alt + F4 for normal screen

page 228

print this page


As part of the learning process we stopped one session at short intervals so that each person could account for their actions.  An incredible breadth of different perceptions and imaginative experiences were revealed in even a few minutes of activity.  Accounts of each person’s actions were usually entirely unexpected and magical. Most of the time a full knowledge of what went on in people’s heads was, however, unnecessary. Once a certain mutual confidence existed that each person’s actions were coherent (however bizarre the coherence) there was little actual need for explanation.  The inner imaginative richness of the work gave each person’s actions a certain weight, so that even inaction came to seem very positive.  In fact a prolonged stillness often became the most interesting element in what was going on.  There was also a surprising ease of transition between movement for its own sake (as in dance) and purposeful movement e.g. to fetch an object, build something, leave a situation behind, etc.  Breaks in activity also became interesting and the fact that when something lost its intensity one could simply stop doing it—as a child leaves a game—gave freshness and ease to the work which it is hard to imagine in any other circumstances. Development of the work appeared to take place most rapidly on occasions when it was realized that some major ingredient was lacking.  One such moment was when it was suddenly recognized that the work was becoming too nice, only collaboration was being admitted within the group.   By allowing conflict the energy in the work was restored, but recognition of the fact that something was missing had to come first. 1.      The Use of Speech Many distinct modes of language were used: straight literal conversation;   story telling, solo or group, including interweaving of several parallel stories;   unmatched dialogues (replies are inappropriate in everyday terms as if one participant is mad or not listening);  interviews with appropriate answers; interviews or lectures partly carried into another mode, (a lecture given in terms of movements;)  questions answered by presenting an object; naming of objects or activities in terms of a fantasy or an analogy;  and so on. Situations of mis-match between what a person was doing and saying, or other “not linear” possibilities, were often the most interesting. 2.      Objects and Spaces The rooms in which the work took place were obviously a major factor in the events.   Positioning of doors, windows, general proportions, quality and brightness of light, warmth, subsidiary spaces, all added up to pre-determine a certain feel to what went on.  A narrow space created a string of activities one