Post first project, indeterminacy, Barth and Eco:

I knew this would happen. I knew I would fall behind, that I would have observations that went un-recorded, that I would sweep up days into a single post. We discussed the Introducing Postmodernism book and pulled out of it a number of terms and ideas that we need to revisit. This time round I had them post to Canvas their ideas before the conversation, and most did, that allowed me to circle back and create a more complete list. The plan is to see how much of this material we can cover. So far we are developing a good list of terms and ideas, similar to, but different from the last time I taught the class. Some arise from our discussion of the projects and some I know that I need to add, or add as they come up in discussion.

The postmodern dance material I find a great place to start, mainly because of the video and explanation of the Solo Olos piece. We started with an indeterminate exercise in which I broke students up in to three groups and hand them cards with a list of words on them. The task to create something about a minute long we could watch. Wonderful solutions – all different, and yet all created with the same material. Then into the conversation about the dance material. I have to admit that having many more dancers in the room this time round made me a bit nervous talking about this since I really only get it from the outside as an observer. But good conversation about the Trisha Brown piece.

I started the next class with an indeterminate sound piece loosely based on the drinking and hooting piece but with phone numbers, claps and stamps. Mildly interesting. The Cage piece is a much better example – but we will get to the later in the term. The conversation about the Eco material was OK, the Barth story a bit flat. I got the sense that either no one had read it, or no one wanted to talk about it. I think we came to a good place with it by the end. Hopefully we can swing back to these ideas with the Monty Python film.

As I felt the last time I taught this class – it just doesn’t seem to be jelling. The ideas are there, the comments in class and canvas writing suggests that they are getting the ideas or at least wrestling with them, but I don’t feel like the class has an identity yet. Part of that may be how we spread out in the room, but part may also be how I am approaching the conversations. It will be interesting to see what happens as they tear fairy tales apart on Thursday. I then essentially haver two days after to discuss the projects and digest the Hassan article – two good review points where we might be able to get a bit more group activity going. As always with classes like this, I need to trust the process in that it is a growing knowledge of ideas and not one that hits immediately.

2019 and a whole new class – Days 1-3 and first project:

I find that it doesn’t make sense to begin reflecting on this class until we have had some time to digest the first project. The discussion on the first day about SSC material yielded a really nice list of ideas. I need to remember to come back to them from time to time. The first project was assigned day one and due the second class. With 16 students we explored the projects over two days and still need to pull out techniques and ideas. I have no idea how I did this last time with 25 students. I like that we had time to settle into each project and discuss the basic design elements (line, shape, color, rhythm, texture) but also begin to shape meaning. When asked why they thought I had given the assignment one student reflected that others saw things in the project beyond the initial intention. A great observation I need to do more with in the next class. I really do love this project – students are asked to bring in two or more items that comment on each other. It is about as open-ended as possible. It works to start the postmodern class as the reappropriation project, the gen art class as the juxtaposition project, and even back to the roots of the assignment, the surrealistic museum. Part of the intent is to get into the habit of noticing things, but also to get to know each other. It is amazing how much these projects reveal.

Lots of great variety of pieces, some quiet and peaceful, some playful, some abstract, some everyday. They all provide a great place to start the conversation. Unlike last time I taught this class I really don’t feel that I missed the modernism project. I like diving right into things. But I do feel rushed. 2 ½ weeks less than spring term is too much time gone. I’ve already handed out the next assignment, but really feel like we need more space between them. It’s not due for two weeks, but I don’t think they know enough yet to tackle the assignment.  But, we do have two weeks to gather techniques and ideas and discuss how to use them. I debated moving the Hassan reading to before the project, but I need to keep in mind that students do these projects so that they can have a perspective on the readings and not the other way around. I may remind them from time to time to trust the process. I need to do so too. Looking forward to chatting about the first projects on Tuesday. I feel like we have already accomplished a great deal and now just need to digest and reflect on it.

Um – yea I’m still doing this thing:

Post-Stein we did some listening. The point here was to make connections to the ideas we have already discussed. To this end we revisited Cage for a bit but then moved on to listen to Reich’s Come Out.  I actually relish having students listen to the this in real time. 13 minutes of this kind of sound is a long time, but if they listen actively by tracing how the sounds evolve its not as painless as it might sound. It is a great piece to discuss indeterminacy, the death of the author and the idea of the open work. Reich’s position of listening is basically the same as ours. I do find it interesting that it is this moment that is blown up into the Gen Art class, the way the tail end of the Aesthetics of Dissonance class crosses over into the Postmodern class. The linkages between the three are really interesting, and yet each one traces a different trajectory to the present moment. Reich was followed by Lucier and Basinski, all basically doing the same thing.

The follow-up day is basically difficult listening hour part two – post – punk, rock, classical, digital, etc. Here I riffed on the idea of post a bit to tray and break it out of just post-modern, but to show how this idea – once developed – could play out in a number of different ways. More a clips and samples class than the extended listening of the previous one. Like the Reich, the idea is to make connections to the techniques and ideas we have discussed.

This class was followed by the presentation of the “hypertext” project – in which students had to take a passage from Stein’s Dr. Faustus and bring ten external elements to bear on it. The projects were fantastic. Really all over the map. Clearly a development from the initial juxtaposition project – here the collisions were deep, rich, and informed the text in any number of ways. One element that we reflected on is how aggressive many of these projects were. Perhaps because of the aggression of Stein’s text, or perhaps the gesture of layering ideas onto something brought this out. This is the first time I have used this assignment in this class and it worked quite well. A great lead in to the Wooster Group.

So we watched House/Lights the Wooster Group’s deconstruction of Stein’s Dr. Fautus. We spent a class period discussing their working method and keying on the rift that developed with them working on Miller’s The Crucible. This lead to a great conversation about ownership and when you have crossed the line and violated that. Also – a good conversation about deconstruction in general. The following class was the video. It had been some time since I have watched it – it really is kind of a beautiful mess. Aggressive, frenetic, loud, layered, everything postdramatic theatre aspired to be. A fitting final piece to the term.

The conversation today about the video was great. Lots of wonderful connections to the postmodern ideas as well as the projects. The video provided a good document to tear apart and then discuss its structure. It also allowed us to deal with a question that came up earlier in the term about the postmodern actor. Filtering their live performances through tons of media the WG folks seem like the perfect definition of that type of performer. Sort of a post-actor in which you can’t distinguish between live and mediated and so the question of presence gets completely disrupted. I did find it interesting that a handful of folks that have been fairly quiet all term  took the lead today to discuss the video. Variety of material always seems like a good idea.

I’ll follow up after the final projects but one thing that has been nagging me about this particular class structure is that we essentially explored the major terms and ideas prior to the break – most of the projects and readings were in the first half of the term. This meant that the second half was more about applying the terms and ideas and therefore somewhat less active. It feels less like we are driving to the end of the term and more like we are winding down. I need to find a better way to handle this – a better way to pass off the role of teacher to the students so they can bring it home. But, I’m excited to see what they will do to Heiner Muller for their final projects.