Thank you Greenrooms

18 November, 2009

firstly to all of the people at the greenroom that made my work possible I thank you for:

your Belief in me
the trust in my work
the use of the rehearsal space
the excellent technical help
making me feel like a real artist
getting my work out form my bedroom into a wider world
keeping the Greenroom going
emma’s hug
changing the date
steve’s extended conversation on the explosive nature of custard powder.
the single vodka diet coke’s

Gill

————————————————————–

As ever post performance I need a way to react to the work and have found that a manner ways make sense. Primarily I write, just about the immediate things that happened in the event as a way to document their happening. Participatory exchanges are very difficult to manage and shape and all too easily (with some exception) leave no trace . The brittle frisson of exchange makes participatory performance both fascinating and impossible. Bellow is just that a documentation of what happened on 6th Novemeber 2009, as a way to remember it. It is by no means a complete picture or an accurate reflection.

Separation of Mixtures

General Points
-10 minutes was too long
At the start of the performance I had set out for myself the guide of 10 minutes per person. However, I soon realised that outside of an academic context, even with the art friendly audiences at the Greenroom, this was too long for most people. At the halfway stage I gave the instruction of giving people 7 minutes in the space. This worked a little better, giving a range of responses across the people that attended. By the end however I had brought the time down to 5 minutes.
What this ‘too much time’ was, I’m not entirely sure. Time to get bored? time to get comfortable? I wish I could quantify this in an accurate way. It does need engagement though. For example if I had only given my participants one minute in the space. Would this give the action an immediacy, vastly changing the outcome? Conversely if I gave them an indeterminate time in the space, told them that they have ‘some’ time, how would this disorientate the participant? Is this the desired outcome?

-The Noise
As predicted, but not quite experienced, the noise of the electric razor vibrating on the metal serving tray was…massive. amplified by a wireless microphone stuck under the plate, the noise actually became a unique deterrent. In many cases people would pick up the razor just to elevate the grinding noise. This action however left them with the portentous object vibrating in their hand. How would they use the object now that they had taken responsibility for it?

-Thank Elena
Doing this piece previous to manchester I was able to test it out with some of my fellow post grads. In an exchange with Ph.D. student Elana I found us holding either side of the metal tray playing the sound in the space. Hands vibrating from the buzzing razor this action became a strong exchange as we experimented with physical tension and noise.
I had decided previous to performance that if someone found the piece particularly difficult I would offer them this option. There were two instances in which it was used. One in which the participant was getting distraught, not given a clear mode of engagement he began to struggle with himself. Secondly another person wouldn’t stop talking, elevating his tension by repeating the same questions to me, again and again.
In both cases this action (of holding the tray) was a useful way to deal with the situation in a thematically appropriate but controlled way. I am beginning to realise in participatory performance that suddenly I’m responsible for my audience, for their well being in the performance space. The actions that I perform may disturb them. In future I must consider a ‘way out’ for my participants. A way in which I can shape the action more easily and still hold some thematic value.

Separation of Mixtures

The variety of reactions
As ever the variety of reactions people have to such a performance with an unclear mode of interaction is fascinating. I will document some of them. But even now I ask myself. What is the importance of these reaction? Are these ‘outcomes’ important to my research results? Quantitate? Qualitative?

-Man who stood back
One of the participants that sticks out in my memory is the man would stood back and just watched for the entirety of his time. This was early on in the performances and so he had the full 10 minutes in the space. He felt no inclination to pick up the electric razor. However, he did not seem uncomfortable. He was quite happily surveying my body in the space.
For me this was a reaction I could quite happily deal with. For all the ways in which I garnered engagement, the action performed on my body was very difficult and distrurbing. This persons engagement was his own, to simply be in the space. Also in deciding not to pick up the razor he controlled the action.

-Man who gave me sideburns
Another participant who stood out was an older asian gentleman. He strolled into the space and with no hesitation cut away my beard, shaping me a goatee and 70’s style sideburns. What I noticed in performance was that people were happy to shave away certain bits of hair but avoided others all together. Almost everyone avoided my hairy face except for this man. His sense of propriety not the same as that of my caucasian participants. By far the most popular areas to shave were my back and upper chest. The back I found particularly significant as it allowed my participants to look at me without me looking back.
Conversely this man asked/informed me as he shaved away that there was something interesting about masculinity and shaving on an asian male body. I didn’t respond, taken aback by is unflinching use of the razor on my face. In hindsight, there was a strong feeling of respect collated around my facial hair that this asian man didn’t posses. Maybe like me he understood its inauthenticity.

-Woman who crossed her arms
Another participant who I remember specifically was a woman who came into the space and announced ‘your not going to talk to me are you’. I hadn’t as a rule decided how I was going to react to direct address. But her outright challenge meant that I decided to remain silent. Perturbed by my lack of response she gingerly shaved some hair off my forearm. Then again announcing ‘I’m not doing any more’ followed by crossing her arms. She held this position for a few minutes and we found ourselves in a stand off. Finally she gave in, quickly shaved some hair off my chest and ran out of the space.
What I came to realise over time was how my action could be interpreted as a challenge. For this woman it was the direct provocation that she struggled with, specifically collated around my silence. For some it was so much of an issue that they stood back never approaching the razor. For others not enough of a challenge, prompting them to pull my hair and ask if it was real. I didn’t offer my participant a way out in this exchange and neither of us came out victorious.

In some sort of conclusion. The mode of participation needed to be better shaped. As ever in a situation where I leave the mode of engagement so open I risk a shapelessness. This I think can only be fixed by iteration.

Also the sound became the prevailing force in the space and requires a separate engagement. This fact will inform my next piece