After last week’s session,  we got into small groups of 4. My group consisted of Katherine, Adam and Kent. Our task was to explore the space for a allotted amount of time and to use our bodies to highlight a otherwise unnoticed part of the building, adapted from the work of Willi Dorner who used brightly clothed human participants to fill a otherwise forgotten area of the space they were in. In our search we saw the back of the building had some fairly rusty fences. We used our arms to lean off these to create a shape of a crucifix with our body in a sense. Our next task was to then actually move this inside the Grandstand Building.

In our group we found the back room, where there was these magnificent steel pillars inside. For our second group task we had to incorporate us hanging off the fence into this room we had chosen. The Handbook of Drifting, by Phil Smith, was our reading this week and as a group we decided to incorporate this theme into the performance piece we had to make.

We all chose a starting position that would have kept us part of the room we were in. I chose to drape my arms around the pillar, facing the cold steel. Our intent for this short performance piece was to incorporate the actual rules of drifting and to only abide by the rules that it dictated. We chose certain rules such as “picking a theme” something you can stick to whilst doing this piece by searching for sharp angles or by thinking about something and then immediately doing it letting your body dictate to you where you go and how you get there. Sensitisation as well was a interesting one as you had to concentrate, at least for me. As you walk around the room you hear the breathing patterns of the audience that came to watch, the footsteps my fellow performers took. One part included me looking out of the windows in the room the sunlight was extremely bright this morning we were there and my eyes squinted a little.

I used one of these rules in particular which was ‘Don’t be satisfied with irony – insist on double inauthenticity (Smith, 2010 p.120) This spoke to me purely because it says to not conform to what is comfortable to you in a performance aspect. To merely be satisfied with how you think rationally and not to think outside the box on a project this big is foolish, in my own opinion. By being inauthentic however does that mean we are purposefully going to try deceive or counterfeit our audience about the site we are in? I’m still thinking how putting something inauthentic in Grandstand would serve any purpose but another question arises in my head in does works of art that are spurious and devoid of concept truly considered weak? I appear to be rambling but again it’s a thought in process.

(Sorry Katherine)

Of course after doing the performance I hadn’t actually realised what I did. It took me until yesterday to truly feel like I had build the foundation to make a connect with the site building itself. A very vague thought I understand, but in a piece where you don’t speak and only allow yourself to walk and think you do gets you to think and react.

I also, upon first gaze have completely became enamoured with this stunning fireplace in the room we did our performance. “Per Ardua Ad Astra”, a rough translation apparently is “through adversity to the stars” which is the RAF’s motto is written over the main fireplace, and upon further questioning Michael informed us of the RAF past that the Grandstand actually had. I thought I was excited when I found out a morgue was planned to be build at the Grandstand but the military past it has is outstanding.

I have much more to post about the location at a later date, as I need to gather my sources together as well as upload these images I captured of the place to give me thoughts on the architecture.

References:

Phil Smith. (2010). The Handbook Of Drifiting. Mythogeography : A Guide To Walking Sideways. 118- 121.