Jenifer Toksvig, 25 January 2014

Convened by Jen Toksvig. Present amongst others: Stephanie Bain, Kate O'Connor,

Sharon Davey, Lorraine Keene, Natalie Carrington, Shireen Mula, Mhairi, James

Bailey, Fauve Bickerstaffe, Michela Sisti, and by tweet: @Olamerino

A group of creative artists have been informally gathering to make work on several

projects. We call it tribal work, making theatre in tribes.

We frequently make in open space.

We were drawn together via D&D, where Stella Duffy called a session to see who

would like to come and work with her. She had an idea for a story, and it became the

Chaosbaby Project. A group of creative artists came together to join her, and now we

work on other things collectively.

With Jennifer Lunn and Culturcated Theatre, we did a benefit for the Russian LGBT

community called From Russia For Love.

With Jen Toksvig and Alan Sharpington, via The Copenhagen Interpretation, we're

now involved in The Seeing Red Project, which is based on Red Riding Hood and The

Wolf.

Via Amie Taylor, we're about to start gathering on occasion to share theatre and

writing games and exercises, to broaden our knowledge base. This is The eXchange.

More info about joining us for any of these projects can be found by emailing Jen

Toksvig:

[email protected]

We have Facebook groups from which we tend to work a lot, so you can also do a

search for SEEING RED on Facebook.

At the session, we talked about how this kind of making works. This is what we said:

- The community doesn't need to be organised. Not by one person, anyway. No

central committees. It frequently has a core of people whose passion and availability

allow them to engage more often than others, but that doesn't make anyone's passion

less than anyone else's.

- We've found that the more you try to organise it, the less it happens. Commitment

that comes from passion, not from obligation, seems to be much more sustainable.

- We are a collective of networks, rather than one big group. Not everyone has to

know everyone else. You work with your own connections, and you make new ones as

you want to, when you want to. There is no formal organisation to it.

- There seems to be no division or ‘class’ system according to either experience or

talent, or any other judgment of quality or extent of knowledge. Everyone comes

knowing something, and they come with their own skills and ideas. Everyone is

grateful to have everyone else's input, whenever they want to give it, whatever it's

about. Everyone is an equal, because we are all creative artists, and we do not judge

any creativity to be good or bad, worthy or unworthy.

- Although we have no rules or process we've really agreed on, it feels like we just

work towards whatever is right for the project, in that space, at that time, with those

people.

- We learn from each other, but not by intending to teach each other. When we learn

new things, it comes from a process of collective sharing. Everyone benefits from

everyone else. There is training. There is development. There is discovery. There is

process. There is change. There is growth.

- We do talk about, and plan for, specific outcomes, eg: a show. We have made

scripted work. We have made unscripted work. No single person takes responsibility

for any one role. We all take responsibility for whatever role we feel passion about, for

the time that our passion lasts. (This can include being passionate about committing to

a certain role. It is an individual choice, and a collective one too.)

- We try to embrace whatever happens. Whoever comes. Whenever, wherever… all

the open space principles.

- We try to trust. That the people who show up will be the right people. That they will

invite more people, who will also be the right people if they come along. We trust in the

work, and in our passion for the making of the work. We trust that it will sometimes be

difficult and horrible and shit. We trust that it will sometimes be too much. We trust that

we all care about the work, and the process, and the making, and each other.

- There is no judgment of quality in the making of the work, but there IS judgment of

goal-achieving. If we all want to make work that is accessible to an audience, that tells

a story coherently, that is presented entertainingly, then we all try to make those things

happen. Which means everything is welcome in the process because everything helps

us reach our collective goal. Even the stuff we don't keep, we have still kept in the

archive of the making.

- We like to archive the making. In our initial project, a writer took the photos, a

designer performed, actors directed, directors produced, and we all brought food.

- We like to bring food.

- We don't like to audition. If you want to come, you are the right person to be there.

- It's about nurturing: ourselves, each other, the process, the work.

- Leaders naturally emerge and change during the process: the right person for that

moment will lead for a given time. All changes are embraced. Last-minute fuck-ups

become opportunities for something new. The work never settles.

- It's less of a set process, and more like imitating life. It's how life works. It's open

space.

- Rehearsals are sessions. Performances are sessions called. (You don't have to go to

a session. You can always call another one.)

A tweet contribution to this conversation:

@olamerino: “@DandDUK Making work in tribes… I can tell you about the

@talkwithLEAP model #DandD9 if you wish. Actually, probably is a Lancaster thing!”

Yes please tell us!

(Attached image courtesy of Sharon Davey)

Images:

Tags:

open space, collective, Theatre, tribe, Work, tribes, Open Space, tribal, WORK,

THEATRE, making, Making, Open space, work, OPEN SPACE, theatre

Comments: 3

Leo Burtin, 25 January 2014

Well, I shall tell you… or at least start to tell you…

the Lancaster Emerging Arts Platform project (which is now part of the slightly bigger Talk with LEAP, which operates more

like an organisation) started with a project called Leaping Out, where we invited 12 artists from a variety of disciplines to

come and make something together in the space of a week…

From this project, a number of collaborations, tribes and groups have since developed and we use the ‘Leaping Out’

model/principles for everything we do…

We don't ‘formally’ work in Open Space, but it would seem that each of our projects leads to the next one, in a way which is

driven by the people which make those projects happen… and that's how our little ‘tribes’ and making work in such a way

has developed since we've been around…

Also, Lancaster is a small and VERY creative city… I swear artists/creative practitioners make up at least half of the

population…, and of course we all know each other and there's never as much as six degrees of separation between

anyone…

In a way, it is really great, because there's always someone to talk to, collaborate with etc.

Sometimes though, it feels like this “family” comes with all the things families come from… including the fights, the awkward

uncles, the financial quibbles etc.

And as Talk with LEAP (the org behind the LEAP project) is a TINY organisation (most of the time it's just me and the odd

freelancer!) which seems to have brought part of said tribe together (simply by giving it a roof/name/time to meet!)

sometimes the tribe relies on it too much and we've not been quite as successful in making sure the ‘leader’ of the time is

the right ‘leader’ and that the person writing the funding application/working for free so others can get paid sometimes isn't

doing out of passion but out of ‘pressure’

that said, this isn't the case very often… but one of the things I have learned in my time with LEAP/Talk with LEAP is that

while it is great to work in ‘open space’ and use the principles of ‘whoever comes, whatever happens’ - sometimes

“whoever” isn't actually the right person and there are jobs, people, families, politics, “bigger picture” stuff at stake… so

“whatever happens” isn't always the right philosophy…

I wonder how to create the right context for making work so whoever can come, and they are indeed the right people and

they will genuinely look after each other in a way which means that indeed, whatever happens is the only thing that could

have… and it's a great thing…

About this, like about a million other things - I feel both devoted and disgruntled and I am torn between wanting to believe

that it can all work out and that we will indeed all look after each other… but then there's also bad experiences…

I suppose it's all about learning though, isn't it?

I'll try and use some of your notes, and adapt, and play, and see what happens…

Someone must also tell you about ‘Glorious’ which we made with Rajni Shah Projects… and the tribe who emerged from

that… not in Open Space at all, and with a certain sense of hierarchy, but which totally worked… for very different reasons

probably…

I might do it - but for now, I have a funding application to finish!

:D

Leo

Leo Burtin, 25 January 2014

Also - a question (maybe I am just being a word pedant)

“creative artist” ? do you know any artists who are not creative?

or does it mean something I don't know?

Jenifer Toksvig, 11 February 2014

Hey Leo,

Great to hear about LEAP.

You said: “Sometimes though, it feels like this “family” comes with all the things families come from… including the fights,

the awkward uncles, the financial quibbles etc.”

Absolutely! I find that, more and more, I want to take advantage of the opportunities and collaborators that present

themselves on my path, and part of that is working through… and even embracing the ‘awkward uncles’ parts of a tribe.

Open Space can help with that, in that I can use my two feet and walk away from someone who is driving me insane at

any given time, but if their passions have brought them to this same project, I'm trying to learn how to give priority to the

stuff that is good for the project.

Not easy. And yes, it is a big part of this way of working.

You said: “… one of the things I have learned in my time with LEAP/Talk with LEAP is that while it is great to work in ‘open

space’ and use the principles of ‘whoever comes, whatever happens’ - sometimes “whoever” isn't actually the right person

and there are jobs, people, families, politics, “bigger picture” stuff at stake… so “whatever happens” isn't always the right

philosophy…”

It is for me, always, but it does mean that I have to be super-open to change, majorly prepared to be surprised, and

absolutely determined that the project will be whatever the collective makes it into, rather than whatever any one of us had

planned at any point along the way.

For example, we've lost performers who were playing major characters in work we had scripted, so we had to replace

them with new performers at the last minute. I was fully prepared to ask “What if we cut the major characters?” or “What if

we all play the major characters?”

I sort of love that, and I've just realised that it has an immediacy that I find very exciting, and very freeing. This might

sound odd, but to me it feels like a sort of emergency state of being kicks in: we can respond in the moment, and make

decisions and discoveries we would never otherwise have made.

You said: “I wonder how to create the right context for making work so whoever can come, and they are indeed the right

people and they will genuinely look after each other in a way which means that indeed, whatever happens is the only thing

that could have… and it's a great thing…”

I think the challenging part is the very last phrase. Maybe all it takes is an appreciation that this thing we have made has

been made by these people in this way, and that ultimately, the thing we've made and the experience we've had making it

is all that matters. (And in this, I include the audience as makers.)

- Jen