An enpowering structure for dancers, choreographers, choreographies and curated events

Author Profile: anna koch

In relation to the work of Litó Walkey

Posted by

André Lepecki From Partaking to initiating: Leadingfollowing as dance’s (a-personal) political singularity:

“Constitutive imperfection of politics. Constitutive imperfection of movement. Both demanding the imperative to courageously engage, so that we do not fall into passive participatory partitionings of the sensible. To dare taking initiative, even in the most adverse environments. To dare to lead just to discover the courage to follow. To dance so to set something in motion, but only if this activation of movement is aimed at not seeing motion falling in proper steps, fit, attached to personhood’s traps. Leadingfollowing. Followingleading. Relinquishing the personal, so that “the unexpected can be expected […] to perform what is infinitely improbable.”1”

1 Arendt, Human Condition, p.178


“Rhythm is determined not by the length of the edited pieces, but by the pressure that runs through them.”

– Andrei Tarkovsky


Erin Manning Relationscapes – Conclusion: Propositions for thought in motion. pg. 220-226:

“Participate in the complex interplay of the transversal passage between thought, concept, and articulation.”

“It foregrounds language not as a personal enunciation but as a collective event articulated through relational series. […] prearticulation becomes preacceleration: the reaching-toward of expression as conceptual unfolding. We are moved to think. […] It is about how a language must always be invented in tandem with the force of the unknowable, its appetition for novelty kept alive. This feeling for the new proposes a taking-form of language where language becomes less a syntax than a milieu for expression.”

“We find ourselves thinking sound. Sound becomes a concept for language in the making.”

“Taking form always begins with the terminus. The terminus is not an end point but the energy of a beginning. The terminus kick-starts the process of articulation. There is no causal finitude here: we never know what becomes of a beginning. The directionality we have “in mind” is a relation of tension, a reaching-toward that makes us think, always more than a goal. The terminus is a force of thought toward articulation.”

“We often assume language’s termini are words. Words are not language’s termini; they are only one of the events along the way. The terminus of language is the relational folding-through of prearticulation. Language emerges not through an already-constituted thought: it merges with thought’s tendency toward relation. How thought becomes relational is how language begins to take form. With prearticulation comes a feeling-with that proposes the potential of a taking form. This event in the making articulates itself in an infinity of ways, sensingly, linguistically, affectively.”

“It is a movement of thought pulled forth from the relations of tension that make up the passage from prearticulation to the concept to enunciation.”

“Begin with the interval and admit it into experience.”

“Rethink what counts as art, as practice, as thought, as writing, as politics. The relation is as real as anything else—it is the associated milieu through which all else comes into contact.”

“[…]the creation of relational objects for thinking-in-action.”

“Without transduction, propositions have no force. Transduction is the unity of an event across its different phases, a processual individuation across strata that creates affinities between levels of experience. Propositions provoke transductions that alter what a particular relation can do in a given instance. Not every relational object is evocative in every instance. Each material shape-shifts into different affinities of purpose.”

“Thought is an untimely proposition.”

“[…] takes us out of the time of language as enunciation to the time-pressure of conceptual pre articulation. We feel the force of expression taking form even as we remain unsure of what is actually being said.”

“A constant conversation is an untimely affair: it jumps from plane to plane, virtu- ally participating on the plane of thought and prearticulation, becoming-actual through concept formation, finally emergent on the plane of composition of language’s articulation. This infinite conversation is enveloped by the terminus not of signification but of responsivity.”


Erin La Cour One Events, May 2103

Qu’est ce qu’on a vu Cette vue qu’est ce qu’on a vu enfin. Vu Et. Cette vue. Qu’est ce que c’est enfin. Theresa Hak Kyung Cha1

This quotation, taken from the personal narrative of postmodern writer and artist Theresa Hak Kyung Cha, underscores two interconnected ideas that One Events reflects upon: (dis)location and (dis)locution. In this series of questions presented as statements, Cha prompts her readers to see with her that perhaps there is no answer to what we have seen, that there is no finality. Underlined in titling her work Dictee, Cha’s quotation raises questions of dictation and authorship, of place and placelessness, ultimately pointing her readers to reflect upon whether if in any speech or action there are two selves or voices, if one is the voice of another, and if so, who this other is.

One Events, the final presentation of Ayse Orhon, Christina Ciupke, and Litó Walkey for the Master in Choreography from the Amsterdam Theater School, engages with these questions both collectively and individually, that is, both on the level of the event, which juxtaposed the three individual pieces, and on the level of the relationship between the performer and the audience.

As the evening unfolded, the structure of the event became more clear, but the separation between the performer and audience became further blurred. In each piece, the participation and interaction of the audience with the performer and with the work itself was revealed as a key component in what the pieces aimed to communicate. Interrelated to the level of the event, the way in which the audience’s participation with the artists and the works grew as the evening progressed. Though each artist and work encouraged different revelations of (dis)location and (dis)locution, taken together, the works encouraged a multifaceted experience of these concepts so central to the works of these artists and to their collective expression.

[…]Litó created a sense of timelessness and placelessness in her work; we were left wondering when the piece would start and where it would take place. However, without fully realizing it, we were already active participants in the work, engaged with Litó’s questioning the boundaries between performer and spectator, beginning and end; we were awaiting something that in fact had already begun.


1Theresa Hak Kyung Cha, Dictee (Berkeley, CA: Third Woman Press, 1995), 125.


A property, commonly shortened to prop (plural: props), is an object used on stage or on screen by actors during a performance or screen production. In practical terms, a prop is considered to be anything movable or portable on a stage or a set, distinct from the actors, scenery, costumes and electrical equipment. During the Renaissance in Europe, small acting troupes functioned as cooperatives, pooling resources and dividing any income. Many performers provided their own costumes, but special items—stage weapons, furniture or other hand-held devices—were considered “company property;” hence the term “property.” The relationship between “property” in the sense of ownership and “property” in the sense of a stage or screen object imply that they “belong” to whoever uses them on stage.

Episode 1670s, “commentary between two choric songs in a Greek tragedy,” also “an incidental narrative or digression within a story, poem, etc.,” from Fr. épisode or directly from Gk. epeisodion “addition,” originally neut. of epeisodios “coming in besides,” from epi “in addition” (see epi-) + eisodos “a coming in, entrance” (from eis “into” + hodos “way”). Sense of “outstanding incident, experience” first recorded in English 1773.

“[…] transduction is characterized by the fact that the result of this process is a concrete network including all the original terms. The resulting system is made up of the concrete, and it comprehends all of the concrete. The transductive order retains all the concrete and is characterized by the conservation of information, whereas induction requires a loss of information.” – Gilbert Simondon

Prosody (Phonetics) – use of pitch, tempo, rhythm in speech to convey information about the structure and meaning of an utterance. (Literary studies) – theory and principles of versification, especially as they refer to rhythm, accent and stanza – study of versification, esp. systematic study of metrical structure. The rhythmic and intonational aspect of language song sung to instrumental music pros- in addition oide – song, the study of the metrical study of a particular system of versification (metrical composition of a poem).

Palimpsest writing material (as parchment or tablet) used one or more times after earlier writing has been erased.
Something having usually diverse layers or aspects apparent beneath the surface.

Read more »

Weld Company working with Litó Walkey.

Posted by , , ,

Reflection 1.

We are engaged in a practice of looking at our own output and then by writing about it finding a new entrance or a different way of perceiving what we have done. Rather then react to that  disecting by developing the material and changing it, we turn it over, around and pull it inside out in our thoughts and practice. Almost as though the work is being psycho-analysed. What did it do? What did it feel like? How did it react? What does it remember or suggest? When executing the material again we include the shifts of attention, the moving of focus, try to recognize when and where the actual start was and when it ended.

When we started working the space was full of our process with Rebecka Stillman. Instead of taking it away and changing the space, it all is still there. Some things are used again and others are standing or lying there: residues, remnants, objects without an obvious function. We are adding to those objects, leave more things, more unused superfluous objects. They are there, waiting, reminding, predicting and suggestive of a past that is in us and we in it.

Reflection 2.

Through Lito’s writing* practice it seems we have gained access to places equivalent to the Aborigine Dreamtime, or a free pass to realms that usually takes years of psychoanalysis, but we somehow start to inhabit these places all day, which are usually beyond the reach of western lived states. We are still fully cognitive and processing with systematic precision (well attempting to and embracing and dealing with our failings as new facts that may catch us enough to be deliberately included in an again of some form). The precision is used in a way that is translucently open flowing to all areas but also with an emphasis on refining finest of details we feel compelled to capture, amplify, conceal or remove. A sublime symphonic harmonic dyslexia that rescripts itself, simultaneously cannibalizing and conceiving itself a new, each time it is activated or reformulated.

*So far Lito’s writing practice has included: means of rigorous application of reformulations, transforming and transgressing questions to imperative affirmations, responding with activations of the affirmations and then reprocessing them through performing, rescripting and then reperforming further transgressed/rescripted but not developed beyond the original performing, what actually was performed from the performers perspective.

Reflection 3.

How will we remove the talking and props from the work? Will it be amplified so much that it transcends into something where the props and talking become redundant and unnecessary?

I am dreading everytime we’re starting a new performance composition but love the feeling after having performed it; with all it’s imperfections. Did I break against a rule? Was that good or bad? I’ll probably just remember it and try not to put value on it. Why do I feel completely at home in one second to just feel completely lost the next?
Choosing the path I am not sure will work always makes it more interesting. How to anchor a memory by repeating but avoiding completeness? Will I ever enjoy doing it? Don’t I enjoy doing it? What is it actually that I am doing?
It’s only complete with an audience. Incomplete fragments.

Reflection 4.

On to talking, no props

In order to say no to something you have to know what you say no to.
We investigate props and talking spending time with them, by using props and talking.
We put pressure on these concepts to identify their edges, where do they break?
When/where does something/somebody become a prop? When/where does communication or using of voice become talking?

On removal/concealment/amplification in relation to above

Can something loose its meaning or become less clear through amplification?
Is obvious absence some kind of presence? Can we by removing talking from our material make someone think about the function of speech?
Can concealment be a main event, seen as more important than what it is concealing? Can we conceal something and then take away what we conceal, but keeping the act of concealment?
What is concealment an amplification of? A secret. Something that is important or threatening. Something that does not belong. What does concealment consist of? Something that is in line with that which belongs, a copy of it. It can be identical, but will always have another agenda.

Reflection 5.

Something:s, very precise and particular things, described and inscribed in neatly arranged and ordered forms, composed in concealed manners, flooding through this vessel that I am, a filter so full of imperfections, overloads and shadows: diffuse and imprecise is the name of the dance,  …transing, all there is is is, one will be missing, bits from a wordfeast.



Read more »