Before starting apt:

My research started as an ¨experiment¨ that was influence by my kibbutz. The experiment: A group of artists will shape a single performer - me.

In the application I suggested an ¨experiment¨ of 10 steps. During the process collective interventions, discussions and voting were the main ingredients to reach decisions.  ¨The artistic environment will be used as a tool to study social behavior. The interaction within the social reality, the ¨real life¨, will be then the main aspect for arriving at a creative result where the ¨artistic¨ and the ¨real¨ will be interdependent of one another.¨ Why to choose ¨me¨ as and individual? I am an example, an out come of another attempt that failed to reshape humanity in an Utopian manner.  I am my research object, so I want to disconnect from being attached to ¨me¨ personally. I am observing my reactions to the one that observe me and I observe the observer.  I am the observer of my reactions to the relations I establish. 

I started by reading the basic historical rules of the kibbutzim movement. I also read documents describing the struggles people had trying to define how to live an utopia in the real world.

I spoke to the person (nachshon Golds ) that few years ago had a court case against the kibbutz movement. He claimed that he was a part of an experiment which as a child could not refuse participation and that he is mentally damaged by it.

 

 

Starting apt:First week.

Already after the first week of overwhelming, sometime speechless, interactions, my approach to my ¨experiment¨ started to crack. I experienced again group discussions. I have to admit, much more intellectual then in the kibbutz where I grew up.  One group discussion was particularly influential. It was about: paradox. Thus as a result I was wondering: do we need oppositions at all? I started to reflect over the way opinions and assumptions are exchanged and form them selves. In that period I spoke to Piet Joostens about communism. We spoke about the democratic elements of elections, voting and the representation of the majority. It finally register to me that those are all tools of empowering and control and are in contradiction to my life travel of seeking communication, so why should I manifest them again? I realize that my ¨experiment¨ has to change. I have to discover the underworld of decision-making mechanism.  Why do we discuss, give opinions and let the majority decide? Then language, once more appeared to be the focus of my imagination.  If the juggler of speech becomes the representative, ¨the majority¨, in a process of discussion, how can the hidden messages come to life?  How can language become a more equal landscape for us to travel on, with out restricting variety of expression?

By reaching those shores of understanding I found out many great people were and are dwelling on the same matter.

 

Reenactment work shop

The prominent aspect of the workshop personally was the beautiful text of Peggy phelan ¨The anthology of performance¨. The other , the woman,  minority, the invisible with in the representation of the western cultural world, all those terms assembled into a performative depiction. The invisibility became a potency of structure flexibility. Performance is an example of a construction which can never be copied. Every repetition or documentation of it creates a new set of reciprocal events of exchange.

The context of reenactment has a significant roll in my research. It emerged out of the necessity to reexamine the collective decisions mechanism that had a dominant impact on my life as a Kibutsnik. As a result I was playing with the idea of launching myself back to the kibbutz and reenact with the remaining inhabitants a cultural event. That event should have a particular connotation between the historicity of the place and the current affairs.

 

Workshop collaboration - nicolas y galeazzi

The encounter with Nicolas and the display of potentials in portraying the collaboration discourse were a big shift in understanding my research. I realize that by departing from my authentic artistic circumstances I entered in to a realm of political and social perspectives and influences.

We examined collaboration according to economical development and political consequences. Some of the texts we read had a significant influence. For example:

Jacques Rancière : The Emancipated  spectator

¨an ignorant could teach another ignorant what he did not know himself¨

The collective performance is a  performance that is not a product. It is a chain of interaction that allows people to exchange and influence the creative moment, not only to consume it.

Florian schneider : the term collaboration originates from operating with in the enemy structure. According to that the outsider is the one ¨that will manage to add critically to pre-established power relations of expertise¨ (Markus miessen) 

 Bojana Kunst write about reexamining the protocols, the script , the set of rules. By acknowledging the protocols the artistic process can find the ¨virtual spaces in between¨ to operate.  ¨Inter territorial spaces , in which connection among many different cultural, historical and artistic experiences are at work.¨ ( Bojana Kunst)

The major focus, in my eyes, of the workshop was capturing art as a direct and allusive field in the relation to economical political structures. What is my position concerning collaboration as a social reference? What would I want to enhance in the complexity of reflections between the individual self and the value of a collective assembly?

Some of the aspects that came to display were: decentralization, delegation, changing rolls constantly in the decision mechanism, lost of authorship oppose to branding oneself, micro relationship to distribute understanding with in the group, gathering people like thoughts, to detached from identification to a project, anonymity or ignorance as strategies of coming together, anti-hierarchical, anti-dialectic, anti- representative.

 

Reconfiguring my conceptions:

-Looking for methods of discussions as game format to generate symbiotic interactions.

-Investigating composition of adding information and opinions instead of dialog of disagreement.

-Approaching the experiment as one body of negotiations and create a framework where people can join in.

-Create a space between the object of discussion and personal identification. The accent is not on personal outlook but on changing perception.

-Merging in to collaboration by tolerating distinctions, diverse voices to coexist.

-Changing rolls thus everybody play all sides of the game. By that diminishing the success of the I. 

Out of all those recognitions and after a mentoring talk with dear Nicolas the configuration of ¨give me a piece¨ appeared. It was a new dimension in the process that interdicted another approach: Open up the experiment to make a piece with the ¨whole world¨. To divide a performance to its elements: movement, text, surroundings, music, light and so on. I will ask people to give me information concerning one of those subcategories of a performance. I will create all kind of systems of interaction. Can be a discussion or an action with one or more participants that as a result I will have an aspect of a piece. I will constantly bring the aspects together and reshape the piece according to new interactions.

The points of reference were:

-How to realize the elements of a piece with the others?- how to invent new impute and a flexible structure of generating material- me as an empty container – how to define through the others my own thoughts?

 

 

city of illusion