Simone Forti in Orvieto, Italy, March 2008.
J: In the workshop experiences we had with Simone Forti we experienced her Logomotion research separately, but similarly. In Orvieto, I explored speaking-writing-moving really for the first time with any focus and longevity of investigation. In my own practice, I recognise now that the interplay between text and movement has always been present, but in a mostly undisclosed manner. I mean that when I worked with Simone I could feel a "homeliness" in working between text and movement, but that the methodology was unfamiliar to me. I had never exposed my process in that respect, inpart I think because of my infancy as a maker. I found the workshop investigations then at once challenging and familiar....
E: Text, speech and movement have been part of my creative practice for quite a long time. I remember exploring speech and movement in my own choreographies as a student at Laban, as well as sourcing my work from reflective writing, and therefore letting some of it filter in the work. Working with Simone helped me bridge these different elements as well as understand how they can all be the manifestation of the same creative activity. It was extremely challenging to me as it placed the self at the center of the experience, therefore leading me to a very vulnerable yet extremely rich place.
J: As Elodie and I have discussed our work we have settled on the term "track-changing" to describe the potential for information to be converted into another medium. This may not be a clean translation, and here the idea of currency is useful to me. In Simone's work we both experienced and witnessed instances of live processing in the improvised form- when the idea spoken or danced changes either in content or due to swapping between the modes of expression (movement, language). Much much more could be said here about the beauty of clarity in these processes. In recent conversations we have have discussed and shared writings and talked a little of dances experienced with Simone, noting our mutual interest in the integrity of the decision making processes in speaking/ writing/ dancing which follows a stream of consciousness subject to diversion and content switching.
First taxonomical attempts using polarities such as: empty/containing; edible/non-edible; boxes/round. We slowly moved to less rational polarities and even less objective criteria: blue/round; things that are taller than wide/things that are labelled; smooth/things that would tessellate. Form those polarities we began to evoke the idea of a continuum to position elements (things that are taller than wide/things that are labelled but also things that are taller than wide with a label). (August 08, Charente).
Some of the objects used in Canterbury in our exploration of embodiment. We mostly played with the objects, consciously choosing aspects of the objects and transferring them to the body. It now appears to us as the embryo of the processing machine. (November 08).
Studio space at Laban (Laurie Grove, London). The organisation of the space reflects our process: (from left to write) a space to draw, objects to interrogate, the camera to document the process and a space to reflect, discuss and write. Although quite distinct we integrate all those elements as part of the same creative practice. (January 09).
