Michelle BoulƩ in conversation with Matthew Walker
From Movement Researchās Critical Correspondence blog
ISSUE Project Room was first introduced to Michelle BoulĆ© through her participation in cellist/composer/improviser Okkyung Leeās 2011 Artist-in-Residency at ISSUE. As evidenced by her collaborative performance with Lee, BoulĆ©ās layered and transfixing engagement with movement, light, performance space, and audience suggested she would be an ideal fit for our 2012 Emerging Artists Commission program, which sought to reach outside our normal sound-oriented range of focus to encompass transdisciplinary practices. ISSUE Development Director Matthew Walker discusses process, authenticity, vulnerability and texture in performance with dancer/choreographer Michelle BoulĆ© in anticipation of her upcoming SOLD OUT premiere, WONDER, May 30-31.
Interview Date: May 6, 2013
Matthew Walker: What was the gestation period of the work?
Michelle BoulĆ©: Ā I guess it began over a year ago with those little meetings I was doing with you guys when you were in the other space [The Old American Can Factory], and it has been super spotty. I did have concentrated time in the summer at BAX and also space I got at Chez Bushwick, and then during the fall I didnāt rehearse all that muchā¦I would be back in New York because Miguel [Gutierrez] had his premiere, I was touring with John Scott and it was hard for me to hold onto the piece while doing that other stuff. So I kicked back into things in late January. The end of March 2012 is maybe when I had to stop rehearsing in the Can Factory. So I guess I would consider it, on-and-off, just over a one year gestation period.
Matthew: But you at least had some notion of a piece when you proposed it before then? Does any thread of that original concept remain?
Michelle: The notion of witnessing. Ā Thatās why I chose the circle and the authentic movement practice, which I tried to do with non dancers and wasnāt super successful. Ā Thereās something about looking at what movement can be, and I wanted to see it with untrained bodies. Thatās just something I wanted to do and it seemed like a good way to do some research. Some of that has remained, definitely the fact that the piece is in a circle, from the practical reason of getting people to be able to see, but also group witnessing where everyone is a bit implicated; youāre not up against a wall. The first time I tried it, it was like, āOh my god, itās like a ring leader, Iām in the middle of this circle.ā It feeds into the last thing I do in the piece, what happens with authentic impulse. The scoring of it is āThis notion here, this notion here, this notion here,ā so Iām digging through it as I perform it, but the footage of the material that I learned ended up being from my improvisation at 110 Livingston, not even the stuff that I did during authentic movement sessions. Ā But there are things I remembered, because I wrote things down about them, and thereās one movement inspired by my session with you that I do in the piece. This thing about witnessing and seeing is in the piece.
Matthew: Can you talk a little about the authentic movement sessions?
Michelle: I canāt remember how many I didā¦maybe 12-15 different people. We would meet in the Can Factory and do a bastardized authentic movement practice, where a mover moves with eyes closed and thereās a witness, and the movement is timed, the mover doesnāt have to do anything besides follow āauthentic impulse,ā and the witness just watches and keeps the mover safe. Thereās a dialogue that happens afterwards, the mover talks about what he experienced, the witness describes what he experienced as well. Itās a dialogue to be in touch with what youāre experiencing through movement with impulse and how movement does have a connection to later experience. The thing that I like is that it gets dancers outside of their training, like when Iāve used it in teaching or as my own practice. Because the trained body says a lot already, and Iām not always interested in what it can say, but itās also a part of this piece, the trained dancer body. So I continued that, listened to some of the conversations. It was very important to have this intimate dialogue with some people whom I had never met before, I think that feeds itself into the ending of the piece.
Matthew: Maybe knowing about the authentic movement practice is an entry point into my understanding of your development of the piece. I think āauthenticā is something that got lodged in my brain and something Iāve come across in your interviews about your work with Miguel. Thatās been a concept thatās been important, whether that was something that was placed in my mind when it shouldnāt have been is something Iāve found myself thinking about a lot during the performance, and it felt like there were instances of you encouraging the audience to be thinking about that and subverting or deconstructing that. There are a few instances I found to be interesting: for one thing, the notion of self-reflexivity seems likes something youād address as yourself, as the performer, and encourage the audience to think along those lines. The monologue being an example where you hear your voice, an explanation, detailing a trajectory as a dancer from childhood to professional, I feel like its difficult to not initially assume that itās you talking, or some version of you, and then it becomes more surreal and you realize itās a performed version of you thatās fictional.
Michelle: The word authentic is interesting because what actually is authentic in the world of performance? Weāre always creating something. The thing thatās interesting to me as Iām watching work now is, āWhat is a body conveying? What kind of self are we presenting or promoting or standing behind or sitting inside of?ā I have that question when I see people performing. And, from a conversation I just had with Miguel, and from being in his work for a long time, what is the relationship around authenticity and sincerity, which is something different. But how does one play with that and subvert that? I just saw the Warrior Queen performance with Marina Rosenfeld and it was amazing because thereās one song about her husband dying on the night of their honeymoon or something, and she would go, āOhhh my husband died!ā and cry, and then the song would end and sheād coyly smile and say, āThank you!ā [Laughter] It was amazing! and I kind of love that she was playing with that. I was drawn into her performance and not the storyā¦Iām interested in that. As I dig through the layers of my own experiences, I just feel a lot of things. Iām interested in going a certain way with an experience that isnāt verbal or intellectual, and I donāt think one can aim to create that specifically, but thatās whatās happened. I spent a lot of time by myself, went through the ups and downs of it, and kept asking this question of vulnerability. As I created sections I kept thinking āIām actually not being vulnerable in this section, itās another front.ā So are there moments where that truly happens or am I carrying it and playing with it the entire piece?
Matthew: The idea of vulnerability is something I was thinking about as a disguise or as the character that was played, and it felt to me like there were a few ways vulnerability was played. The way you opened the piece, in the traditional sense of someone being vulnerable in their body, but in some ways that felt like the mostā¦
Matthew: Yes, the most staged and least emotional section. In contrast, when you were in the blue dress, despite that being the most costumed and extravagant disguise, that section felt like the most emotionally present and immediate. Ā So thatās another way I was thinking about disguise.
Michelle: The vulnerability for me came through the process of making the piece and making the decisions and saying, āFuck, I think I have to do this because this is what the piece is calling for.ā Art-making is a super vulnerable practice, which is new to me too. In the practice of making work there is always a negotiation with how much I let myself be vulnerable as I make and how much I am always just creating something. Not that those are on a two way dichotomous street butā¦ Ā Part of it comes from this training working with Deborah Hay of, āHow do you hold a piece?ā In her work, you have to stay in this process of question-asking, and she would call you out when you dropped the question, so youāre always in this heightened state of awareness. Ā Thatās this physical performative training I had working with her, and I would tune into that sometimes and Iād play with it, too. But because Iām playing with it, itās staged and conscious. So is it really vulnerable? Yes, it is sometimes!
Read the full interview at http://www.movementresearch.org/criticalcorrespondence/blog/?p=7356
ellievsbear
amandla
gamechangershow
stormborns
theartofmadeline
titsay
