Les tutories

Each laboratory session has been recorded using a static camera and an audio recorder. I then used Adobe Pro Cs6 to edit the footage, syncing up the sound from the audio recorder with the video footage and making short clips of the work carried out in the laboratory. These were then uploaded to YouTube, as well as retaining all the original footage. Alongside the video footage, pictures were also taken periodically throughout the process; these helped us to remember visual images. In addition to the static camera, from October 2015 onwards we also used a GoPro camera to capture different viewpoints and angles; we experimented with wearing it, attaching it to the ceiling, floor and windows. This allowed for greater documentation of the laboratory sessions, placing static footage next to the dynamic footage taken on the GoPro.

Video footage, as Caroline Rye (2003) states, can become ‘a substitute that cannot provide evidence of exactly the thing it purports to record’ (Rye, 2003, pp.115-123). My concern with the use of the video documentation is that the disjointed, fragmented, multi-vocality, multi-perspective and polyphonic nature of the laboratory may become lost. The phrases multi-vocality, multi-perspective and polyphonic refer to the collaborative nature, the overlapping of conversations, the quick pace between ideas and the microscopic details that are formed in the moment of ‘doing-thinking’. These minute elements make the process what it is, the indecipherable habitually experienced moments embodied by the ensemble.

The use of static cameras undoubtedly results in the action or multi-perspective nature of the laboratory being lost or ineffectively conveyed, as the image is static and filmed from a distance. Despite this, the use of the static camera reduces the interference with the process itself, as there is no need to move or adjust the camera. The use of the video footage allowed for ideas or moments of physical movement to be captured and, subsequently, revisited or altered; we did not, in the laboratory, aim to create a representation of the work, as the video footage still remained within the laboratory. The documentation was a part of the process and a part of the practice – not, as Nelson confirms, becoming the practice itself, ‘[t]he audio visual evidence of the ephemeral event can never be mistaken for the practice itself’ (Nelson, 2013, p.86).5

From October 2016, we also recorded voice memos directly after each laboratory session. These were carried out by each member in private allowing for an instantaneous reflective process on their experience, thoughts and ideas arising from the laboratory. Furthermore, these voice memos allowed me unimpeded access to the ensemble’s experience of the practice, from which I have been able to draw in order to support or investigate theories surrounding task, found objects and the between of the ensemble. The decision to use a vocal recording was chosen for three reasons. Firstly, it was quick and did not require more time from the ensemble; secondly, the vocal nature reduced the pressure to ‘say the right thing’, instead following the participant’s train of thought; finally, as the vocal recordings were unscripted and unedited, they offered a candid response.

5 _{This is much like the Peggy Phelan and Philip Auslander debate on Liveness that began in the 1990s. The}

debate has been pivotal to the discourse on liveness in the field of performance studies. Auslander’s book

Liveness (1999) is formed in response to Phelan’s influential construction of performance as ‘representation without reproduction’ (Phelan, 1993, p.31).

An important element of the process has been the digital scrapbook. This digital scrapbook was always open to all members of the ensemble and was used to document our thoughts, reflections, pictures, research, videos and memories of the laboratory process.6 _{It created}

a secondary space where the ensemble could form and share their experiences and ideas outside of the immediateness of the laboratory space. As Lisa Stansbie states in The SAGE Handbook of Digital Dissertations and Theses (2012) ‘using a digital format is appropriate when it acts as an imperative tool in the progress, process, methodology and presentation of the research itself.’ (Stansbie in Andrews et al., 2012, p.402). The digital scrapbook provides a space for reflection; as such, the digital scrapbook became a space for retrospective documentation, practice and research: ‘the means of digital documentation and the ease with which images can be collated and organised offers potential to archive the research and allows for its sequential presentation.’ (Stansbie in Andrews et al., 2012, p.394). This approach helped keep the laboratory process present, while also allowing for historical documentation of the environment and process. The digital scrapbook also provided a space where the videos of each laboratory session could be uploaded, watched, and re-watched, and allowed the ensemble time and space to reflect on the collective process individually.

In addition to the digital scrapbook, we also kept a physical scrapbook with notes, drawings and rules scribbled down during the laboratory environment. The physical scrapbook allowed us to document on-the-spot ideas, rules and sub-rules available for instant recall and visual explanations of seemingly impossible layouts or movement sequences. Towards the latter part of the process, the physical scrapbook became an invaluable source of

6 _{You can view the whole digital scrapbook by following this link:}

documentation, referred to and relied on as a source of sub-rules and rule clarification. The combination of the digital and physical scrapbook allowed each member of the ensemble to have a sense of individual ownership over the collective process, as both scrapbooks were collated by and for the ensemble.

These methods of documentation, videos, voice memos, and drawings, as well as the physical and digital scrapbooks, when combined with this written document, function to offer an insight into the multi-perspective and polyphonic nature of the laboratory environment, while situating my practice within a wider context. It is my intention that, by engaging with all aspects of the process, a greater understanding of the formation of performance ensembles will be evident.