The Final Project:

So we discussed the working methods of the Wooster Group and then watched their deconstruction of Stein’s Dr. Faustus. It is usually a few years in between viewings for me and I always forget how weird this performance is. What I like about showing it at this point in the term is that students are ready for that weirdness and see a great deal of what we have been discussing in the performance. So, we had a nice chat about the piece and what they saw in it.

I did cut the conversation short to get them involved in an ideation process leading to the final projects. Bob and I did this last time in the Gen Art class and it seemed to help. Unlike the last time I taught this class, rather than give the students a single text I gave them a box of fragments – quotes from Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Colour, a bit of Heiner Müller’s poetry, a short Adrienne Kennedy monolog, some tarot cards, and a deck of flash cards I found at the dollar store. Basically a collection of raw material out of which to make something.

After the ideation process the last week was devoted to them discussing, rehearsing, planning, etc the final project. As I have in the past, I created specific groups based on the type of work throughout the term. Basically trying to figure out who’s skills or outlook will work well with other, or challenge others, or disrupt others. That kind of thing.

The final projects were really lovely. It is interesting that they took a similar frame to the last time I taught the class – highly interactive and with many indeterminate moving parts. While there is clearly a structure, by this point in the term there are times when the structure is challenged or completely open. As we discover, when you ask people to play sometimes you have no idea what they will do. It is a good way to end the term since there really is no closure for this type of class. 

Having them work with the ideas and material to see what they create is always the fun part. Many often comment that there would have been no way that they could have done this at the start of the term. So it is good to see evolution – or de-evolution – over the thirteen weeks. So, I find the project-based structure developed with Bob to be very sound. I often question it or doubt that we will get to where we are headed, but in the end it always works out. So, as I ask the students, I need to continue to have faith in this structure and what it is designed to do.

Ultimately my goal is to have students see perhaps a different pathway to artmaking, one that leans heavily on theory, concepts, and ideas. I don’t anticipate that all will work this way, but it is an option. Or, it allows them to see a bit more deeply into works that may have seemed haphazard or unstructured. As a form of conclusion I have to say that this was a delightful group of students. Playful, creative, intelligent, willing to dive into the increasingly vague project prompts. I do find this way of teaching somewhat exhausting, but the excitement on project days  is always worth it.

Stein to Stein:

Discussing the structure of Stein’s Dr. Faustus, we ended up on the third floor of the library so we could look out the window. This worked well to establish Stein’s notion of theatre as landscape. Although Dr. Faustus is one of her more narrative pieces, it does have a layered structure that loops back on itself, which works with the landscape idea. A good conversation. I have been constantly impressed with the charity that a number of students show these seemingly impenetrable texts. Some great observations and ideas shared about what Stein wrote.

The difficult listening hour went well – as well as it could. I realize that listening to Reich’s “Come Out” can be an ordeal for some. But the comments about the sound and how they engaged with it make those 13 minutes well worth it. I wish we had time to listed to the whole of Alvin Lucier’s “I am Sitting in a Room” and Basinski’s “Disintegration Loops,” but alas 80 minutes goes by far too fast. Given the move from spring term to fall I lost 2 ½ weeks of class and so condensed the two listening days into one. We lost post-punk, but got to sample some glitch.

The hypertext/hypermedia project based on the Stein text was really wonderful. So many lovely complex and deeply thought out projects. As a number of students noted, the interactive quality of many of these pieces was quite evident. There was also a searching or unearthing quality this time round. The last time I taught this class these projects seemed a bit more aggressive rather than welcoming. Same material, two totally different groups of students.

Getting to this point in the term when the students are comfortable taking risks and creating some engaging and thoughtful projects is always the goal. I do doubt this as we go through the process, but one of the things I have to remember is how classes like this were put together with trial and error and the goal of skilling the students up for the end of the term. It means a piece at a time until the pieces start to cohere. I was delighted that they did on this project.

The follow up conversation was a bit low energy – but there is always a lull after project days and certainly always a lull as we reach the remaining weeks of the term. I had them do image and text exquisite corpse today and put the two together. Never done that before. Interesting to hear those fragmented speeches in relation to the fragmented images. I then chatted a bit about sampling and we listened to some plunderphonics, rap, and mash-up. This is the environment they have grown up in so it should feel like home, but hopefully a bit defamiliarized in the sense that they have more background on it now.

Two project ideas: Record a 2 year-old telling a story and then animate it or stage it. Bailey’s notion of postmodernism as a junk drawer – make a project out of the contents of a junk drawer.

On to the Wooster Group and then final projects and then we can call it a term.

Up to Fluxus:

I think each time I have taught this class this way the post break material, though very useful, creates a kind of lull in the class. The Lyotard, PM architecture, intro to Fluxus is all a bit more about listening than doing or creating. I realize that it is at this point in the class where I want students to make connections to the material we developed in the first half of the term. One way of getting at that was having them write papers – yes a clearly academic exercise, but one that allows for a kind of synthesis of elements from the first half of the term as well as letting me gauge if everyone is getting this stuff. I should have gone with my instinct on this an pulled out a handful of statements that were beautiful in how they wrestled with postmodernism, but I didn’t. So the first half which seems very student driven gives way to the second half that seems more instructor driven. How to fix this? The information and conversations around these ideas have been fine, but ultimately feel a bit more like a traditional seminar. The antidote for this can be the Fluxus material. I typically rely on this activity as a way of regaining the momentum from the first half of the term and returning the class to the students.

I have often thought of having students write and share Fluxus event scores (sentences or instructions on index cards) somewhat fool-proof. I have seen this activity produce some really wonderful and beautiful work. And while on a limited scale it did so today, we never really reached that crescendo of activity that I have seen in the past. And I am trying to figure out why. The number of students – doing this with 15 as opposed to 20 or 25 gives us fewer cards to work with. The space? Here I thought about containing the students in the center of the space but didn’t – so they, naturally, gravitated toward the periphery. It is far too easy to perform from that space rather than take the space in the center. Some did, and some did try to raise the energy level, but we kept coming back to neutral.

That said, there were a number of really lovely pieces. Some simple, some complex. The pieces that spread out in time more seemed to be the most engaging. There is something about settling into time that has its own affect. What I like most about this activity is that it tends to frame all activity as if it is an answer to a Fluxus card. So, as one student drops his coffee, walks across the room to get paper towels, cleans up the spill it appears, even though he told us it wasn’t, as another activity to be watched. This part I think the students got. So while the activities never really reached that crescendo level the conversation about the pieces went well. Here, tiring of the expanse of space between students I gathered everyone in the center of the room. A valuable lesson. Too much space can be as dangerous as too little.

My hope is to change our relationship to space by bringing students to the library to look out the window and discuss Stein’s notion of theatre as landscape. That then listen to some Reich the following class and then on to the hypertext projects. I did ask them to look at everyday activities as if people were executing a Fluxus prompt – so perhaps a few more observations next class. We shall see.