a portrait: voiced

Working through a live and lived performance of my Medusa: speaking.
considerations being made:

voice
interference
voice

voice
levels
voice

voice
female
voice

voice
texture
voice

voice
body
voice

Post thoughts: 10 performances

Post thoughts: This is thoughts in an alternate location. This is thoughts on the train. These are thoughts post thought I will transcribe in their exact state. I will not interfere with these post thoughts.
___

The aesthetic of so much of the work was similar- someone commented that it was “generational” the impact of the machine on the text. The control of performance being passed to the machine. What impact does this have on the ownership of the writing?

I am interested in this being “BEYOND TEXT” when so much of the work concentrated on the PRESENCE of text and showing text. I am not criticising this aesthetic but am interested in why, in most of these performances text was not undergoing any change. Liveness brings with it a risk to expose the materiality of the text and this was not being done. In Robin Deacon’s work at the end of this piece he reads from a variety of scripts – provided by his father- his live reading of these created a new text in performance. It allowed for interaction between text and body which was spontaneous.

SPONTANEOUS: LIVENESS: versus DEADNESS

(this term DEADNESS was mentioned by an audience member in the discussion following the performances. I will use this term, not as a term which implies a deadness of the performers, but as a term to address the binary of live.) The materiality of the LIVE text was not dealt with in performance- texts were eing typed in front of us BUT they were not being produced. This is what interests me. the text which was performing was not live. All these artists engaged with the materiality of writing and exposed the “act” and “action” of writing, but we did not see this truly as- “generation” of text was not happening.

I suppose this is why I raised the question of all of the mistakes in the typing- I asked why mistakes made in the live typing of text which was being projected to the audience, why were these mistakes corrected? Are these mistakes not a true mark of liveness? Of the body? Of the present? Of the space? It is these mistakes which were glimpses of true liveness for me, which generated a document of the performance, which encouraged a new, live generated text to come into being. These mistakes allowed a translation of the prewritten text to be created through performance. And in performance we are translating; moving from a page to a bodily enactment. This process through body, which all the performances dealt with is of interest. These mistakes act as a trace that this performance occurred. These mistakes show that performance is a translation not a reproduction.

I was interested in how these two words come into play.

TRANSLATION of the text in performance and REPRODUCTION.

I am unsure whether these are the right terms – but I will explain them as I see them in terms of performance.

TRANSLATION: to undertake change from one form to another. From one language to another. To translate is to communicate. To translate a text is to communicate it to another. To change its form – to communicate this “new” form using the tools of this “new” language.

REPRODUCTION: to reproduce is to RE-produce. To produce again to produce again. In a reproduction we expect no faults, we expect the production the reproduction.

So now I have returned from these statements and considered translation to be of more interest, of more relevance to exposing text and its status as object. I want to say I enjoyed this event. That I appreciated all the hard work. That I appreciated the coming together of people and level of audience interest. To see where text is now. To see how text is being treated in performance. To consider where text should be. And why it should be in performance. My words of documentation are written in the dark. These words now are written on the train returning to Waterloo. These words are considerations of the ongoing question. These writings are asking and answering questions. These writings are the effects of a day spent with people. These writings are reactions. These writings will continue. And these writings are writing.

Documentation and response to 10 Performances at Roehampton

I open this with the hope that these words are gestures towards what occurred on Thursday, November 26. These words are a series of thoughts and writings which took place during the event. These are my writings and are live writings. They are scrawled and I have not re-read these writings till now.

I will transcribe these writings as they are written in as honest a transcription I can make of the mark. For speed between performances each one is numbered and so please refer to these to see which document matches performer.


1. Rachel Lois Clapham and Alex Eisenberg: 10 Performances +1
2. Akillas Karizisis: Man, 52 yrs SELF PORTRAIT
3. Johanna Linsley: Like to know
4. Robin Deacon: UNTITLED
5. Tamarin Norwood: What To Do
6. Matthew Goulish: Gratefulness Performed by Lisa Alexander
7. RESPONSIVE SESSION: Lis Austin, Efrosini Protopapa and João Florêncio
8. Cathy Naden: All that I can remember
9. Mark Caffrey: Collective Spill
10. Barbara Campbell: All that I can remember
11. Theron Schmidt: This text bears false witness
12. Danae Theodoridou: A Single Voice 3000 English words in the hands of a T.J.
13. RESPONSIVE SESSION II: Lis Austin, Efrosini Protopapa and João Florêncio

Find further information here.


I begin.

1.

Repetition of a binary of plus
One writing offering thought on
Plural forms of making and deconstructing

Live speech - interruption to form
A new rhythmed construction

2.

typing free typing But non correcting
and then correcting - relationship
between non correct and correct
between instant change and non
change.

- actor female - her relationship to
words on screen – The present
joseph Beuys – mouse trails
screen down. Quiet voice
relationship to the first
text created in front of us and
the ongoing texts which
are pre-loaded – What
is the relationship between
live text and lived text


Sounds vs words vs thoughts

(misspelling vs correction)
It ended with FINITO

3.

Gesturing bodies
Shifting of of a of end a count
bodies in a

place – elevators

Humour - one lines

Hand (left) on hip


Spoiler

Then Body - sequence -narrative

Moved - ruffled.



Conversation – email text __
Step in and

Out of who She is – step in

and out
Biographical info
Is revealed – strokes of seriousness
Colombo
The Wire vs Bleak house
Contextuality __
representation

of connectivity.

Parallels – narrative __
connections

Tinged always
tinged with

The set up of the presentation

4.
_____________________________________________________________________
_______________________ZEPHYR___________________________________

what will happen if he
doesn’t write this down.

2 camera – perspective
mouth on 1 – ear now
mouth – framing to open
mouth
black hole of mouth –

VOICE:
Terminally open mouthed

poses – gestures

watching open mouthed.

Displacement of sign and noise
^ (text being
(open mouth) heard)

relation between text and body

>mismatching.

now typewriter

The act of making text –
but where has
text come from

> non improvised

(Foucault- Body + machine)

(EYE)

( )
OBJECT – Recordings
inhabits
inhabits of machine – the machines
unconscious.





we can
them for the Clinic
the ver truth I have to
5, like and shin away doorways
chewing marry lurings
per cardboard known my
sonnel new factory
approach
still one

going But constantly kept some degree

will occoesion said she got

see charity pause
things
advantage I
have position broken

official lowering history
cab brains clogging manifest
while stay he cut it fine wont
you table fish end

stir up simply and what
position in loyalties spilt out
tell what dilly and
table perplexed jelly

Number One
___________ collectiv but

How engaged after chair struggle
they Jude
cosy we’re all

Call I forget to convey
humblest well probably
in read then


________ end ––––––––

5.

molecules: a liner gesture
teaching - fast - no fluxuation

___________
/ pause]
turn page
specific speech __
speech unable
relate to – und to
iferantiated
linear

non sensity – PAUSE

inability>

(turn page)
objects – sorting and arranging
sorting

/////
//// constant water stream _________
//

6. –––––/////////–––––––


invention
Word – consider – this is
an after
Thanksgiving
moment a shifted def of
part

condition
attitude vs a
full = vessel
to begin carrying – a found word
he wears a bend – half my age
posing – FLINT
Demolish – shrinking Domnate __adult life
of a word
–– the entrance of
concealment
concealed –
planting outline –
a ghost of hidden
concealment of recordings recorded
existence

placement of trace –
recording it
praise the not me

me vs not me
trace an engagement of trace and
a biographical

patterned replacements – –__
grateful and not meeting
gratefulness

7. Response

between – between – between

dialogue.

(i) Before – preparation – rehearsal
obsession
Question – NOWNESS
LIVENESS
NOWness } contains
LIVEness } pastness

Imagining – Imagined

Nowness – how past (rehearsal
Forms the nowness)

(ii) academic
thought in quotes
contaminate thoughts
text has a verb
text is a doing

(1) “BEING” “DOING”
“BEING” “DOING”
“BEING” is “DOING”

(2) OBSCURE – CREATES/ED
“THINGS” “ACTIONS”

(3) Platos thousands – “INDIRECT”
“DISCOURSE”
“FORMER”
“ESSEMBLEDGE”
“RELATIONS”
“DETACHED”
“ASSEMBLEDGE”
“MUR MUR”
“VOICES”
“FROM”
“MOLECULAR”
“DEPENDS”
“SPEAKING”
“WRITE”
“SELECT”
“IDIOMS”
“I”
“WORD”
“VOICES”
“BUT”
“TRANSFORMATION”
––––
relation to we see


(iii) composed vs thought

composed: relationship to text
Cage/Austin ––
Beyond text –– what of now
What now –– towards
What paradigms/ frames
Unhinged?
see in performance
unhinge what text
Research
DIALOGUE
Thoughts:
Structures of silence
STOP
Absence vs Presence
Readers
audience as
reader
WRITING AS PROCESS
[IN]


–––––––––––––TEA–––––––––

8. labour of projecting –– text on screen

a lot of ellipses
are you really
are you reading reading
CURSOR
text again –– all double spaced

Ryan made a point about perspective
earlier
for a third time text. I’m

watching her index finger on mouse
move—BODY vs TEXT

Blank
slow scrolling
how fourth time text
5 smaller amount
of text.

6th time only 2 lines now

7th time = um

8 text again

Underlined areas and repeats
Slower

9th time =UM

10= 1 line
11 – text

12 closer
13 the same closeness

14 the same closeness
15 the same


16 the same longer line
17 one line

18 separated by
same closeness

same closeness = 2 return

20 UM

21 –written
and lost

21
22-
tt 3:46 PM it has 94% battery

CURSOR
23
24
I remember
25 refers to.
26 white chapel
STOPPED SCROLLING
start


white space –void _silence
27 ?
What choice suggest
A rhythm


28 = UM
28? Find my way back
/ GAP

3.51
29

the misspellings are highlighted

with red squiggle lines
throughout

There are 2 laptops – What is

the relationship

between

30

Communal reading – why on screen
What does this do.

PAUSE /VOID/white
space

waiting – is there a signal

system
31 @ 3.55



words enforcing a silence

text forcing a silence

noisse creeps in

discomfort
heard
we are still
on 31?
_________________________
\ thankyou /

9.
Female Male
((0 \0

For the first time

Story he is writing out
writing over
SAID – saying present saying

tense


\ /
\ /
\\ //
\\
her to him

(discourse)

10.

rolling text and a line

lines.
breaks become important

Bad dis being in n[arrolated]l

Body is being textualised
(F would like to
Body is in being

consider a textual script

for the body – a scored

script for the body )


Is this document of BODY?


She her with the laptops
the performer is choreographing
our reading
Is this her reading

Is she reading

We are not bearing

Witness to her experience

She is
in control of

our experience


silent reading BUT

not private reading


I want to read

out loud



time – matching real time

to this pre written time

It’s 4:21 as 11 passes

[11:00]

The Gaze = is interest as

audience member on the

body controlling the

text or i s i t on the

text itself

I now follow the in str
uctions
I follow the instructions
to set about my own
performance and bodily
alignment with the

text ___ a physical
reading

_a play of
with/the/on text


I ended blinking

11.

[Note before: Running theme of
projected words projected
pages
Focus not on language
in relation to body
but to machine
Disembodied text]

shifting position of

words on a screen he

he writes this __ is aware

of process /place.

believe what you read?
believe what you hear?

materiality touched on

relationship to


the text we are


seeing & reading

as audience &


to you creating


it?

Is there something


of a translation


a medi ati on


between per fo rmer


and text ,


Also text is

performing.
where is this
text coming from?

Is it now a true

trace of performance

occurring.












NB In the break

With Ryan + Karen we
Talked about text

being produced in

performance – text

in a state of construction
and de construction
- we play with its materiality.
I’m interested in why he


deletes his mistakes


these are what make


it a trace of now


and this
experience


are we programmed

to do this
It says something

about instinctual

instinctual mark

making and body

in relation to text

this is perhaps


removed by


machine.

text on screen

do we consider

words as single

objects -Karen

said this

transcript he

is transcribing

12.


I don’t think I
the need to
directly copy text
onto another document


what is interesting?

*ownership of words

relationship to spoken
text & projected text

what is this?


again we read > this
conflicting between
words we
see and hear
* PAGE as STAGE: online
onscreen

There could be play

But there is linearity

performance and liveness
STATUS of TEXT in performance – here the screen has one

The text as being a
performance like a human
voice has slippages
yet its human instinct
to correct it – is

this allowing text its own

Space to perform.

- question of liveness

- live mark making

- idea of trace of performance

13. Response II

(i) generational
Economies of labour

Medusa: speaking

Medusa speaks and laughs through Helene Cixous. This is a reactionary text. It is engaging with Carla Harryman’s Adorno’s Noise. It is reacting to the concerns of a poetic practiced theory. A working through theory practically. Here it is Medusa who is concerned with finding her voices within Cixous text. Medusa speaking to find her body of text.

Medusa: speaking

1

By by by by my owned offering of body spoken as it is of speaking contemplate bridge of a must no way is by way by as it comes from by non by product essential production. To speak engage directly non negotiable forward pushing of rupture tearing period as lawless partnership strung up against over future tensual tense turse tursive textual providing own own own own to push harder on pen is direct birth of own penhership considerable offer wordly negating land as a herstory bodified periodically penned organed out toward the non forward non where a without reason non request To gain from present a forced speech inherent inherent inherant in her ant in her ant in her aunt in her aunt in her aunts in her auntsv in her auntxi in her aunt true in her aunt cixous in her in her in her in her in her in her from a behaviour of chorality her fem femality across her ment.
_____
2

standing as I do at a platform prepared to become liminal preparation of time equats to a non sequence – her control over against the periodical attempts of a clock is brutal. Convergence brutality of a bruised minute. She within a carriage already will not stop here a non convergence but a straight linear fielding of time outward window foregrounded a force non passé decibal over shall I say sixty. Convergence a breath of veins to look up at tree to teach roots function to preserve upon a fledging greenery willing itself to remain present. Convergence non likening to a liminal on one edge faced to break – delineate
for delineate deliniat delinia delini delin deli del ded _ post terrant of winter
mark made
_____

3
















_____
4

Write this facing a windowed reflection of write this as a window reflection toward outside- shifting of subject from non focus glance of recollecting non facing and inevitable must a paler convert convention
can propose to write now under non disclosed as write on window. Outside common a non general forthcoming talk of non voice an hertividual her a classification denies plural form of shared body. Undergoing a home geneous presence con alterification begin faltering stream NON NEO to place a NEO offering a non way non way to negotiate non way to pluralise NON way to define non. Way to offer me non way to say now now way to element body non way to digress across non way of her plateau non way will non way to talk non way to write non way be non way as woman way non way __write non way be non way as woman way non way
_____

5

Poise not allowing for a comfort a slight
and upper. non chanced imaginary
encounters non deliverances from early
age touch was the base for cleansing as
a woman leant against green grass
blowing out breathes wind thou to.
Rest. I call it meadow from before
filted degrees apparent thant light tormel.
Will flaunt to can a memory so seemingly resuilt
in you fore presenting an isolation a fore
to dress pursed to non touch gen the
an inscribular no verbal request concerns.
O slight resting over curious at
age of self can consume a non
window facing for willing non
willing as an attempt concave
depending palm concave ever
so slight pleasant grounding eye
wider to sit as a rest is as ever a gain.
a a a vowels to form resonating
understanding stand in base of
a fledgeling glimpse of that
eye in a to task of an inked
to tilt till it
to burn over breath
concave beneath control
birthing breast purely
subtle rippling against
jagged

unfurling a width
su down a right draw
curling under between pedi
resting breathes non to plurality
boundless a rub over a
as touch pen as
folded against and resting
placement slight to frame
sea tulping after tulping
to tide venus up tied over
freedom at age in non in but
against this stretch against for non
latten against to tilt against
to touch against
to line against
to against
to against
to against
_____


6

Wishing from a sovereigned goal facing
Empirical streets of women from over bountiful plains. A recircling would ask to draw in from you non negotiating but counting newness amongst friend amongst gender amongst my form Consider where internal allows for gap of a space a void to be framed filled to bursting. A seizure upon voided offering shall we consider the veil
a rustling papered body in which conjunctions thwart outwards. Pressing over and through and around a passing from anxt towards. A veiled towarding A veiled can I ask you about desire?
for a momentary relies upon veiled frames. Preparation of a veiled begins by reframing an intricate panting from breadth to re paint. non premium place – when I asked around desire please stop. Halting within a framed negotiate tempered cannot walk within I didn’t respond to your desire believing from withstanding own for fore, A
puncture within veil bleeds void onto your desire puncture of veil to bleed hair forth out write. To begin with a punctured veil insist of no desire desire desificates a non unity a puncture invent practical infinite bleeding out – a breadth _out out towards from. She veiled void consist of a pre-supposed passing counting newness amongst friend amongst gender amongst form. to bleed is unwilling is waves seeping outwards bleed is to be non accused non thought reaching beyond voided veil bleeding excess elivinity punctured veil bleeds from about punctured veiled bursted for your desire,
_____


7

shouting can you walk to the edge of your room begin shout SH OUT SSH OUT SSSH OUT OUT presence secure presence of breath upon you to out. At age before considering when out will come when some will exude into multiple. At the edge of your room standing facing wall breath upon paint panting upon wall chipped out through body chipped against. Sore surface because facing because writing because it because you because you because you
To bury
To forget
To excuse
To edge
To secret
To punished
To didn’t
To irresist
To come
To go
To be
To face without excuse Attribute surface forward Standing aware of feet Facing surface To shout To sh out To ssh out to sssh out
_____


8

to embrace against paged machine Forge a bearing of won page own body as machine mechanism of hand over nail towards pen Against for now economy Reason for to dwell on Reason to dwell on economy to dwell on object to dwell on for transpositional convex transvex trans vex trans sex Against for no reason but myself –female –trans –of off of off economic trans economic pre trans economic –pre your of my – facing ed I tore mechanism for chan ism.
_____


9

conquering lay at plural cause for this is non play categorisation over me body for your body forward and convex for concave speaking fluidly she vexed lays seize at the sink To look passing over water refracts a “belief” lay at plural valley concave facing convex inherent void inherent waste inherent non inherent inherent in her ent in her end in her in her in her in looking Fluidity fluidity standing at the sink dailey from looking in her looking for vexed lays out convexing before her convexing out water confirms presence balanced concave she vexes concave she vexed concave she vex,
_____


10

Enter the past, Large white triple doored wardrobe where legs dangle, over the bed. praying can be heard on landing. RED. fuchsias scent pale. powdered mantle boxed. beneath leg/ enter the forget. desperate to tell colour of carpet it is not heath non preserved non alive non memory non. Gapping over gap causal of condemnment. to condemn. to non memory. to dangle. frigidified.[1] non rest. fidget memoretically. fidget to find – non locality powdered fidgeting legs pale. dangle. where doored praying the mantle can. white fuchsias beneath boxed leg. triple on landing. RED. bed be heard large wardrobe scent/ enter the forget.
_____


11

Lowered perspectives as legs dangle a road a green penetrable elipsed steps behind echoe forward now. Confined. Dangling between internal knees resting upwards torch penning to the right. darkened responsively
darkened
loss can cause and inflict
lack of being lack of
to know being lack of
placement to
because am in room am in room am in room. Because he is in woman he is in woman he is woman.
_____


12

Convex remains eyes at point stress looking. Lacausal can strike logic. Looking strike anti-looker. To strike away strike and remove strike a look put on lipstick and strike upon him remain eyes lashes at point of looking strike to past anti and remain mirrored graciously to strike lashed and lipped
_____


13

Mouthes lined thick culturally
Becoming non voided image
Painterdly licking coloured lips
coloured and activates mouths
_____






14

Poreal breaking at the introduction signals resurrecting welcome system gesture praying outwardly to transcribe over it transcription of corporeal to begin mirrored introductions. Extending. Yes.
_____

15

unification presumes a unit
of whom you I they we are
units from to in at of
unitary in wholeness of time
_____


16

This in present. decidedly questioned?
Unit as solidity
_____

17

In early voice heard. Aired banded of her and this new. Pleasant from one to this now. Rooted voiced in linearity. Must early voice left for this now. Echo upon hills from this now.
_____


18

Returning to shelves. The fact can often be clearer from a fas. Returning to shelveds. The fact can often be inscribed from a far. Returning to shelf The fact can data be and this if not a
and when not
and certainly not
and why not
and what not
and she not
and fact not
and she fact not
_____


19

Let you insert here. a parent remark




[for my marked gains political social and economic frustrates area, For admittance takes below For land plateaued is resting For marks made must bury]
_____


20

TO REMEMBER TEXT BOOKTUALLY NON INSTIGATED HERE. FOR NOW. PLEASE BEG FOR THE ENTIRE. RESTING ON MAT IT SWALLOWS HARD. TO REMEMBER. OFF ONCE DEEPER. MAINTAIN. SELF- SELF- SELF- CENTRALITY COME. IN REASONED. TO REMEMBER. TEXT. HEARD. BEGS. A. SELF- A SELF –A SELF.
_____


21

lying non now non now pushing a breath on a page to sweep over and against and deepened it with a code. of lined against lined scented traditional non rushing if you could see look at them eyes her bring it on a gallop a lunged noise a rooted vein. pulsing. Inner ear he would say thru is the rub as she rubs she rubs he there to her Lying trough on and around papered over with body against non tell wired from within for her lunged down tilting. tilting. papered tilt lined against forefinger penned for rub non negotiate with her penned story.
_____


22

Believe. as one does not deathed.
_____


23

Pooled between remain separated. To create present. To presume. Convex. Multiple.
-- dangled and lurid the between convex and concave liminality attains and utters its growth. A cattled being, woman. seeks to turn from without itself. immensively cattled tapped by inability to hear a called from a fear but to call the liminal non. Fielded and grazing considered there a dangled place but to become to hear to write calls upon and toward breaths sourced to tear away thwarted
without itself. Risk of a push pull relationship offer non resolve non restolution –
the digression of rest locates her breath in a non place. Sonically vacuumed a direct pushing communicates the uncodable between. To rid the between is to buy place the culling of the liminal; a begin of Her
flawed we beg in Her.
= sitting hands under thighs a sitting to listen a sitting to listen a sitting beginning to a sitting biting of lip A sitting aware of temperature A sitting looking down a sitting raised shoulders a sitting heavy feet a sitting dry mouth a sitting a sitting willing TO BE OPEN MOUTHED VOICE OF STRAIGHT TONE AN EVENT ABLE and then hands actively
lip
temperature
looking
shoulders
feet
mouth
willing
raised and forceful anti silence words spill for you must work catch loud the voice asks to lie between body and mine. Waging an occasion of speech beyond. For liminality is broken in the live. The presence forces plurality. The presence of heard voice forces body upon body upon body upon body upon body upon body upon body upon
_____


24

Once governed as a hunted voice to now hunt out a silence Resembling governed can we come to the edge of border. Resting place. from. around. through. reserving place over order.
_____


25

Utterances public utterances lay bare. utter an she says. From behind table. Drawing on body. Shall I listen to the entire list. Bodily. Duggest. Calm. TILT. Forward becoming traceable. Utter on she says utter pursed the rub of public lips shall listen. Public in a tilt shift to trace in aired voice.
_____


26

page pressing face facing pressed page. Two feet facing away pulling between tonsil to toe chords tighten forming distress – paged stress.
_____
27

dangling between tonsils between wombed. A pilling of device internal rebuilt of text la langue dangling between in from her role as child to role upon age to dangle a front to flood. Between body to tilt slight tense up piling devisal convexing salivating paged to breath through page.
_____


28

Sourced. A running tongue over teeth convexically lexical for to mean between place. stand. Body against body for can we define. Hovering over to flutter up through. seemingly eyed she it rests upon (body) or (bodies) it rests in ( ) and ( ) with (body) is all which leaves space in ( ) is a don’t not don’t make.
_____


29

Drives from momentary values. This radical will might over. She system bases seizes reactionary.
_____


30

Pre-
_____


[1] placement causal breaks mematic memory. banish may be strong usurped at a bodily youth placement breaks memory. memory breaks placement

Examining: Carla Harryman’s Adorno’s Noise

Carla Harryman’s Adorno’s Noise is a self structured work which reaches out towards worlds of language, dialectics, art, sexuality, memory, politics, poetry, writing, the self, the object, space and Adorno. Carla Harryman plunges us into her minds eye- into her world which is a complex object fighting for its place in the world. Adorno’s Noise is a complex work, which aims to challenge. Like the Harryman work which has gone before it, this new example of her writing does not shy away from complexity of thought or process. This complexity makes this work initially daunting to engage with; this feeling of daunting is not a negative one, but one which spurs the reader on to uncover the meaning of the text. The text is a noise; a hybrid of hisses and spits from across genres. Harryman plunges us directly into this noise; a noise we are unfamiliar with, a noise which is forcing us to listen, a noise which is asking for change.

There is a need to uncover what this noise means; you must be willing to translate it. Carla Harryman demands that you listen and listen with intent. This text demands that you listen and listen throughout. Yet what are the implications of this intent listening and is it possible? Has Harryman constructed a dense enough text to be physically deconstructing itself?

I must firstly turn our attention to the title: “Adorno’s Noise”. There are instant connotations of thought here and from the beginning Harryman has set up a very open dialogue with Adorno’s work. Yet will this book be just that; noise from Adorno? I must admit that this text is noise, but it is certainly not purely Adorno, it is very much saturated with the voice of Harryman.

Adorno’s Noise is a melting pot of thought and dwells on and samples from one of Adorno’s key texts; Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life. Adorno’s text is similar to Harryman's in that they both draw on a wealth of experience and offer a critical and political journey for the reader. Adorno’s text dwells on a damaged life; it is posing the possibility of teaching a “good life”. I will not dwell on Minima Moralia, but feel it is important to foreground any thoughts on Harryman’s text by taking a little time to look at what is causing her noise.

Minima Moralia is a dense text posing difficult questions of life, politics and place, which remain questions to be considered today. It is this questioning which I think is of great significance. I want then to open my discussion of Harryman’s text with these words from Adorno;

Today self consciousness no longer means anything but reflection on the ego as
embarrassment, as realisation of impotence: knowing that one is nothing.

In many people it is already an impertinence to say
“I”.

The splinter in your eye is the best magnifying glass.[1]

Reflection on the ego is a laughable offence; the “I” is an irrelevant, there is an instant image of the “I” being “splintered”; it is being obliterated. Adorno poses many questions in his text, but this is one which is key to understanding and engaging with Harryman’s text and the use of voice within her work. We must remember then that Harryman’s noise is one where the “I” has been splintered and is still shattering.

The “I” as I see it is not only author and reader, but object and the object which Carla Harryman has created is one of great pleasure. The object itself is a magnified and splintered experience. If we consider firstly its visual form, it a flickering sign system which we the reader must negotiate. Adorno’s Noise is physical, it is blacked out pages/ lists/ inversions/ mirrors/ repetitions/ bolds/ narratives/ spaces/ italics/ bullets/ questions/ non narratives/ statements/ scores/ notes. It is noise; a visual and textual noise. Harryman by doing this is offering an essay which is a series of processes, each given its own space to exist. This space is important to recognise as it is these spaces or voids which offer the reader rest, and allow us to see how all of these different experiences can co-exist to form the basis for this one essay. Using these methods Harryman also suggests that text is image and this impacts how we negotiate this text which has now become; object.

In terms of the visual Harryman has created an oscillating essay, which does not stray too far from the rules, but just far enough to make it difficult and uneasy to negotiate. It is this negotiation of the text which I think makes this work such a success. We the reader must find our own strategy of listening in order to make this a personal reading experience. The text demands interaction and a sense of play from the reader and it is this sense of play which is key to the shattering of the “I” in the object. It is this sense of play which immediately notifies the reader that we are entering a very physical reading experience where definition is elusive. Harryman is offering up a space where the commodity of the very object we hold is being torn apart; it is being “magnified” and “splintered” using the techniques of Adorno.

This visual quality is directly reflected in the content of Adorno’s Noise. It is divided into a series of viewing chapters, Harryman is constantly shifting her focus; sections jump into the next as we are led through a language which moves from tones of the personal, to theoretical, to poetic, through sampled texts. Harryman has created a text which is lived in, this noise is a hybrid soundscape, yet it oscillates and changes in pitch, pace and volume. It is a consuming experience. This oscillating quality allows Harryman to maintain a distance with the object as it shifts and eludes definition.

In writing a poem she is not writing a novel in writing a novel she is not
writing an essay in writing an essay she is not writing a diatribe in writing a
diatribe she is not putting her body on the line in putting her body on the line
she is not going to jail in going to jail she is not getting a job in getting a
job she is not protesting in protesting she is not elucidating her point of view
in elucidating her point of view she is not writing a poem.[2]

We see Harryman define through the negative; what a poem is not, what she is not, what the reader is not. This attempted definition is important to recognise when we are dealing with a text which is eluding its own definition as object; this text is not a poem, it is not a theory, it is not an essay. Harryman plays with this repetition of image to create and build a series of differences, there is an ebb and flow of what this text could be. Deconstruction of the “I” is constantly occurring here. Yet Harryman pushes this deconstruction further by putting the body of her text on the line. Adorno writes that ‘the whole is the false’[3], and we see this at work in Adorno’s Noise. The labour of listening forces us to watch Harryman write, the negative constructs the positive and this chapter is an example of how she constructs a text. These shifts in definitions are not unfamiliar to Harryman; it is what I find pleasing in her work.

This idea of shifting definition is found throughout Harryman’s texts, yet what is most interesting is that Harryman focuses on trying to find definition within a text which is eluding it. It is these slippages which make Adorno’s Noise relevant to contemporary poets of today. Her language is not only pushing against definition, but she points at the idea of defining ‘the object’ with severity; it is under attack.

REGARD FOR THE OBJECT RATHER THAN COMMUNICATION IS SUSPECT[4]

In her chapter “Just Noise” Harryman presents us with a list of names that include: Elizabeth Grosz, Kathy Acker and Jackson Maclow, attached to each is a weighty footnote. These footnotes are then removed from context and placed as text in the “Reprise”. The object of the footnote is being shifted; it is being communicated. This act of communication takes place by the careful placement and repetition of phrase. This labour of repetition is clearly of interest to Harryman and forms a key aspect of her writing process. By moving language its status as object is altered and this action leads to a new informed act of communication. The most important aspect of this action is that it shows that Harryman’s form is her content; the building blocks of language are exposed and re-addressed. Harryman’s building blocks of language are moved and re-moved. Adorno’s Noise is not only in dialogue with critical thought, but critical thought is being performed for us.

This labour of writing is paralleled in our labour of reading. Harryman in her performance texts sets about constructing a laboured reading experience, by laboured I mean that we work through the text, building it as we go. Harryman opens up the possibility of writing as not only a way of communicating ideas but a process of actions. Harryman is Brechtian in her positioning; she exposes the process of thought in this work. We know that objects for Harryman are not mere entities but essential constructs surrounding us. It is important to consider their status and Harryman exposes the status of the theoretical text, the personal text and the poetic text by not only placing these all side by side, but intertwining them. The labour of finding the stitches in this work is that of the reader if we choose to look for them. These stitches are well hidden, yet we know they remain and hold this network of texts together. The object of language is being exploded here and we must explode our views with it.

I ask us now to move from thinking about language in Adorno’s Noise to thinking about the reading of this text. Contemporary poetics concerns itself with how we read and there is something concrete about Harryman’s text; it is a mix of solid objects who seamlessly merge. Yet each chapter offers a shift and addresses a newness, they are all underpinned by our reading experience and the way Harryman not only gets us to read, but listen. Adorno’s Noise is a talking text which we engage with physically, temporally and emotionally. It is a space which asks us to consider our reactions and interactions as a reader and questions the very object of text.

This question continues throughout the piece and we are encouraged as readers to move through the text;

The preference is to move through the confrontation. This is executed. The
confrontation, which has tilted upward right in front of the noses passes into
the mimetic as it, mimesis, it passed through.[5]

A passing through of thought. Harryman offers an image of this noise passing through the body. She is offering ideas oh how reader should respond bodily to a critical text. Critical writing should be passed through, should be engaged with and be engaging. It speaks to a newness and a contemporary theoretical thought process. We pass through Adorno’s Noise until we reach a crescendo of noise, an “orgasm” fuelled by a poetic energy. Throughout this text Harryman sets up expectation, an expectation that this orgasm of sound will occur. Yet we are constantly assaulted by lack and ever eluding definition of what this text is. This lack is culled by the onset of Harryman’s orgasmic voice. This purely physical end to Adorno’s Noise is a climax to the readers’ very active and participatory reading; Harryman fills our lack not with definition but with hope that this text is allowed to exist.

In Adorno’s Noise, Harryman has constructed not only a text, but a temporal space to examine and form a dialogue between critical theory, poetry, spatiality and performance of object and text. This text is a performing text as we do not only read it, but listen to it and it is this listening which fills the voids of reading. Adorno’s Noise is a collage of experience and is a space where the text within is allowed to battle internally with itself and externally with the reader.

It is the battle for definition which is this text’s strength. Harryman’s work must be considered as poetic, as theory and as performing textual object. It is not a book which will sit comfortably on a shelf; it will whisper out at you and keep constructing new noise. It is this constant capacity to communicate anew which makes this text an important one to be considered in the light of contemporary theory. Adorno’s Noise is at play with itself and those texts it is in dialogue with; it floats happily between genres.

The noise of this text will continue and oscillate through more texts. As a piece of contemporary theory it challenges its very genre and asks its readers to consider the advantage of a space which is still defining itself. It is a text which will not be “ensnared”.

[1] Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life, Theodor Adorno, trans. E. F. N. Jephcott, Verso, (London, 1978), pg 50

[2] Adorno’s Noise, Carla Harryman, Essay Press, (Ohio, 2008) pg 89
[3] Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life, Theodor Adorno, trans. E. F. N. Jephcott, Verso, (London, 1978), pg 50

[4] Adorno’s Noise, Carla Harryman, Essay Press, (Ohio, 2008) pg 20.
[5] Adorno’s Noise, Carla Harryman, Essay Press, (Ohio, 2008) pg 7.

Abstraction: Abstracting

Investigating Contemporary Performance Poetic Practices

The definition of performance is ‘the action or process of performing’[1]. Performance is an object in a state of being; it involves interaction, it involves the exchange of energy. My explorations aim to deal with examining poetic performance as a plural event which is under constant construction in:

TEXT PERFORMANCE DOCUMENTATION

The binaries of these terms and their materialities will be explored to create a practice which aligns these terms and traces their co-dependence. I am interested in the dialogue and status of these poetic materialities; where text becomes performance, where action becomes poetic, where documentation is poem, where performance is poetry, where writing is performance.

These investigations will be framed by avant garde poets and performers who challenge the materiality of the poem. My investigation will focus on and form a dialogue with the rules and restraints of the Language poets, experimental women poets such as Caroline Bergvall, Fiona Templeton, Redell Olsen and Carla Harryman as well as female performance artists to include Carolee Scheeman, Kathy Acker, Eleanor Antin and Marina Abramovic. I will draw on their traditions and those of fluxus, site specific performance and technology to establish a focussed practice which looks to be performed and performing.

Materiality is at the forefront of this investigation and I intend to engage practically with spatiality and the female body in performance. My spatial critical argument will be framed by Robert Smithson, Nick Kay, Philip Auslander, Henri Lefebvre, Gustave Bachelard and Elizabeth Grosz. My focus practically is on experimental female poets and artists and theoretically the work of Rachel Blau Duplessis is at the forefront of finding a practised space which is available for female production. A space which works to create its own feminist language of performance. A space which is performed and performing.


[1] The Oxford English Dictionary, ed. Catherine Soanes, (Oxford: Oxford university Press, 2000)