Maker’s Diary: ‘Stop’ Contract

In rehearsals today we all worked to develop and agreed on a ‘stop’ contract for the scenes:

Nigel interrupts the game, gets on the block and announces “we know a story about her; do you want us to tell you or is there something that one of you would like to share?”

(If no one wants to share, he tells the audience that they can stop the story anytime they like by calling out ‘stop’. If they stop the scene than they can just move on to the next section or they can request that it is played out in a different way).

We decided that the audience should have the potential of affecting every part of the show and other’s experience of it…hence the ‘stop’ contract. All of the scenes are very strong and disturbing, so we felt that ethically and creatively the audience should have the potential to impact upon those. This passes some of the moral and creative responsibility on to them for their own experience.

Maker’s Diary: Meeting & Rehearsals

I have just got back from rehearsals and despite feeling crazy tired, am pleased that it went well today. I had a meeting with Olu at lunch time. We discussed the concept of ‘making it matter’ and having something at stake for the audience. I filled Olu in on all of the developments in my thinking and the structure of the performance. Our chat really filled with confidence and I think that the positive vibe that created carried on through into the rehearsals tonight.

We spent the first half of the rehearsal developing and polishing all of the textual elements. I think that these are coming on really well….well except for the usual lines issues! The girls are still giving Nigel a hard time but he is persevering and I am sure that they will warm to him. I am just so concerned at our lack of time to really develop the radically changed format. One key development today was the decision to give the audience the power to stop or change any of the scenes. We just need to define the exact rules of engagement for that contract with the audience. We started to try out the game aspects of the performance tonight. Some of the games manifested with more ease than others. It is simply a case of making sure that all three of the performers are comfortable with all of the games and feel at ease playing with each other. Once they can do that they will be able to lead the audience in participating in that too. Once they are comfortably familiar with the games I think they will start to have more fun with them. They are being over-thought at the moment. It needs to be more natural. It is just impossible to anticipate how the audience might respond to the games but that is what makes it exciting for me….and hopefully for the audience too. I understand the nature and function of the games as a performative device but I can’t really predict how they will manifest on the night. The familiarity of the games…as recognised through cultural schema should give the audience some clue as to the rules and contract of those activities but the displaced context should create enough unknown space for liminoid acts to happen.

Maker’s Diary: Blocked

I am going to be brief, as I am shattered. All the text elements have now been blocked and just need to be rehearsed and polished (lines also need to be learnt…arrgghh!!!) I will begin to tackle the new game elements tomorrow. I am really excited. Right bed is calling to me.

Makers Diary: First Re-Development Rehearsal

I took the cast though all of the new developments in the show and explained why. We decided that we will deal with all of the textual elements first before we approach the new games. I think the performers feel more comfortable when dealing with the text because it has some relationship to formal structure and formal process….the more open elements of the games scare them a little….well they scare me a little too but that is what makes it so exciting. We managed to work on Nikki’s new text as well as the new scene….we did not get through it so will finish blocking it tomorrow in full. Nigel was really nervous but once we got into it he really relaxed and was fine. The girls however, were a little awkward and standoffish towards him but I am sure that they will warm to him soon enough. I am looking forward to tomorrow; we are so short on time we really need to crack through it all so that we have time to polish. Due to our lack of time our rehearsals are all really long and because of Nigel’s shift work…really crazy hours in the morning. I am not sure how well I am going to be able to keep up to date with the blog but I will do my best.

Maker’s Diary: Nerves & Nigel

I ran over things with Nigel this evening before tomorrows first session; he is
very nervous and apprehensive, despite having already learnt all of his text! I am sure that he will be fine tomorrow. I think he I nervous about working with the girls because he has no experience in performance but neither did Richard and the girls very quickly warmed to him.

Maker’s Diary: Another Revision

Here is a slightly adjusted structure but I am sure that once we get back into
the rehearsal room things will shift and develop again.

Siren Song Revised structure

-greeting audience
-‘She’ speech 1
-Nikki leads charades game
-Nigel leads she has never game
-Nigel interrupts with ‘we know a story…..(Rape text)
-Nikki leads story telling game
-Nigel interrupts for inscription…they allow audience to write on them
-Debbie leads suicide shop game
-Nikki lead she whispers game
-Nigel interrupts with ‘we know a story…..(New text)
-Debbie leads musical statues game
-Nikki leads pass her parcel game
- Nigel interrupts with ‘we know a story…..(Moon text)
-Debbie leads who is she game
-‘She’ speech 2
-‘stop’

Makers Diary: New She Text for Nikki

The new performance structure requires another ‘she’ text and another scene. I spent last night looking back over some of our early devising sessions and wrote the new she text for Nikki incorporating some of that material; I also wrote a new scene. Here they are:

SHE Text 2

Before you all leave and head for home, I want to say a few words about HER.

She is always late
She never misses a trick
She is a dastardly, sexual predator
She takes two sugars in her tea but only one in coffee
She often lies without good reason
She needs to make him love her
She is always silent when she is angry
She doesn’t own a car and wouldn’t know how to drive one if she did
She never really loved him anyway
She tears the labels off bottles of bud
She never wears a watch
On Monday she always feels she should wear black to the mourn the passed on weekend
She goes to the seaside for the shells and she puts them in an old cigar box
She can never just sit still
She smokes too much when she’s on the phone to her
Sometimes her wee smells like sugar puffs, which always make her smile
She has a way of making women feel as special as her lover when she flashes them that look
She’s petrified of birds
She never, never hesitates
She has big sultry eyes and uses them as a weapon
She hates baths and prefers to shower
She has been known to use sex as currency
She has a magic pillow full of feathers that helps her sleep
She never can say no, well not when it matters
She always expects too much from others and is perpetually disappointed
She’s never been on a plane
She had vivid night terrors when she is stressed
She wishes that she were special
She wishes that she were special

Pause

I know you have all known her or been touched by her in one way or another, so I would like to offer up the floor and if there is anything anyone would like to say about her, then please step up now

New Scene (scene 3)

HIM: Cascading through the skylight, the moon danced across her cheek, reflecting in her green eyes as she spun. Seductive and lilting to the melody. Meandering and weaving like lazy beasts through the brush, the glowing candles cast their reflections on the flock wall paper. Her laugh melting into the air like liquid chocolate, rich and smooth. God I want her. (beat) Her scent radiating, washing over me as I let myself fall into her. Her, she, my lover, mother to be. Bare toes pushing off the carpet as she spun, whirling, infecting me with her pleasure. God I want her.

HER: They danced. Tight to one another, rhythmic flesh on flesh, becoming whole with the ambience of the moment. He leant in, brushing her neck with his lips, pushing her hair back from her face. He tipped his head and closed his eyes in readiness of his lips on hers.

SHE: There’s something I need to tell you.

HIM: Shhh

HER: He kissed her, long, deep and full-bodied.

(They kiss for a long while. Once they stop she whispers in his ear and the kissing turns to a struggle. She is trying to cling to him and he is trying to push her away. He pushes her hard onto the floor…there is a very long pause as they both catch their breaths and she gets up.)

Standing there before him, eyes wide, so vulnerable and broken.
Tears making their blue grey mascara trickle across her high flushed cheeks; gracing the edge of her lips and then absorbing into her collar.
Her, she, gasping, rasping in a whisper she extends her hand towards him and pleads.

HIM: “Don’t go” she begged as I threw my eyes to the floor avoiding her watery gaze. I couldn’t answer, couldn’t look. Her, she; that swelling dark welt spreading around her left eye.

SHE: Look at me

(She extends her hand to touch his but can’t reach.)

Look at me when I am talking to you.
(Pause)
If you walk out that door its over. Do you hear me? If you leave were through.
(Pause)
Are you fucking hearing me?
You can’t even bear the sight of me can you? Can you?
Say something, anything, don’t just stand there. Fuck.

Please.

HER: Her hand still extended, she stood rooted to the floor, shaking, her body shuddering, frail and needing; racked with silent weeping. Her eyes boring into the top of his head, willing him to her.

HIM: I couldn’t move, keeping my eyes on my shifting naked, bloody feet. Shards of green glass and thin maroon liquid adorning the floor in a crystal carpet of rubble. But still I can’t face her. Her, she, that malignant swelling flesh around her wide, wet eye.

SHE: Say something, don’t just ignore me, I can’t bear it.
(Pause)
Look at me
(Long pause)
Christ, what the fuck do you want me to say.
Say something. Speak, yell, anything please.
(Pause)
I’m sorry.

HER: She stepped forward, only a little, tentative, rocking into movement. The crystal green glass sheen crunching under her weight, pressing into her soles releasing scarlet bubbles onto her milky skin. She touched his hand, a brush with her fingers but she didn’t take hold.

SHE: It doesn’t matter. This doesn’t matter.
Please don’t do this.

HIM: I drew away, her cold, delicate long fingers churning my stomach.
I swung my body clumsily to the side, retching, heaving and I vomited. Once, twice; my puke spreading out amongst the glass blood and shallow maroon lake.

SHE: Please baby, I…

HER: She dropped to her knees and wailed, wretched, lost and broken, yowling her pain to the vaulted ceiling; her floral print dress stretched tight across her bump, her unborn flesh. She laid her hands flat, palms to the floor as she wept.

HIM: I wiped my mouth on my sleeve, took a shallow breath, bile burning in my nostrils. I stood upright and put my back to her. Her, she, my lover, mother to be and that, (beat) that black puffy wet eye. I began to make for the door, slowly, lumbering, so heavy and sore.

SHE: Go on then, piss off, that’s it fuck off. Just like you always do.
Useless fucking cunt (beat) get out.

HER: As he moved to the door, she leapt up, lunged at his back, holding him to her, to her body, to her bump.

HIM: I was stuck

SHE: I didn’t mean it, don’t leave. Please (beat) please, shit, don’t go. Fuck, you know I, I mean, fuck, fuck. You can’t I need you, we need you.

HER: she held him to her, clinging, her limbs wrapped about his sore, bleeding body, her head resting, no! Nestling in his damp sweaty hair.

SHE: Don’t go! Don’t leave me.
Oh god, don’t leave us.

HER: She flailed and clung as he wrenched at her limbs.
She flailed and clung, her, she, his lover, mother to be.
Her, she, his lover, mother to be.

SHE: (Screams)

Makers Diary: The Re-structuring of Siren Song in 3 Parts

In light of my reading and thinking yesterday, I spent all morning re-working Siren Song and I wanted to share my initial thoughts.

Siren Strong Re-Development
-The performer’s greet the audience as they enter and encourage them to stay on their feet and chat (about ‘Her’).
-Once all of the audience are in (and hopefully milling about in the space), debs will clear her throat and deliver the first ‘She’ text (she will do it from cue cards like a speech at a wedding or eulogy)
-Inscription section will start with Nigel. They will write on each other and themselves as they deliver the text, then move amongst the audience offering them the chance to inscribe on their bodies (tell us what they did to her).
-Nikki plays a game of Musical Share but instead of chairs it is based on musical statues…..if you move then you have to tell us a secret about her.
-Nigel interrupts the game, gets on the block and announces “we know a story about her; do you want us to tell you or is there something that one of you would like to share?”
(If the audience want to share, then the first scene is skipped but if no one does the scene plays out)
-Debbie leads a game of Who Am I, (all those who want to play have to write the name of a famous woman or person on a sticker and stick it to someone else head without them seeing it). Each person gets a chance to ask 5 questions with yes/no answers to guess who they are.
-Nigel leads a game of She Has Never (he starts by saying she has never….if you have done the thing you stay stood up if you have never done it you stay sitting down. This keeps going until only one person is stood up; they then have to lead the game….which starts all over again).
-Nikki leads a game of Why is She Crying Charades? (it is the same as charades only you have to think of reasons why she is crying…mime them and the others have to guess; if you guess you take a turn).
Nigel interrupts the game, gets on the block and announces “we know a story about her; do you want us to tell you or is there something that one of you would like to share?”
(if the audience want to share, then the second scene is skipped but if no one does the scene plays out)
-Debbie leads a game of Pass Her parcel (there is a parcel that gets passed around to music, when the music stops the person holding the parcel has to unwrap a layer. In each layer is something of hers with a tag attached that asks the audience member to tell us about the object)
-Nikki interrupts and does a new ‘she’ text from cue cards (I need to write this), again as if at a wedding or funeral.
-Nigel interrupts the game, gets on the block and announces “we know a story about her; do you want us to tell you or is there something that one of you would like to share?”
(If the audience want to share, then the third scene is skipped but if no one does the scene plays out)
-Debbie leads a game of she went to the suicide shop (this is the same as I went to the supermarket…the first person says what they bought at the suicide shop…which is a way of taking your own life…then the next person has to say that and add another one to it…it moves around the room like this until there is a winner.
-Nigel gets up on the block and yells ‘stop’ at the top of his voice…..all three of them come to the front and take a bow.

Reflective Practitioner: Performer/Audience Dynamics-some thoughts

I spent all day and evening in the library, reading and researching; trying to understand the audiences response to Siren Song in 3 Parts and trying to think about the ways in which I could develop and shift that relationship into a ‘creatorly’ and collaborative one.

The devising section that was based in Playback techniques was simply too free and open. It created a new situation that broke with the conventions of theatre and the contract of the space. This meant that it had no social or cultural context or precedent; which according to Cognitive Science creates difficulties in processing such a situation:

A Schema, acting as a central executive, coordinates information. It indicates when information can be ignored, which information is significant, and how the elements of significant information relate to each other. A well-established, automated schema acts exactly as we would expect an effective central executive to act. Both incoming information and the responses to that information can be governed and coordinated by schemas. Provided schemas are available, no other central executive function is required for humans to process information, of course, schemas must be learned and activated and so are not always available.

(Ross 2004:227)


Musical Share seems to be successful for 3 reasons: it engages the audience in an activity that is recognisable and this activity free’s them up to be able to play within a scenario that is familiar and recognisable but without any real risk involved in terms of life praxis. The rules of the game give the audience something familiar to grasp onto but still allows the room for new and exciting thing to happen.

Turner describes ludus as ‘shallow play’. ‘Deep play’, according to Geertz has ‘real’ consequences or weighty implications that affect the participants future life praxis profoundly; such as initiation rituals and rights of passage; however, ‘shallow play’, according to Turner and Kapferer presents the condition for reflection because it is less likely to have lasting implications in life praxis beyond the ‘ludic’ reflection because it is less likely to have lasting implications in life praxis beyond the ‘ludic’ experience. As Carlson discusses in his introduction:

Clifford Geertz has suggested a distinction between “deep play” and “shallow play” in performance, a distinction recalling Turner’s liminal and liminoid, but seemingly reversing Turner’s speculation about which sort of activity was radical and which conservative. According to Geertz, only those performances involving the participants in “deep play” are likely to raise real concerns about fundamental ideas and codes of the culture. Bruce Kapferer, on the other hand, seems closer to Turner, arguing that in “deep play” both performers and audience may be so involved in the activity that reflection does not occur and that paradoxically, it may be in the more “distanced” experience of “shallow play” that cultural self-reflection is most likely to occur.

(Carlson 1996:20)


Secondly, the game of Musical share matters because it is a real act; the audience are using up the scenario and playing with the possibilities of that familiar scenario, as themselves. They are not being asked to pretend but instead to commit an act. The performers and the audience are made present through the strategy of tasks, as themselves:

The performatised self is then as illusory as the dramatised other, but its illusion is countered by the irrefutable fact of the self in performance: of presence. As the self is less overtly illusory, so too, increasingly, is the performance space, with issues of site-specificity confusing and collapsing any easy divisions between art, installation and performance.

(Freeman 2004:61)
This is something that The Living Theatre pioneered in the late 1950’s & early 1960’s. The Living Theatre, developed performance strategies to engage their audiences in ritualistic acts, and attempted to implicate them fundamentally in the construction of the performance. They sought a communal approach to the making of theatre and often lived in the same space that they created and performed in. The Living Theatre, at certain moments in its history operated more like a creative commune than a theatre company; ‘it was the most famous of all theatre communes and became a symbol of an alternative social model and different way of life’(Junker 2004:470).This commitment to communal living and artistic production demonstrates the deeply rooted aspirations of Malina and Beck to democratise both the production and reception of theatre; a core device in its re-functioning as a social tool. The blurring of life, making and performing is something that Brook suggests is unique to the Living Theatre:

In The Living Theatre three needs become one: it exists for the sake of performing: it earns its living through performing; and its performances contain the most intense and intimate moments of its collective life.

(Roose-Evans 1989:104)

Lastly, the recognisable structure of play that the game represents creates a liminal space that has the radical potential for liminoid act to be committed. The audience engage in the task and it is through this real activity that they become ‘creatorly’; they become responsible for the creation and performance of the event within the game structure. The invitation to play is liminoid rather than liminal: ‘[t]he activities of the non-working, leisure periods, play activities, are precisely those that Turner characterises as liminoid’ (Carlson 2004:21).

For me, the first experiment has highlighted two key aspects that need to be addressed in order to create a ‘creatorly’ role for the audience: social space and culturally recognisable tasks, games and rules-rather than performative devices. The Playback approach has not been successful, so I am going to look at Fluxus and Happenings in order to understand the ways in which life praxis and the everyday can be employed as a dramaturgical approach to participation.

Reflective Practitioner: Meeting with Synne

I am not going to give a blow by blow account of my meeting with Synne but one of the key things that she raised was that she did not feel that her participation in the event mattered. I have been considering this since this afternoon and it is something that I really need/want to address; I want the audience to participate in a ‘creatorly’ manner and I want their participation to matter. It is very frustrating that I was not able to achieve that and also that I have so little time to develop the work before it goes to Camden. There were moments when it appeared t compel the audience, such as the game of musical share but I need time to consider and understand why this mattered when the opportunity to devise did not. Right I am going to go and do some readings…look back at the performance and rehearsal tapes and try to understand why the freedom of devising did not compel the audience in the way that musical shares did. I was inspired by Playback theatre (http://www.playbackschool.org/) for the format of the devising section and the audience appeared to be very engaged at the two events I attended. I really want to get to the bottom of this and try to understand that dynamic and relationship.

Makers Diary: Free Falling

Funeral for someone, for ‘Her’ but she is neither dead or alive, we have to make her present through our play.
Party-cake, hats, balloons, booze, wazoos?
Performers as hosts, as facilitators of play?
Inscribing each other, the audience and host, all inscribe the space.
Confession
Simon says- She says
I have never-she has never
Pass the parcel- pass her parcel- objects and prompts, little notes to create stories and anecdotes
Not texts but speeches; like at a social event or perhaps just choices, make them responsible for the scenes.
Ask the audience to dress up to come dressed for a party, for a night out-like a reception.

Okay I am now seriously tired but will pick this up again in the morning when I have had some sleep. I have a meeting with Synne tomorrow in the SCR and I am looking forward to hearing her thoughts, although I am not sure that she enjoyed it or even liked it at all to be honest but that is fine…I value her feedback.

Makers Diary: Trainstorm

While I was riding the two trains back from Royal Holloway to Soton, I made quite a few brainstorm notes and decided that I would share them/document them:

Want to change the costumes…not the dresses but the ‘everyday clothes’
Want to change entrances and add a new text: Debbie can explore physicality and Debbie can explore breath production.
Can we inscribe the space this time? Writng on the floor with chalk?
Games, party games, drinking games and teenage games as a way of making performance with the audience.
More risk for the performers and the audience, it has to matter, it needs to matter, there has to be a reason to invest. Something has to be at stake.
Previous performance was too hermetically sealed, need to break donw the usual barriers and expected conventions of spectating associated with theatre. The audience need to be implicated in a fundamental way. The ‘new’ contract needs to be explicit and in place from the very start of the performance.

Reflective Participant: PaR Symposium

Today I gave a paper about my Daisy Chain Model at the postgraduate PaR conference, Royal Holloway (actually in Egham). This is the paper that I presented minus the power point bit!

Slide 1 Open at Start


Developing Reflective Practice in Performance:
The Daisy Chain Model and Performative Documentation.


INTRODUCTION

Practice as Research (PaR), plays a key role in my research and makes up a large portion of the data acquisition activity. I would like to briefly outline my reasons for adopting PaR as a fundamental research methodology before moving on to discuss the various ways in which I have structured and marshalled that activity. (CLICK to Blank Slide 2)

In my research I want to explore emerging participatory theatre practices, examining both the production and reception from a phenomenological perspective; the experience of particular practices and their reception by a material audience. However, as I began my research activity, I came up against two main difficulties: There is very little documentation available that has recorded makers or audiences actual experiences of contemporary participatory theatre. I realised very quickly that I was in the position of having to generate that primary source material as part of the research process. This also meant that I would require access to the entire process of the making of at least one piece of contemporary participatory theatre; in order to generate that type of primary source material. Not as easy as it sounds! Just identifying and sourcing the participatory work itself as a potential audience member was and still is challenging but attempting to become involved in the process right from inception proved to be a ‘mission impossible’, with the resources and time scale that I have to work with. It soon became evident that if I wished to explore and examine actual experiences, I was going to have to create the circumstances under which I could generate and collect that kind of evidence. So in order to generate the evidence that I needed, I would have to produce my own work, my own piece of participatory theatre.


I decided to use PaR for two reasons; firstly, to develop and explore my own participatory practice in relation to the practices employed by other participatory makers and secondly, to generate anecdotal and localised documentation of the experiences of actual audiences.

SECTION ONE: PaR

I first want to outline my positioning in relation to current PaR debates and discuss the taking up and practical application of PaR for my own research purposes. I want to address the ways in which I have applied PaR as a research methodology.

As a researching practitioner, I am located within the arena of the debate which suggests that practice per se is not in itself a scholarly activity. It is my understanding that practice can only stand as research when it is contextualised in appropriates ways and conducted in a rigorous manner; whether that context is incorporated within the practice itself or is made up from supporting and/or parallel structures. Biggs’ 2003 study for the PARiP project, offers up an interesting and useful classification for varying paradigms of creative practice: He distinguishes between ‘(1) art as therapy (for the individual), (2) art as cultural practice (the production of works of art), and (3) art as research’.

Both of the first paradigms of creative practice contribute to knowledge through the traditional relationship with the academy, through criticism but do not them-selves constitute scholarly activity. For practice to be attended to as research, it has to appropriate methods of fulfilling the traditional criteria of scholarly research. Thus, it must be rigorous in identifying and defining a set of research concerns or questions that relate to issues wider than simply the creative concerns; it has to exercise and communicate those concerns to the wider audience of the academy. The UK Council for Graduate Education state that: ‘Practice based doctorial submissions must include a substantial contextualisation of the creative work. This critical appraisal or analysis not only clarifies the basis of the claim for the originality and location of the work, it also provides the basis for a judgement as to whether general scholarly requirements have been met’. They go on to suggest that ‘this could be defined as judgement of the submission as a contribution to knowledge in the field, showing doctorial level powers of analysis and mastery of existing contextual knowledge, in a form which is accessible to and auditable by knowledgeable peers’; a view which is also supported by the more recent Palatine report, conducted by Nelson. PaR not only needs to be conducted in a scholarly fashion but also needs to be disseminated in order to fulfil its function of contributing to knowledge. It has to be reproducible in some sense of the word.

PaR requires the researching practitioner to not only develop particular modes of conducting practice within a research context but also to devise strategies for documenting their practice in such a way that it can contribute to the scholarly debates of the discipline in which it is being practiced. I first want to discuss the ways in which I approached my PaR before moving on to discuss issues of documentation and dissemination.

SECTION TWO: Applied Models of PaR

I have developed an overriding structure that I hope ensures a dynamic and organic relationship between PaR and other research activities called the Daisy Chain model, which I will show you in due course. I have devised the Daisy Chain Model by developing Trimingham’s Spiral Model, to suit my own particular PaR needs. I first want to explore the theory that underpins the Daisy Chain Model before moving on to discuss the ways in which it structures my PaR activity.

Urry and Law suggest that: ‘the social sciences, including sociology, are relational or interactive. They participate in, reflect upon and enact the social in a wide range of locations including the state’. The core principals of social science, as asserted by Urry and Law, are the foundations for the applied model of action research which Trimingham’s spiral Model has partly grown out of. Robertson defines the ‘underlying principles of action research as reciprocity, reflexivity and reflection’. Indeed, action research main purpose is the creation of knowledge through practice and is an applied methodology for PaR activity that has developed directly out of the education and social science disciplines. Its application in the arena of practice as research, in performance studies is useful because it is not just used to test new knowledge through practice; but it is also concerned with ‘practice developing theory’.

Action research offers some insight into the ways in which the traditional relationship between theory and practice can be problematised, at the same times as providing an applied model of PaR through grounded theory. Robertson aptly cites Kemmis and McTaggart to illustrate this point: ‘action research provides a way of working which links theory and practice into the one whole: ideas-in-action’. This addresses the issue that I raised earlier, of contextualising creative production as rigorous and scholarly; by employing a methodology that requires a constant critically reflective perspective can fuse the two traditionally separate roles of researcher and practitioner.

Trimingham has taken up the principles of action research to devise a model of PaR that in application can structure and lend rigour to the often ephemeral and always anarchic nature of the creative, theatre making process. As Trimingham’s notes, ‘the material on which the research conclusions are based depends almost entirely on a creative process, and the process, in fact, has many disorderly features’. This diagram is a visual representation of Trimingham’s concept.

(CLICK TO SLIDE 3)

As you can see from the diagram, Trimingham’s model prioritises research questions or concerns as the entry point of the spiral and these are what underpin and inform the creative process; but not as a fixed unchanging entity. Instead they are a dynamic and fluid presence that is constantly in flux according to and informed by the creative processes that they seek to underpin. Although the research concerns/questions are the entry point, their dynamic relationship with the creative process create a reciprocal cycle; with theory affecting the creative process and the creative process affecting the research questions. Trimingham asserts that in allowing for the disorderly reality ‘of creative processes, the paradigm model of progress that allows for this is the hermeneutic-interpretive spiral model, where progress is not linear but circular; a spiral which constantly returns to our original point of entry but with renewed understanding’. (CLICK TO BLANK SLIDE 4)

As PaR is not the only research activity that I have and will undertake over the course of my PhD study, I felt that the spiral model needed to be (re) considered to incorporate and include my other research activities; as I felt that they would be as related and influential on the practical activity as the research questions. My intention in devising the Daisy Chain Model was to create a completely dynamic relationship between my practice and all my other research activities. In attempting to reconcile the disjuncture between my Par and all the other research activities, I have identified the need to take up two slightly different roles, which are brought together in a reciprocal, cyclic relationship by the Daisy Chain Model, which I will be demonstrating in more depth shortly.

The two roles are: the reflective practitioner, of which I have already briefly discussed and the reflective participant. According to Schön, ‘through reflection, he [the practitioner] can surface and criticise the tacit understandings that have grown up around the repetitive experiences of a specialised practice [in this case making theatre] and can make new sense of the situations of uncertainty or uniqueness, which he may allow himself to experience.’ By asserting the use of reflection-in-action, which as I have shown is fundamental to action research and the spiral model, the practitioner can lend new insights into their practice through the phenomenology of that practice and practice situations.

Reflective participant is a term that I have coined to describe the activity that I participate in when I attend performances, rehearsals and any other event linked to the making processes of other theatre practitioners. For example, by attending a theatrical event, I enter not only as a member of the public and as part of the audience but as a researcher and maker. I bring a certain agenda to my attendance, to my participation at the event; by participating in the events themselves, not only as a collaborative member of the audience but also in the critical role of the reflective participant. The Daisy Chain is the structure that marshals these roles and the activities undertaken through them.

(CLICK TO SLIDE 5)

As you can see, not unlike the spiral model, the research questions/concerns are the entry point. Each petal represents a circular research activity, which feeds back into the entry point of the research concerns/questions. So instead of a single spiral, we have simultaneous, multiple spirals feeding back into the research concerns/questions. So here we have a practice petal, the activity is undertaken as reflective practitioner; an attendance at a performance while taking up the role of reflective participant, so on and so forth. All those petals represent research activity; at a certain point the research concerns shift as a direct result of the research activity, they are renewed through their relationship with the practical activity. (CLICK TO SLIDE 6) Once they shift, they create a new head, a shifted entry point and the whole cyclic process continues. The petals feed the head and the head makes the petals grow; in a mutually beneficial relationship. It is this structure that I have devised which ensures rigour in my PaR activity and creates a dynamic relationship between all aspects of my research endeavours, without being reductive. (CLICK TO BLANK SLIDE 7)

SECTION THREE: DOCUMENTATION & DISSEMINATION

Documentation and dissemination of PaR is vital if the practice is to function in its capacity as research. Documentation should not simply be and after thought or a post-process activity, instead it is an integral issue that must be engaged with from the very inception of the project. According to Freeman, ‘the employment of the personal, evidenced in reflection, need not function at the expense of a wider, more generic publication of knowledge. The relationship is collusion rather than collision, with the necessary critical discourse being at once contained within and exercised through the product itself’. I would like to spend a little time discussing the ways in which I have engaged with those issues of documentation and the preparation for dissemination. The main question that I have had and am still grappling with, is: What are the traces of performance and documentational materials in relation to the vanished live events? I want to explore some of the documentational methods that I am using and the difficulties that they have thrown up.

I am in the process of making a piece of participatory theatre called Siren Song…In 3 Parts. It is a devised theatre project that seeks to explore the concepts of woman and trauma. It examines the audience’s experiences of what these concepts mean for them through a task-driven, participatory aesthetic; blending some of the principles of playback theatre and a postmodernist performance ethic to generate a unique and provocative theatre intervention. The performance is constructed through a series of tasks and games that ensure a completely unique experience each time it is encountered.

As well as recording my own processes and participation as the theatre maker from inception to reception; I have also been collecting and recording the experiences of the other collaborators involved in the making process, and the final collaborators, the audience. I have been recording and documenting those processes and experiences in various mediums.

I have created a myspace and though this dynamic, interactive communication tool I have been keeping a personal blog that is publicly available. The URL of which, I have made available to all of my creative collaborators and the audiences; all of which are free to add comments, suggestions, thoughts, feelings, ideas and feedback to my entries.

(OPEN MYSPACE PAGE AND GO TO THE BLOG AREA)

As you can see I have been making my entries under different titles, so that I can distinguish what type of research activity the entry pertains to. So here we have entries made under reflective participant, maker, reflective practitioner and so on. It is a very personal and localised account of the process.


I have also recorded the entire making process on DV video. This serves as a digital document of the rehearsal process that compliments and runs parallel to the blog entries.

In addition to the blog entries and digital documentation, I have kept all material artefacts that have been created in and through the creative process. Things such as sketches, drawings, lightning designs, set designs, costumes designs and publicity material.

I am still in the middle of the making process but have presented Siren Song as a work in progress to a live audience twice. As well as the methods of documenting the practice that I have already outlined, I have devised the work itself to contain elements and moments of documentation.

During part two of Siren Song, the audience are asked to contribute to the work themselves by writing their responses to the question: Why is she crying? on small individual, handheld chalkboards. Some of those suggestions are then taken up and used as the impetus for the performers to do impromptu, improvisations on the spot. Here is an example of that clip.

(CLICK INTO SLIDE 8-VIDEO CLIP) once finished (CLICK INTO BLANK 9)

The chalkboards record part of the audiences experience and are photographed after each live performance. In addition to this, each live event is filmed.

One of the key aspects of the work is the inclusion of the diary room that is made available to the audience at the end of the show. Once the piece itself is finished, there is always an after show discussion, which is included in the running time, rather than as a separate event. During the course of the after show discussion the audience are invited to nip into the diary room at any point and leave their own contribution; in whatever form that maybe. Once inside, they have the option of leaving their comments/feedback/thoughts/ideas/contribution on a DV handy cam, an audio recording device or in written form. There are no instructions, other than how to operate the electrical equipment in the room. As the audience come and go to the diary room, the after show discussion is filmed in full.

I have attempted to collect record and document all traces of the process, right from inception through to reception in a manner that is sympathetic to my phenomenological perspective. I do not expect all these elements and traces to stand in place of the live events themselves; they become something else, something other to that which they were created by. As Cologni states, ‘the nature of live Art is in the liveness of both its delivery and fruition, but also of the continuously shifting contextualization of its produced supplements’.The traces left behind produce a re-enactment, through which I hope I will be able to gain some insight into the nature and function of the production and reception through the perspective and re-enactments of the actual collaborators. Mouldering ascribes this point and suggests that ‘whatever survives of a performance in the form of a photograph or video tape is no more than a fragmentary, petrified vestige of a lively process that took place at a different time in a different place’. This does not mean that they are not useful.

Conclusion

All the evidence that I have and will collect during the course of my PaR activity will be localised and specific to the circumstances in which it was generated and collected. The localised, anecdotal and documentational evidence that I have and will collect throughout the PaR activity, is only ever partial; just traces and ghosts, that through their re-enactment of the actual live event, create a changed and different manifestation of that which they were created by. All that is left to offer is simply dust; as Phelan suggests, ‘performance cannot be saved, recorded, documented or otherwise participate in the circulation of representations of representation: once it does so, it becomes something other than performance…[as] it betrays and lessens the promise of it’ own ontology.’ (Phelan 1993: 149)

The methods of collecting evidence that I am applying will only ever produce a ghostly re-enactment, partial and changed, for the work of others as well as my own and is a factor which needs to be considered in the conceptualization of the research findings. Although the documentation and anecdotal evidence will provide some insight into the experiences of those involved in the events, they do not stand up as a complete understanding or theory for the nature and role of the audience. The experiences themselves need to be subjected to modes of inquiry that will conceptualize the experiences in order to discover the implications for wider theoretical concerns: aesthetically, socially and culturally.

While at the conference I was bale to participate in several workshop performance presentations; here are some of the thoughts that I jotted down during the day:

Creating multiple layered narrative through repetition of voice and movement, rather than through stories-leaving the audience to code and decode the significance of the events-the writerly audience.

Game, task and rule as devices used to make the performers present.
Practice as proof- as scientific experience or evidence of hypothesis.

Mapping and documenting experience using visual representation (www.ourplaceourstage.net)

Makers Diary: All set

It would appear that all are informed and happy with the casting situation. Now all I need to do is re-develop the performance and get it in ship shape for Camden in less than a month….good job I enjoy a challenge.

Reflective Practitioner: To the rescue

Nigel, my partner, and a non-performer has agreed to step in and take up Richard’s role. I just need to let the girls know and hope that they are welcoming and warm towards him. It is going to be a very peculiar situation working with Nigel in this way.

Reflective Practitioner: Disappointment

It looks as though Richard is not going to be able to commit to enough rehearsal time to be able to continue as a performer. I feel really disappointed that he will no longer be involved and it is going to be incredibly challenging for someone else to step in now at this stage due to the time constraints. Thanks for all of your hard work Rich, it has been an exciting journey.

Reflective Practitioner: Re-development

I have had some time to reflect upon the first two performances and just wanted to share some of my initial ideas:

No chairs or formal seating of any kind; I want to create an entirely liminal space that both the audience and performers occupy. I do not want the audience to have to cross any barriers, either conceptual or material. Perhaps some informal seating scattered around the space rather than a block or bank…I want to avoid spectatorship.

Maybe we could build the documentation of the audience’s experiences into the actual performance. Perhaps one of the performers could take people aside into the diary room.

The audience need more creative control and creative responsibility for the performance, perhaps they could have the power to stop the texts or scenes anytime that they see fit…make them take responsibility for what they are implicated in. In fact, there needs to be more creative opportunities overall; musical chairs really worked, so perhaps more party games like pass-the –parcel as a way of collaboratively generating performance with the audience.

Food- booze?

Performance Pictures Three

Performance Pictures Two

Performance Pictures One

Pictures from the show

Reflective Practitioner: Performance Two

She sighs and exhales audibly, as she sinks back into the plush feather pillows…as she closes her eyes the evenings events dance across the back of her eyelids………….

Okay I am not going to repeat any issues that cropped up tonight that I already mentioned yesterday, as I do not think there is much point at this stage.

We had a much bigger audience tonight and the ushers managed to get the audience to sit in the horse shoe section…which was great. Still though, I think that despite the more intimate nature of tonight’s performance, the seating arrangement created too much of a physical and conceptual barrier. I am going to really carefully reconsider how to expand the liminal space of the performance space to include the audience from the very off.

Again, the audience seemed to really get into musical chairs and there was a real sense of fun, competition and playfulness. The secrets about ‘her’ were great and they really seemed to get into the spirit of things. As the most successful part of the performance I need to reconsider this device.

I was VERY disappointed with the improves tonight, the audience really don’t seem to understand what we are trying to get at, I need to find a way of making the rules of engagement specific and matter to the audience so that they feel inclined to play with us. I am worried with so little time between now and Camden.

The audience did not use the diary booth at all tonight; however, some of them took part in an after show discussion that was really interesting.

Some initial thoughts about re-development:

Need to spend more time thinking about and developing their performance presence.

Need to make explicit the rules of engagement

Need to make it matter to the audience in a fundamental way, so that they really invest in the performance.

I need to re-evaluate the performance really thoroughly on terms of my research aims as I feel these two experiments failed to create the role of the creatorly participant.

Need to find a way of collecting and generating audience feedback.

That is enough for tonight I am proper bushed…so to my bed.

Reflective Practitioner: Performance One

I was disappointed at the lack of audience tonight despite all of the advertising and promotion there was only a handful of people present. I was afraid that this would be the case as the main student body have all gone home. I instructed the ushers to ask people to sit in the horseshoe seats and not go up into the seating bank but unfortunately the majority of the audience ignored this request and scurried up to the back. It really confirmed my fears that the traditional seating arrangement would create a barrier and set up conventions and behaviour that would not be conducive to participation. Unfortunately there is nothing that I can do about this at all now for this round of experiments but will have to work hard to address for Camden.

The opening section of the entrances and inscription was not seamless but that is a case of more rehearsal needed but more worryingly did not seem to be effective in setting up to the audience the things that we wanted to explore with them in the performance (this became more obvious later on with the responses to the invitation to create with us).

The audience seemed to respond well to the question ‘why is she crying’ and without any explanation they began to write on their chalkboards. I think I left too long for this; both the performers and audience became restless after a while but I pushed the point because I wanted them to have time to reflect and change what they wrote (I will put up the pics after both of the shows). Rich, Deb & Nikki also felt that it was too long but I wanted it to be a creative challenge for the audience. I think that tomorrow I will need to watch the audience carefully and judge the time accordingly. I will also need to speak to Rich, Debbie and Nikki about not drawing attention to them selves during this section; they need to remain still and allow the audience to take responsibility for filing that space and time during the performance.

A similar comment was made an audience member about the opening She text, that it went on too long and they just wanted it to start. I understand how just the words hanging in space might seem empty but I wanted the audience to work to make her present in that space, in all the ways that they could imagine…once the text has begun, so has the performance.

I must admit that I was disappointed by most of the audience’s responses to the question ‘why is she crying?’ Many of the responses were really silly and did not engage with the debates and discussions that I hoped we had set up in the first section of the performance. In this way, I think that we obviously had not engaged them in the things that we wanted to explore with them; they were implicit but I had hoped that the audience would get a sense of what we wanted to investigate and play with. Maybe we needed to let the audience know the performance rules that we were working from in order to play with their ideas because there was a definite reluctance to take responsibility for their ideas in performance and what the performers did with them. I think that the seating arrangement contributed to this. Maybe the rules of engagement need to be made much clearer from the start in architecture and performance style.

Musical Chairs was much more successful than I had anticipated after the improve section had been so flat. The majority of the audience joined in and crossed over into the performance space. The created a liminal space by crossing over but I am not convinced that there involvement in the task was creatorly though. I think that I need to re-examine how this works as a performance device but it definitely has more potential than the texts seem to.

I think that many of the texts and the style of the performance perhaps alienated the audience rather than setting up the themes which was not my intention at all. I think that I need to maybe take a less postdramatic approach and think about developing techniques that are more engaging in a material way from the off. The theatricality of the texts and physical work did not serve the purpose that I though it would.

Only two people used the diary room, unless tomorrow is any different I am going to have to re-evaluate the ways in which I generate audience feedback.

I have to go to bed now….lots of work to do tomorrow.

Reflective Practitioner: Structure and intentions

We now have the performance structure entirely fixed, it is simply a case of rehearsal now-the devising has come to an end for part one of the process. I just wanted to pause for breath before the madness of dress tech and public shows to reflect on what we have created and our intentions in doing so.
In part one of the show structure, Undressing-dressing down, and our intention is to set up the themes that we want to discuss with the audience and the ways in which we have addressed and played with that theme. We hope that this opening part will present the performers to the audience and begin to tell some of our stories and relationships with her. It is my hope that this will warm up the audience to the concept of woman and trauma.

In part two, telling tales-like it is, we invite the audience to participate in a devising/improve session based around a single question…why is she crying? I am hoping that by structuring the audience’s participation through the participation toolkit, they will feel that it is a safer way to become interactive and engaged with the material and the audience. I am hoping the rules will operate in the same way that they have during our process and will ease anxiety and push for investment and involvement in a comfortable and non-pressured way.

In section three of the performance, Playing-with you, we will invite the audience to play a game of musical chairs. Again this game should be a familiar structure and I hope that in playing a game that is comfortable and fun, they will forget themselves and can invest and generate material just by applying the rules of the game. The winner of the game decides which text will be performed for the audience. Although the audience do not have creative control over the actual material and their choice is not an informed one, they will actually be making the performance by participating in the game of musical chairs and creating the presence of the absent her in their responses to the offer of telling us a secret each time they get eliminated from the game.

Our performance of one of the prepared texts is a gift to the audience, an offering of possible stories that we have prepared for them to make something of. It is out thank you to them for helping us to play and our offering of her/she to them…our possibilities of her/she.

The re-dressing element is about turning full circle and the suggestion that this is a fluid process that can be repeated and will be repeated but for the sake of difference rather than to repeat as the same.

These are our intentions and it is not until we get an audience in and participating that we will get an understanding of the success of our intentions and our methodologies. I am still really concerned about the space and I really hope that it does not set up the wrong impression and create a separation between the audience and the performers. I now have no control over that and will simply have to ask the ushers to make sure that everyone is seated in the semi-circle rather than letting them go into the raked stalls.

Makers Diary: Dress Rehearsal

This morning I sent out another round of e-mail invites and put a reminder on the portal-staff and student pages. I also got the programmes printed in full colour and they look great. Charly and Ed have offered to usher and so will Lorraine, so I think I am covered.

Olu is now going to come on Sunday and he will be bringing a friend with him.

We managed to fit in an extra session this morning between 9am and 12 noon. We used the extra session to work on the participation toolkit. I am so pleased, it was a great deal more successful than in previous sessions; all of the performers worked together as a team to generate material, it was fantastic. There was a particular soundscape that was really moving and powerful. Richie took some really exciting risks in the session and produced some really solid work as a result. I think the urgency of the situation has knocked some of the humour out of him; I think that he is the most nervous of all of the performers now.

We managed to fit in two full dress rehearsals and pretty much the same issues and notes came up for both of the runs- despite my notes and feedback after the first dress.

The costumes in the first dress run caused some issues as I suspected that they might. Debbie only needs to make some small adjustments to her entrance and undressing but Nikki needs to totally re-think and re-devise her entrance and undressing. Richie’s costume and entrance in terms of dress issues was fine. He is struggling with the shoes but just needs to take them home with him tonight and keep practising his routine in them. All of the performers are going to need a little help from each other to undress; Debs needs help with a zip, Richie shoes and a few other issues. After the first dress run, we spent a little time working on and re-adjusting the entrances and undressing so that in the second dress this would run much smoother.

Richie’s entrance is not all convincing; he is going to have to really work on that tonight. Debbie’s entrance was great; she really sets up her relationship with the material, texts and themes. It is a real shame that Nikki had to re-devise her entrance because her floor work was really exciting and created a distinct relationship with her texts and the themes. The new entrance that she has devised does re-configure this relationship and her performance persona but it approaches the material from a slightly different angle and actually one that I suspect is more truthful than her first.

The opening text still needs work but we are just out of time. Even though Nikki has the text in front of her in the first dress she kept stumbling over her words and it sounded as though she was just reading it. I would prefer her to have learnt the text but they need to sound spontaneous, even if she is reading them off stage. I gave her notes after the first dress and suggested that she needed to take a position on each of the statements and then deliver the text to express that position or attitude. It is not just the words but the way in which she chooses to express them and her attitude to them that is interesting. This was also an issue that came up in the final section of the Moon text that Nikki has. Nikki needs to infuse and deliver the text in a way that tells the audience her stories and how she relates to the texts.

Richie forgets his texts all the time and does not seem clear on what he is supposed to be doing and when…..arrgghh. Unfortunately he does not have the experience to cover and just keep going and the girls do not know their own structure of texts well enough to cover for him or rescue the situation. This is not good at all and I am concerned.

We did not manage to get any audience for the participation other than Lorraine, so it is really difficult to judge how this will manifest itself tomorrow but then that is the nature of this type of work; it will not be complete or whole or any work at all until the audience are there creating the work with us.

There is nothing more that I can do now-tomorrow we are not going to have time to run through for the performers because we will have to set the space and have to set the lights and rigging so that we can have a tech rehearsal. Tomorrow will be our first time in the space with our props and costumes and I am not allowed to change or move any of the lights or rigging…this will be a challenge. I have not made a lighting plan yet, because I have no idea how it will be set and what will be available for us to use. I will have to make those decisions once we get there. This is going to make the set up and tech much longer and more tedious but there is nothing I can do about that. I am hoping that I will be able to create some strong colour washes because I want to create moods and atmosphere rather than light any specific elements.

I can’t believe that tomorrow we are doing it with an actual audience…..although I have only booked 5 tickets in total, despite my widespread ads on campus and the portal. I am just keeping everything crossed that we do actually have an audience or we don’t have a performance at all.

I am going to be techie for the actual performances, so I need to make sure that I get some really good footage because I will be concentrating on cues and lighting rather than what is happening in the performances, I would rather have sat in as part of the audience but that is not looking like an option. I will just have to carefully review the footage afterwards.

Makers Diary: Panic sets in

Lorraine came back down today with the costumes and they all fit beautifully…even Richie’s. I went shopping for the last bits of costume and props and I think we are all set, chalk and all. A fellow research student, Charly has kindly posted an advert for the show on the council’s intra net for me so I hope that will generate some more interest. After she did this, I had a really interesting e-mail from a gentleman called Richard Ryan, which read as follows:
Hello Joanna,
Are you performing any time other than this weekend? Would like to be able to see it - I'm responsible for putting new work on at The Railway Inn (very limited space). If not, perhaps a DVD? Or a chat?
Cheers
Richard Richard Ryan Events & Promotions Assistant Arts Service, Hampshire County Council Mottisfont Court High Street Winchester SO23 8ZF
Tel: 01962 846019 Fax: 01962 841644
I thought that this was very interesting and replied as follows:

Hi Richard
Thank you for your e-mail. It would be lovely to have a chat! We are taking Siren Song to Camden People's Theatre, London on the 3rd July 07, so you would have an opportunity to catch it there, if not I would be really happy to get you a copy of the DVD once it is all put together.
Warm wishes
Joanna Bucknall

I am hoping that this might be the start of some possible opportunities for the future.

Today was actually supposed to be a day off for the performers but because yesterday presented quite a few issues with words and structure, I have had to call a rehearsal today as well. (Luckily I did book a space for us just in case I needed a space to finish off props or any last minute one to ones…..good job really). We did a four hour session today and ran the entire thing through twice. The first time went reasonably well but still had issues with text and structure. The second run was fantastic; Nikki, Debs and Rich were on fire! It was just great, the worked as an ensemble to tell their stories and deliver their text, they really invested in the participation improvs and used a good range of the toolkit…even remembered their texts….fucking hey….that is more like it…that is what I need to see.

Tomorrow we are going to have a full dress rehearsal and we will run it twice again. It will not be in the actual space but at least we have a proper studio to work in, that is something. It will be the first time that we get to run it through will all of the props, costumes and music. Lorraine will be coming to help out with make up and dressing, then she will be audience for us. I am obviously hoping that both dress rehearsals will go as well as the second run today. I have asked the performers to try and persuade a couple of peeps to come along and act as audience for us, because we really need to actually try out that input. I want the performers to get a chance to work with participants from outside of the process before the opening night really. It will give them an idea of what to expect. I have tried to be an objective audience member for them in our sessions but I am not at all, I can’t be. So fingers crossed.

Makers Diary: Concerns

Olu has a family emergency and cannot come to the performances…I am not happy but what can I do.

I e-mailed Kerry at Camden our copy and publicity, which was this:

SIREN SONG
In 3 Parts

Synopsis

‘She was a woman. The kind of woman who wears suits good suits…..’

Siren Song….in 3 Parts is a devised theatre project that seeks to explore the concepts of woman and trauma. It examines the audience’s experiences of what these concepts mean for them through a task-driven, participatory aesthetic. Blending some of the principles of playback theatre and a postmodernist performance ethic to generate a unique and provocative theatre intervention. The performance is constructed through a series of tasks and games that ensure a completely unique experience each time it is encountered.

The event unfolds in 3 sections each one offering up a plethora of stories, partial and shifting. Like a tangled web, each delicate thread weaving and working its way through the next. We give you an inch in the hope that you will take a mile…..we pass you the rope to see what you will hang on it…….we give you our bare house in which to make a home……

‘We wear our dreams on our sleeves, right next to our hearts……….’

Come play with us….

The Company

Vertical Exchange was founded by Joanna Bucknall and Nigel Tuttle in 2005. Joanna is the Performance Artistic Director of the performance group; she has a background in theatre, performance and drama and is responsible for the performative aspects of the company. Nigel is the Media Artistic Director; he has a background in video production and is responsible for the video and media aspects of the company. Joanna and Nigel collaborate to produce a range of different projects, from installations to devised theatre works. Joanna and Nigel are the only permanent members of VEX and they work with a range of performers, artists and creative practitioners for each project that they undertake.


Siren Song Collaborators

Written & Directed by Joanna Bucknall
Scored by Joe Harris (With additional track by Richard Haddlesey)
Costume by Lorraine Bucknall
Props & Documentation Nigel Tuttle
Artwork & Publicity Kirsty Mills

Siren Song Performers

HIM Richard Haddlesey
SHE Nikki Denny
HER Debbie McGregor

I also included a couple of pics, sketches, postcards and the logo.

We had a full day of rehearsals today and I am totally knackered now..shit there is still so much to bloody sort out. Any way, I know it was a really long day but we REALLY needed it. I banned scripts and paper from today’s session with no exceptions and I made them struggle regardless…cruel I know but I needed to make a point….tomorrow is our last rehearsal. We rehearsed everything and started to put together the entire structure, combining all of the elements that we have prepared. We included the musical chairs section and the re-dressing section. Rich suggested that after the text he should just slip away from the space leaving the two girls to dress, as he did not feel that after the journey of the performance that he could put the dress back on or even present himself at all. I am going to run with this, if that is how he feels and his personae has developed then we need to run with that and whatever that suggests to the audience. Debbie and Nikki are there with the words when they concentrate but I am now deeply concerned about rich and his texts. All we can do now is just keep running it and running it.

It is very late and I have a lot to do tomorrow….so off to be d for me now.

Makers Diary: Rehearsal

We spent today’s rehearsal working on Nikki and Richie’s entrance. We also worked through the really tricky blocking at the end of the moon text between the two of them…..Nikki took her kit off for the first time and it was fine. I am glad that it is out of the way and out there…I think she feels much better about it now as well. She has decided that for the Winchester performances she will keep her pants on and just go topless but will go all the way for Camden. I am more than happy with that decision if she is. I am not even going to discuss the off book issue..lets just say it is still is an issue.

Nikki really needs to go away and have a think about her relationship with the opening text and the final section of the moon text..they still feel flat and read. I know she has a personal relationship with the material and I want her to really work on drawing that out and exposing it during her performance and delivery.

Makers Diary: Housekeeping Issues

We now have all of the rooms booked for our final rehearsal schedule. We now have our event permit…..and dah dad ah…wait for it 3, yes 3 requests for tickets…..HURRAH..our first punters.

Makers Diary: More Improv

Once Nikki arrived this afternoon, we went through all of the texts-when they concentrate and invest, it is really fantastic but they really do need to get OFF BOOK!!!!! Things are not going to really come together until they get those damn bits of scrubby paper out of their hands and fixed in their heads.

We spent a couple of hours working on the participation toolkit-today was the best it has been so far and they did explore some interesting ideas and improvisations but they still need to push them harder and further. They rely too much on naturalism and need to explore the other modes of expression too. Also if they opt for naturalism it needs to be convincing and have a level of sincerity to it at the moment it is more like melodrama than naturalism. I am still going to need them to be truthful if they choose this mode of expression. Nikki works really well in this way and when she is not led astray by Rich produces really exciting work. Debs seems unsure of herself and seem to hang back and hold back-just a case of confidence. Rich relies as ever on comedy and smut to pull laughs rather than attempting to explore what he is offered.

OH MY GOSH I can’t believe how little time we have left to get this right!

Makers Diary: Rehearsals

This morning Rich and Debs ran through their section of the moon text and their section of the rape text. They both also did their entrances. Rich really seems to be relishing his opening part of the moon text and I can’t wait to see how he pushes it and adapts it to the different audiences every night. He seems so confident in this section of the performance and actually seemed to know his text today..hurrah. Richie and Debs have a really electric energy between them when they get it right; they just need to get off-book for that section of the text. The choreography is looking really smooth now. The entrances are now starting to come together and if they keep heading this way, they will really set up the themes and their personas.

Makers Diary: Housekeeping..again

I e-mailed invitations to all of the drama and performing arts students this morning, so hopefully that will generate some interest for audience. I am starting to get really concerned about the lack of requests for tickets or bookings. If we do not have an audience then we do not have any work!!

I have e-mailed the SU president to ask for permission to poster and flyer the SU bars. I did go in to the office yesterday but the people that I needed to see were not there. I will get poster put up around the rest of campus and halls today though. I also e-mailed our next lot of room bookings and space requirements too. What a bust bee I am. The chalkboards are now cut and painted, we have 40 of them.

The Programme Picture

The Pictures

Makers Diary: Participatory Toolkit and more

I e-mailed all of the invitations today to all the research students and staff and I posted an advert on the portal on both the student and staff pages-lets hope that we have a really good up take for this. I do not yet have any ushers.

I took photos or more accurately Richie took photos of the cast for me, so that I could finish the programme (which I have now done).

We spent the whole of today’s session on the participatory toolkit. The warm up part of the session was really successful again today; the games really energised and focused the performers. Nikki, Rich and Debs really seem to have bonded now and are starting to trust each other and there is a real sense of chemistry developing between them. We went through each game separately and I joined the performers for the first round of each game because I hoped that this would set an example and motivate them to work in a particular way. After the first round, I participated as audience.

Despite playing each game numerous times with feedback after each, they seemed to opt for the most obvious or most humorous option each time in response to the material I was giving them. We are just going to have to keep going and keep developing the way in which they handle and respond to the material. It is so difficult because this part of the performance is entirely reliant upon them and their relationship with the audience. It is totally reliant upon the performer’s skill and imagination to use the audience’s material in exciting and challenging ways. I can’t do that for them.

In the second half of the session we refined and adjusted the rules of the game to combat confusions and difficulties that came up against in the first section of the session.

The adjustments are as follows:

We came across some confusion as to how we will decide which boards
Are chosen and who will start off. We decided that we did not really want to have explicit discussions or planning on the stage, we wanted it to be more organic than that. So we had to adjust the structures slightly and tighten up the rule; (it is interesting that this seems to be a running concept, that the tighter the rules of the game or activity the more freedom it creates).

We decided that during the music, while the audience write on the chalkboards, the performers will remain still. Once the music stops they will move around the audience simply asking them to “show us”. They can have as long as they like to look at the chalkboards but they are not going to discuss them. Nikki will choose first, and then Richie, then Debbie and this will be repeated twice. This will just save any confusion and hesitation from the performers. Once Nikki has decided upon her first chalk board, she will stand in the centre of the space in a neutral position. Once she has done this the other two will ask her ‘Why is she crying?’ and Nikki will respond with what was on the chalk board. Once she has done this, they will all form a semi circle facing the audience. Nikki will tell them which tool she is choosing and once she has spoken, she has to initiate the game. This is then repeated for each of the performers. Once she has called “stop” she will approach the audience member whose material they used and ask if there is anything that they would like to change or if they would like to join them to replay the game. Once the game has been replayed or no changes are required it moves on to Richie’s first choice.

Storytelling: One of the performers has to start by choosing a chalkboard that they want to address. Once they have chosen this, they will start by saying Once upon a time there was a woman……they have to keep going with telling a story that is based on the chalkboard until another performer interrupts them and then continues the story or changes its direction. This continues indefinitely until a performer calls stop and then that scenario is over. When they interrupt they have to say “actually, once upon a time there was a woman…” this just distinguishes the interruption from the end of the game and is a reminder that the story is not fixed but a dynamic and fluid entity being constructed in that very moment.

Soundscape: One of the performer’s chooses a chalkboard that they want to use and respond to. They will start to produce a soundscape that tells the story or responds to the chalkboard suggestion. Once they have started the other performers will join in to build on it. It stops once one of the performers calls stop. We have decided that no words can be used in this game it can only be sounds and vocality. We have also decided that any part of the performer’s body can be used to produce sounds as well as the floor. We also realised that an open horse shoe is not productive in this game and the performers found it easier to create a soundscape when in close proximity of contact; so for this game they will form a tight circle on the floor.

Freeze Frame Montage: Once the board has been chosen, the performer will take up a position and then the others will join them to create a freeze frame. Once they have held the first freeze frame for five seconds, the starting performer will call change and take up the next position; this process will be repeated until the starting performer calls stop. We decided that three freeze frames are enough to tell a story.

Movement Machine: Once the chalkboard has been chosen, the starting performer will begin to make two repetitive movements in succession accompanied by a sound. The other performers will join in until they form one single unit- a machine. We did not make any changes to this game is it went fairly smoothly and there were no difficulties or confusions as to what was happening.

Naturalism: This is fairly self explanatory really. The starting performer will begin a naturalistic improvisation and the others will join in until the starting performer calls stop. We decided that the performer who starts the improv does not have to include all of the performers, it depends what the scene demands. They felt that it was confusing to have everyone facing in on the semi circle so decided that they would face away unless included in the actual improv.

Reflective Practitioner: Participation

The performers are going to need to take on my role of facilitator/conductor during the participation section of the performance, as well as their role of performer/vessel/cipher. They will have to establish the conditions of play and then marshal the activities-controlling the direction of the play and interaction.

Nikki, Debs and Rich, will have to find ways of including the audience and helping the audience to play with them as performers. I hope that the participation toolkit will be like ‘the score’ that the audience are given and then the performers will be the baton-bringing the audience together to produce and create work.

Makers Diary: Busy Bee

I designed the posters for the show today and the invitations-just need to get them printed at repro.

I went bra and props shopping today, so the girls now have some support.

Makers Diary: Housekeeping…

I put together the first draft of the programme today but I will need to get some pictures of the cast to insert into it. I have organised the room bookings now for the next few rehearsals and text all of the performers to let them know the details.

I have sent the risk assessment to David Buss.