Saturday, July 19, 2008

Collaborative rehearsal as model

Ron & Sam--

Great exchange (last couple of posts). Knee-jerk response: seems like to pressure to jump right in with a hierarchical (whoa, my spelling!) approach is fear of messiness. "Get er done" in Sam-speak. Time's a wastin. For instance, my tendency to engage in long, rambling conversations when I know I should be creating an agenda and sticking to it. Limited amount of time (in a meeting, in a rehearsal) to Get Things Done. That's a fact, right?

So I guess I'm wondering, what does the "middle spreading outwards" idea look like in action. I can really see what you mean in a rehearsal setting more than in, say, a discussion of what FAH should be or do.

But a mess is usually what we need. Maybe what's missing is the confidence that out of the mess something will cohere without it being forced. It's pretty scary, whether you're facing an opening night or an institutional problem, to trust that structure will emerge out of chaos, signal out of noise.

Ron, seems to me that Adrianne Mnouchkine and her Theatre de Soleil work in the way you're describing--know about her process?

Gotta run,

Graham

1 comment:

  1. But a mess is what we need,
    you say (wondering about the
    always expanding middle with
    no center image),and a shared
    sense that out of mess and
    muddle: tidy, out of noise: news.

    This is FRAME DISCOURSE, and
    refers to shared attitude and
    context--not necessarily to
    specifics: a rehearsal, an assessment
    of FAH.

    The environment for "collaborative genius" among other things seems
    to value failure and confusion:
    as generative. As opposed to the
    environment for individual genius.
    (according to Keith Sawyer; I quoted a review of this book
    last summer and got a response
    from Sandy that he was -- I think--
    sending a copy of the review to his
    advisory council. I quoted it several times throughout the year:
    "an environment that encourages
    failure; one that recognizes the
    liabilities of clarity." So antithetical to our industrialized
    institutional values, don't you
    agree?

    Sound like fine-art values
    to me--turned up high.

    The expanding middle with no
    center (as opposed to the top
    down, bottom up power agon)
    exists in the degree to which
    we as faculty might be engaged
    with each other--beyond house
    keeping concerns: our ideas
    and analogies across the curriculum.

    Don't know how it happens, though.
    Need a few more fools to rush
    in.

    Best, Sam

    ReplyDelete