Good Questions

Recently, after reading some of my previous blog entries, I was asked some great questions by "Shems" about this work. So, I'm going to take a moment to respond to them. Here is part of her response,

"It sounds like a fairly demanding project you are working on. As an artist, I can't help but ask, how do you keep from getting lost in the abstactness of the practice of making your art? Also do you ever have moments when you suddenly can't take yourself seriously? and not to be too inquisitive, although it seems too late for that, do you ever feel obligated to include some kind of hook to sell the project to the public? I ask this last question, because if I understood the description correctly, you will be performing your piece, every hour on the hour for 24 hours and I'm wondering why you would want to do that? What does it add in value to the artistic merit of the project?"

Yea, she certainly goes right to the heart of the matter. I'm not going to answer them in the order she asked, but will jump around alittle bit.

Firstly, I don't really think of a "hook" to sell the project to the public when beginning a new work. The idea for doing the work for 24 hours came directly out of the exploration of what this work is exploring - pushing ourselves in new direction, to new edges, to new discoveries. For a couple of years I've been interested in doing a 24 hour performance as an exploration in endurance and how that can lead to transformation. This seemed like the perfect opportunity to go for the 24 hours because the work seems to welcome it as does the venue and context - being in the Capital Fringe Festival. It feels like a good fit. Now, saying that, yea, it is a good "hook" and it is the one that pops out at everyone. Most people respond by saying something to the effect like, "are you nuts?" It gets them thinking, and wondering why the hell we'd want to do that. Hopefully at that point it will bring them into the performance and see that the 24 hours is not the main focus of our exploration, but a by-product, if you will, of this journey. I do think we could do this work without doing it so many times in a row, but it does add a sense of commitment to being in this performance/world in a significant way.

In regard to the abstractness of the work, I would say that that is a concern, but not a major concern. When Jonathan and I take the time to focus on what we are doing - and this includes the structure - the inner life of the work is present. We do work with different source material (words, phrases, photos) to cultivate connection between us and a larger context outside the parameters of the piece. I think both Jonathan and I work from structure alot of time, so it feels very natural. For many people this seems too abstract and they want to focus on the "personal" or "emotional" connection in the work. I experience structure as both personal and emotional. By establishing a clear structure I am more able to let go into my emotional/intuitive self without going into an indulgent or self-centered performance mode. At the same time we have been working with asking ourselves the question, "What's next?", as a way to keep pushing ourselves further and deeper into the work. I think this is an acknowledgement of our desire to stay, or even increase, that connection to the emotional/intuitive, maybe even, spiritual self. I would say that structure and discussions about structure are not a means to abstract the work, but a way to find the space for the personal selves to have more room, to be safe to expose oneself, to be vulnerable.

And, I would say, that Jonathan and I rarely take ourselves very seriously. But, we do take our work seriously. It is the way we make sense of the world, the way we communicate with our community, the way we delve into ourselves and our potential. And, we have a pretty good sense of humor regarding just how odd most people find what we do.