art can emerge democratically. These spaces, (relatively) free from the constraints of rigid forms and expectations, allow for the exploration (aka Jamming) of sustainable practices and the queering of modalities of expression that voice multi-facetted viewpoints. While the world becomes increasingly complex, Cranky Bodies a/company decidedly and convincingly embrace the plurality and fluidity of their diverse artistic languages, allowing the performance itself to become a site of continuous transformation and navigation towards flourishing, co-creative and polymodern community.

“I actually am thinking about choreography in other ways now… I no longer reflect on it as form but more as ways to allow a more intuitive address to the manifestations of affect and phenomenon. The form that appears or that it may take, as a choreographic approach, has the relevance of serving an experiential purpose.” (Benoît Lachambre, personal letter to Peter Pleyer, 2017)

The fluid transition from rehearsal process to studio performance of View.Point.Mary is framed as an experience continuum, a kind of an ongoing horizontal laboratory that revolves around themes of interdependence and interaffectivity through what Mary Overlie calls horizontal encounters among the performers but also with the audience (at times invited to participate). It is one of the nine laboratories that get unfolded in “The Bridge”, in the second part of Mary Overlie’s book “Standing in Space”. The horizontal lab has a focus on nonhierarchical composition and a fluid environment for experimentation.

All in all, the score responded to and reflected the Œcology of the nanopolitics of attention, the choreo-ethics of Jamming and the intensity of a sympoietic Body as Ensemble.

Polymodern Entanglements – Dancing in the Idiorythmic Interspace

Cranky Bodies a/company’s work does not shy away from the ambiguities and entanglements of polymodernity—a term that encompasses the interplay of multiple, sometimes contradictory, cultural and philosophical forces. The notion of polymodernity, as articulated by Lene Rachel Andersen (2017), acknowledges the coexistence of modern, postmodern, indigenous, and even premodern elements in a single performance. These entanglements are evident in the work of Cranky Bodies, where classic, modern, postmodern, and somatic rituals collide, often in ironic and at the same time sincere ways, to form new narrative possibilities.

The costumes and set designs, crafted by Michiel Keuper, serve as prime persuasive precedent of this collision. They are not merely decorative elements, they are sculptural objects that expand into the realm of transitional art, blurring the lines between fashion, sculpture, and performance. The wearable blanket, for example, embodies the postmodern fascination with functional design, while simultaneously evoking timeless metaphysical questions about space, comfort, and protection. Through such blending of elements, and media, Cranky Bodies a/company create a performative space where history, identity, and materiality converge, allowing for an exploration of both human and more-than-human agency. Another recurring motif of the work View.Point.Mary are bodies in motion through space, constantly shifting, bending, and adapting to new environments. The word bodies from Old English bodig is performed in its most urgent and original meaning as “the whole physical structure of a human or material frame, the material existence of a human”. It seems quite apt that in the 16th century there was an etymological reference, an extension to vehicles, as outer layers of the body as “part of the dress which covers the body.” Cranky Bodies a/company all the time uses materials as vehicles.

The idea of interspace suggests a continual movement between worlds, between epochs, and between selves. In a similar vein, Roland Barthes’ concept of idiorrythmie, the individual rhythm within a collective, offers a lens through which to understand the nuanced, ever-shifting dynamics of Cranky Bodies a/company’s performances.

Cranky Bodies a/company use dance – and more precisely Authentic Movement Practice and View Points – not only as an artistic form but as a means of connecting with eden, the pleasurable interspace where dance grows from amidst the body’s own history towards its potential future. They explore the speculative space between the postmodern and the contemporary, between what has been and what is yet to be, and this oscillation becomes a key feature of their performance practice.

The Shared Responsibility of the Ensemble and the “Big Narration”

Cranky Bodies a/company’s dramaturges approach the work View.Point.Mary through expanded understandings of dramaturgy to social matters and political positioning through the practice of shared dramaturgy. The collective exploring and composing between many has led to the suggested score that has been developed by the dramaturgical team during the final stages of the creation process. Unlike traditional performance structures that rely on external dramaturges or directors to shape the narrative, Cranky Bodies a/company engaged in a horizontal decision-making process. Each collaborator across various disciplines is encouraged to make proposals and contribute to the creation of the work, fostering a collective sense of responsibility and ownership over the performance. This process reflects an ethos of care, touch, and sensitivity, where everyone’s voice matters, and decisions emerge from the shared space of the ensemble. At the heart of the Cranky Bodies a/company’s philosophy lies a deep commitment to render the performance a shared responsibility for all collaborators, nonetheless their different roles and expertise are fully acknowledged. In this framework, the concept of the “big narration”—a term that hints at the overarching, often dominant stories of culture, history, and identity—is questioned and destabilized. Cranky Bodies a/company challenges the traditional notion of a single, authoritative narrative and instead build their work from open form composition and minor gestures, offering a multiplicity of voices, perspectives, and stories. Through this process, they create an environment where the audience is invited to participate in the unfolding of the performance, rather than simply observing it from the outside.

The Sensitivity to Viewpoints and Grass Growing from the Middle

“Aren’t we always being choreographed?” (Benoît Lachambre, personal letter to Peter Pleyer, 2017)

Cultivating sensitivity to Mary Overlie’s Viewpoints Method, which is one of many possible frameworks for “being choreographed” – purely serves the purpose of understanding and embodying the six elements of space, shape, time, emotion, movement, and story in perfomance. These elements are not static or fixed but constantly shifting in response to one another, creating a dynamic, living performance that is as much about process as it is about outcome. Deep embodied research into the inner workings of the Viewpoints is the core intention of the latest work as Cranky Bodies a/company, much like Deleuze’s concept of grass growing from the middle, embrace the idea that the performance emerges from its plural middle, growing organically and unpredictably as it unfolds.

This sensitivity and allowance cultivated among all collaborators, no matter what medium (choreography, sound, dance, light, dramaturgy, fashion, sculpture, writing…) made it possible for the performers to inhabit a space of continuous becoming. In this way, the performance itself is a site of exploration and discovery, where the boundaries between performer and audience, between self and other, are constantly negotiated.

Being in the Midst of Entangled Œcologies

In navigating the complexities of polymodernity, Cranky Bodies a/company developed and offered a radical way of experiencing and understanding performance-making. Through a collaborative, ensemble-based approach, a sensitivity to expanded movement practices, ranging from post- to polymodern, philosophical to political, poetic, queer and woke discourses and the ongoing (though patchy) commitment to shared responsibility, they create a space where bodies, narratives, and histories can coexist, evolve and transform. In doing so, they invite us to reconsider the ways in which we move through the world—both as individuals and as part of a collective composed of human and beyond-human agencies. As we move the horizon forward, Cranky Bodies a/company challenges us to embrace the ambiguity, uncertainty, and beauty of the entangled, polymodern Œcologies in which we live.