Making and Meaning was a salon event that focussed on two ways of thinking about sculpture: on one hand, as a stand-alone thing, and on the other, as a result of action, as something done. Do we hold both ideas at once? Are they antagonistic ideas? Do they live together in harmony or discord? We explored the relationship between the encounter with an artefact and the understanding or belief in the process and history of its making. If we need factual information to understand the processes and decisions made in the creation of a sculpture, does this reveal a weakness in the art work? ‘Work’ is a word that functions as a noun and a verb. How is the making of an artefact gleaned or inferred - or not - from the thing itself. It is not at all straight forward and is often marked by ambivalence.

The presentation on Laurel and Hardy concentrated on their transition from silent film to sound. They belong to a music hall/Vaudeville tradition that links them to Commedia dell’ Arte. Baby-faced Harry Langdon is a melancholic, wistful clown, a kind of Pierrot, but there is no hint of pathos in Stan. He is blank and reactive. His consciousness is in doubt. After the mechanistic, frenetic animation of the early silent films, we are beginning to see a psychological subject, but it is animal-like. They skilfully observe not paying attention, muddling thought, flouting social conventions, or not recognising what they are seeing. Unlike the performers their characters have a poor sense of their own bodies. Stan is slow to realise that a third hand is not his own. Ollie massages Stan’s foot thinking it’s his own and thoroughly enjoys it until he realises his mistake. They are susceptible to suggestion; they lose all inhibitions and laugh as if drunk when they mistakenly think they have been drinking alcohol. Semi- or partial - consciousness is played on as when Stan reads aloud but doesn’t know what he said because he wasn’t listening. When asked to repeat a surprisingly coherent thought, he then scrambles it. Their presence is enigmatic, in any situation, whether they are sleeping on a park bench or inexplicably married. Their later features tend to be sentimental. Their characters become benign innocents and child-friendly, whereas their earlier incarnations were indeterminate, wild and alien.

An email conversation with the Choreographer Antonia Baehr about her performances in the context of the annual performance festival held at La Case Encendida, Madrid.

Text for the performance

Master Class on performance workshop and an illustrated talk.

an illustrated talk discussing the way flesh is rendered and represented by different artists and how that may affect an interpretation of the work

Photographs and video extracts of various performances of mine.

Mutual Dependencies is part artists’ book and part academic research. It contains a range of collaborative and inter-dependent work exploring what the practice of art writing might be. This book includes drawings, recollections, photographs and diagrams, recipes for pigments or preserves, writings, ruminations, and tentative articulations. Taken as a whole, it engages with the overlaps between score, script, performance, concept, and drawing, including scoring the table or drawing conclusions.

An ensemble interact in a random repertoire of behavioural subroutines. Performed with UCL students:Dante Rendle Traynor, Ellen Kim, Jennifer Martin, Laura Malacart, Luuk Schroder, Xi Xi, Laura Cooper, Babette Semmer, Tom Rees, Harriet Poznansky and Will Saunders

An introductory text to accompany the Mel Brimfield's residency at Camden Arts Centre.

An account of the approach to filming Marcia Farquhar's performance, 'Fortune Cookie'.

It is a constructed conversation over time during my stay at La Casa Encendida, Madrid to conduct performance workshops about my performance and video installation work.

23 separate artist's book presented as a collection. Thread is one of the books and a text for a live performance.

Artist's text for performance

A conversation about my performance work, including Invisible Work and If the Cap Fits with the writer and photographer, Allen Frame.

Considering the performances of Laurel and Hardy as aspirant humans. It looked at their timing, the use of speech emerging from a silent tradition and the structure of the short films.

A naked performer sits in the Royal Academy life drawing room. He is in the place of the life model. He has a microphone stuck to his face and a radio transmitter gaffer-taped to his back. His disembodied and synthesised voice is only heard through a speaker system under the benches that surround the platform. He describes an alternative body, viewed by another audience in a different place. His actual body and the circumstances in the room are conspicuously denied by the fiction. A small chorus simulates body sound; heart beat, breath, air rushing through lungs, creaking bones. The fiction attempts to recreate the physical aspect of the body, while everything in the account is codified. The account becomes more absurd and removed from the situation. A game is described where a man has to kill a rival, but the events are presented in disguise, where an innocuous act such as shaking hands could be the 'kill'.

Solo performance. 

The audience sits on the balcony surrounding a large empty hall. They look down on a performer who is talking aloud, but not to them. He is describing various theatrical events that go wrong. The fictional audience in the account mutates and become increasingly bizarre. The performer creates an alternative body image.

Triggered by a chime, ten naked performers suddenly appear on the balcony of the V&A library reading room to the audience on the ground. Like mechanical figures on an astrological clock they perform a timed sequence of orchestrated movements. One of these is to raise and lower books to reveal and conceal their faces as they alternately mutter or glance at one another in silence. A man with his eyes closed appears at the top of staircase and strikes the chime to signal a change in action for each of the ten sections.

Script for live performance, performed and recreated by Timo Fredriksson and Christopher Hewitt

Introducing and developing ensemble performance for post graduate dance students.

Members of a group think of a song. The volunteers choose their song independently of one another. Each one begins to sing the different song to themselves, inaudibly at first. The songs, or fragment of songs, grow louder with every repetition. The singers switch to any song they hear and recognize within the group. Through a simple process, one song begins to dominate until all are singing the same song together. The song gets louder and louder and the singing seems beyond the control of the singers. It was performed by volunteers attending the symposium.

Five performers forge connections by inventing names and relationships.

Uno di Noi is a development of L’Un de Nous. The ensemble group acts as one; the performers build on what each other says to form a common thread or train of thought that runs and develops through the group. They take each other’s personal stories and repeat them back as their own. They move in and out of the audience in an attempt to achieve a single person standing centre stage. The difficulty is that they move as one and copy one another. The ambivalence towards the isolated, solitary figure is expressed in a barrage of proposed names, insults and comments on both the power and vulnerability of the position. They take it in turns to stand alone to be pilloried and congratulated for the sacrifice as they are replaced. Two or more performers may work as one ‘person’ gravitating towards and around one another like satellites or atoms. They generate speech between them. Hearing speech has more significance than speaking. The individuals emerge as they recount significant personal experiences but their stories are cut off. A hand on their shoulder silences and releases them. The structure is fleshed out by the group as it takes on a life of its own.

Outburst is a sketch for a system that generates speech - and in this case, song - within a group. The individuals stand apart. They think of a song independently. They rehearse the song, or fragment of song, in their mind and then begin to sing. It is inaudible at first but they grow louder with every repetition. There is a hubbub of different songs. When a neighbouring performer hears and recognises someone else’s song, they switch to that song. Through this simple process, one song begins to dominate. It spreads like a virus through the group. Eventually all the performers are singing the same song. The song gets louder and louder and the singing seems beyond the control of the singers. It was performed amongst the audience at a concert with the band, Low Island.

A group converge and disperse at different places around the centre of Llandudno. The performers stop as a cluster, close their eyes and think of a song. The songs might be advertising jingles, pop songs, folk songs, sea shanties, anthems, operatic arias, football chants, nursery rhymes, carols, hymns - anything catchy. The performers do not communicate directly with one another and they act as if they are alone. They do not know each other’s choice of song. They begin to sing their song - or fragment of song - quietly to themselves, getting louder with every repetition. A murmuring hubbub becomes a cacophony of different songs. If anyone within the group hears and recognises another’s song, they switch to that song. A competitive struggle takes place between the songs - not the singers, as they give up their own song in favour of a more dominant one. The songs battle it out until only one survives. A unifying chorus grows from the discordant noise, which suddenly erupts from the group. The selected and celebrated song is the result of the process where reception outweighs transmission. They then disperse and melt into the crowd but coalesce again throughout the day at different sites.

Flock is a large-scale ensemble live performance for an indefinite number of people that form a cluster, held together by a copying principle. The collective entity interacts with its immediate environment. It is an analogue of a primitive form of life. It tackles issues of artificial intelligence without the technology.

And was a repeating sequence of about 40 minutes cycles of live, ensemble action for ten performers that later expanded to twenty two. It was prompted by experiments in mechanical repetition of narrative film in video. The repetition was played out live, with the ambiguity of time and continuity/discontinuity of mind. It collided the dramatic imperative to develop a narrative and a sculptural imperative towards stasis and stability.

Illustrated introduction to my work dealing with multiplicity and fragmentation

Not Tony is like a comedy, quick-change hat routine, where single items (a hat, a beard, a wig or glasses) represent different members of a family. All speak with the same voice as an ambiguous internal/external conflict is played out. An unnamed, unknown identity emerges in the space between the other established characters. This alien entity was a residue that can only be defined negatively as not any of the others.

A large scale performance event with characters from Alice in Wonderland interacting with diners in the grounds of an estate near Norwich, with a text written by David Gale and directed by Hilary Westlake.

Five performers forge connections by inventing names and relationships. Someone points at an apparent stranger with a growing sense of recognition. The stranger is transfixed and mortified by the gesture. The person is released as doubt creeps in and the pointing finger is lowered. They make good their escape but the tendency spreads through a group until five people are caught in a gestural equivalent of a Mexican stand off. They invent, explore and uncover the interconnections and interrelations as their lives interweave. The character or name assigned to a performer does not necessarily correspond to their gender, ethnicity or age. Emotional ties become factual statements in a memory game. A complex network of multiple relationships grows up and dies.

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Solo performance. A man weaves an elaborate and clearly bogus account of his presence on the stage. He is on stage as a way of hiding. The narrative thread is tenuous. He rewrites himself to accommodate scene changes. He constantly sabotages his efforts to fit in. He is both exposed and invisible at the same time. Finally he forces himself to tell a joke that he is ill-prepared for and faces the wrath of an audience that, having accepted the absurd premise of the joke, expects to be relieved of it by a punch line.

A solo performance. A man weaves an elaborate and clearly bogus account of his presence on the stage. He is on stage as a way of hiding. The narrative thread is tenuous. He rewrites himself to accommodate scene changes. He constantly sabotages his efforts to fit in. He is both exposed and invisible at the same time. Finally he forces himself to tell a joke that he is ill-prepared for and faces the wrath of an audience that, having accepted the absurd premise of the joke, expects to be relieved of it by a punch line.

Four performers sit facing a central television, which is on with sound turned down. We only see the performers, not what they are watching on the television. They focus on different elements on screen. They all copy facial expressions, switching between the characters, next they copy hand gestures. They react to cuts and changes of scene. The performers now work independently, one copying the face of an actor while another makes the hand gestures.

A line of performers sits in a line on a platform-stage facing the real audience and mimicking each other's body position. They represent a formal audience that mirrors the real audience in the auditorium. One performer stands in front of the group, with their back to the real audience, and 'conducts' the stage-audience by drawing attention to their own foot or hand through movement. Two performers now vie for the stage-audience's attention by different strategies that involve moving or standing still. The stage-audience points their fingers to follow the trace of their eyes. They are myopic, their attention span is short and their interest is in anything moving. The chairs are taken away and the formation of the group is repeatedly broken as the mimicry becomes a way to isolate an individual who has failed to copy the others. The rest form a tight group and the isolated person momentarily becomes an outcast performer.

Devising, writing and co-directing a video installation. A replicating system where there is a balance between the speed of the replication and the longevity of the copy is represented by multi-screen images of a figure. A mutation occurs in a copy that does not 'die'.The mutation spreads and dominates the pattern. It is an analogue of a cancer cell. It was made to accompany the Art exhibition of works dealing with the illness by Katherine Meynell and the late Alistair Skinner, who succumbed to the disease during the developmental process.

A written prologue to the performance of the Play, a radical translation of Ubu Roi by Alfred Jarry

Working with the Puppet theatre company, Theatre Rites on a performance for children in a disused shop in Tooting.

Designing and running a series of practical workshops with 2nd year MA students. Ensemble performance towards a group mind and modular behaviour.

And was an ensemble performance for an array of artists and performers, some film-makers, some actors, dancers, painters and sculptors. Different phases of action were repeated in a continuous cycle throughout the day, extending just beyond the opening and closing times of the gallery. Spectators would walk among the group spread throughout the gallery, free to come and go. The performers would meet in different combinations and break a simple action into discrete parts playing various sections backwards and forwards. Two performers would get in sync, using words of a simple phrase to establish a rhythm (like playing a piece of film back and forth). This established - accidentally - a primitive dance through repetition, based on ordinary action: greeting, passing a coat, giving a present, offering a crisp, etc. It suspended progression and held a moment in pulsing, stuttering stasis.

The performance Still and Silent was the result of a weeklong workshop with Finnish artists. The imperative to be still and silent is constantly broken as one individual initiates some action that the others then are inclined to copy, which leads to behaviour feedback as the group become increasingly animated. The members of the ensemble respond to one another and copy any innovation. In one phase they sing a song quietly to themselves but listen to the others who are singing their own and different songs. They get gradually louder until they begin to hear some of the other’s songs. Once they hear and recognise the song, they switch to sing that song. The cacophony of different songs fluctuates but eventually one song dominates and they sing together. It is a system where each individual is subsumed under the group. Collective behaviour and vocal sound is the result of each individual responding to and copying what is around them from one small intervention. It is an experiment that runs through may of the ensemble works such as Flock and Little Systems. Behaviour and sound mutate as the performance evolves.

A performance workshop was held for international artists towards an ensemble with the working title Ages, where an individual within a peripatetic group stops and makes a biographical statement. Others overhearing this may push aside the speaker and repeat the statement. A number of different singe biographical statements may be attributed to the particular zone on the floor. Any performer can replace and repeat the statements as they invent or overhear them. The statements are compatible and could be attributes to an individual of a very particular age. Other zones are established in the same way and any zone can be returned to. The group becomes less animated as more stations are invented. It becomes clear that a biographical portrait is being formed of a single individual at different ages, from infancy to old age. The text was generated by the workshop participants and often incorporated a number of different languages. Sub groups were dedicated to writing for the specific ages. The portrait emerged through this process where each individual contributed a detail without knowing the overall ‘life’. The workshop continues research into performance structures that can be used or interpreted as psychological models. The structures present a complex, multiple and modular model of minds. The ensemble performances work in two ways, one where each individual performer contributes to a larger whole, (Flock, Little Systems, Still and Silent) and the other that constructs a network between the performers (Island). The solo work aims to make a multiple of the single body of the performer (Not Tony or A Chain of Events Called Bob.) I am currently in discussion about a residency with an organisation and venue in Paris at L’Avant Seine where a large-scale ensemble work will be developed with international artists over the course of a year.

An ambiguous internal or external conflict between a family group is played out by one performer who has a system for representing different rooms by placing single objects on a table and different people by wearing a single item. It is part of an ongoing project of representing a mind as partial, compartmental and multiple. It stresses the importance of the structure over any narrative and aims to be accessible to a wide audience. The context for the performance was a weekend of presentations by scientists and performers curated by Juan Dominguez with Oscar Hernández, Manolo Guzmán, Raúl Arrabales and Aitor Erce. Films by Anne Frances Ewert, Nicholas Ray and Sergio Oksman. Live performance by Gary Stevens, Juan Dominguez, Edurne Rubio and Ursula Martinez for an international audience.

Writing and devising over three days to assist in the development of a performance for an artist who is part of Spin, an organisation based in Brussels.

Numerous performers co-exist and move through the gallery recalling or trying to recall and re-enact past performances. Participants include: Heather Ackroyd, Gina Birch, Frank Bock, David Gale, Helena Goldwater, Dave Goulding, Anthony Howell, Yoko Ishiguro, Glenys Johnson, Lois Keidan, Joe Kelleher, Calum F Kerr, Kristen Kreider, Paulina Lara Franco, Marie-Anne Mancio, Angeliki Margeti, Brigid McLeer, Susan Melrose, Katharine Meynell, Hannah Millest, Lucy Neal, Redell Olsen, Miranda Payne, Lorena Pena, Andrew Quick, Hester Reeve, Lara Ritosa Roberts, Donna Rutherford, Graeme Shaw, Steve Slater, Gary Stevens, Minna Stevens, Peter Stickland, Fiona Templeton, Howard Tong, Amikam Toren, Simon Vincenzi, Caroline Wilkinson, Silvia Ziranek. Bodies of Memory forms part of the Acts of Legacy event curated by New Work Network for Late at Tate Britain

A performance workshop discussing and exploring the relationship between video projection and live performance

Solo performance that essays a compartmentalised state of mind. Performed in relation to the video installations at Southampton City Art Gallery and an illustrated talk on other of my performance and video installations.

Discussion of themes running through the work.

Solo performance curated by Ben Roberts

A presentation of performance as a sculptural proposition where the body of work is not sited with the body of the performer.

L'Un de Nous is a live ensemble performance with an original text. Everyday phrases are built into the structure and there are sections that allow the performers to contribute stories that flesh out the structure. The work concerns the mechanisms the tie people together in groups or those that isolate and ostracize others. The performers construct ‘individuals’ that are interchangeable within the group. A sense of self escapes the body of the performer and becoming embedded in a network, while the performers struggle to maintain the fiction. Humour plays an inclusive and exclusive role in relation to the audience.

Live performance with an original text. Four performers describe a scene from a Laurel and Hardy film. They establish the position of furniture and people from the film on the empty floor of the stage, each one repeating and re-establishing the architecture of the space. They break down the action, including speech, modifying and refining the action without reference to the original source.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

Sampler is a series of soundscapes. The five colour-coded performers feel their way through an empty space. They tentatively cross the stage to the sound of footsteps on wooden floorboards that at a particular juncture change to steps on carpet. They find objects in the space through sound. They hear a slap when they hit a wall; crashes and jingles when they hit furniture. One performer freezes after bumping into an invisible table. He hears the sound of a vase totter, roll, fall and smash, after which all sound is lost to him. He flails his arms and steps in different directions hoping to hear something. The performers activate and operate the soundscapes as well as occupy them. They watch each other and learn a sequence of movements for opening a door into another space. They explore and negotiate their environment through a series of movements that resemble superstitious rituals that have to be repeated by every new performer that enters the space. The movements are not gestures, or mimes but code that has to be found by trial and error. Alarm clocks need to be silenced; a baby has to be stopped from crying. At one stage each performer is accompanied by bird song that is activated by walking. Sound elements of a landscape are attached to particular performers as they traverse the stage. Different combinations create different atmospheres. One is accompanied by rain, another by thunder. A member of the team sits in the auditorium watching the action and plays the pre-recorded sounds live on a keyboard in response to the signals from the performers on the stage.

Sampler is a series of soundscapes. The five colour-coded performers feel their way through an empty space. They tentatively cross the stage to the sound of footsteps on wooden floorboards that at a particular juncture change to steps on carpet. They find objects in the space through sound. They hear a slap when they hit a wall; crashes and jingles when they hit furniture. One performer freezes after bumping into an invisible table. He hears the sound of a vase totter, roll, fall and smash, after which all sound is lost to him. He flails his arms and steps in different directions hoping to hear something. The performers activate and operate the soundscapes as well as occupy them. They watch each other and learn a sequence of movements for opening a door into another space. They explore and negotiate their environment through a series of movements that resemble superstitious rituals that have to be repeated by every new performer that enters the space. The movements are not gestures, or mimes but code that has to be found by trial and error. Alarm clocks need to be silenced; a baby has to be stopped from crying. At one stage each performer is accompanied by bird song that is activated by walking. Sound elements of a landscape are attached to particular performers as they traverse the stage. Different combinations create different atmospheres. One is accompanied by rain, another by thunder. A member of the team sits in the auditorium watching the action and plays the pre-recorded sounds live on a keyboard in response to the signals from the performers on the stage.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

Performers apologize as they tentatively tread through a mass of soft toys and wince as one stomps through without care. They hold and talk to each other through toys to avoid eye contact. The toys are strangely animated; the performers are part mechanical. The performers seem to fail to recognize one another and not to understand facial expressions. Empathy is a problem. One talks into another’s face as if it were an intercom. One pleads with another to stay in and knocks him off his feet with excitement on his return. A man seems to be an articulate dog in a smoking jacket. The performers project personalities onto the toys at one moment and treat them as dead matter the next. Forming bonds is a problem. Two performers play the hands of a third who watches with interest as the hands perform a task. Soft toy puppets become extensions of the performer’s arms. Understanding other bodies is a problem as well as other minds.

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another

A woman dressed in a leather apron and a coarse skirt disrupts the action. She ignores the other performers and pushes a table covered in shoemaking paraphernalia onto the stage. The others watch as she sits on a stool and stretches leather over a shoe-last while singing quietly to herself. The six performers are dressed in period costumes. A 'Georgian' couple disturbs a 'Victorian' couple in a game where the performers can see into the past but not the future. Although the Victorians get in the way of the Georgians they pretend that they are not there. The Victorians however acknowledge the presence of the Georgians but do not directly communicate with them. The performers have their own associated period furniture, which they bring on with them as part of the action. They jostle to occupy the same space as the competing historical periods collide and overlay one another.

A man and a woman stand apart behind separate pieces of furniture. They are, in part, identified with the particular piece of furniture but they also use them as a protective barrier to hide behind. The armchair and table are not arranged to make a coherent interior space but stand on the stage as isolated objects. The performers talk about the items of furniture as if these had an attitude to being on the stage. The performers rehearse two incompatible accounts of their relationship with one another. They are alert to being caught, like naughty children, dressing up in someone else's clothes. The man puts on more trousers, one over the other, while the woman puts on more skirts. Their bodies are transformed by the clothing. The accidental impression is both geriatric and infantile. The bodies of the performers and their garments are conflated but the growing difference between them is made meaningless. Much of the performance is about the theatrical experience itself, the excitement, the pleasure, the fear and possible embarrassment both for the performers and the audience. The audience becomes part of the unstable fiction. The performers describe the audience’s responses, sometimes plausibly, sometimes as ridiculous flights of fancy. Encumbered by their clothing, the performers struggle to roll out a carpet over the remaining garments strewn about the floor. The carpet forms a mound and an island. The performers reappear after is an interval ridiculously expanded, as if the process of accruing clothing has continued. The convention of an interval becomes an issue and there is a discussion of how much time has passed in the meantime. The performers are finally engulfed in clothing. Buried under clothes they try to represent themselves with models. Beer bottles stand in for them and are placed on a small table representing the stage. The table is precariously balanced on the mound of carpet and the bottles slide off onto the floor as soon as they are released.

A man and a woman stand apart behind separate pieces of furniture. They are, in part, identified with the particular piece of furniture but they also use them as a protective barrier to hide behind. The armchair and table are not arranged to make a coherent interior space but stand on the stage as isolated objects. The performers talk about the items of furniture as if these had an attitude to being on the stage. The performers rehearse two incompatible accounts of their relationship with one another. They are alert to being caught, like naughty children, dressing up in someone else's clothes. The man puts on more trousers, one over the other, while the woman puts on more skirts. Their bodies are transformed by the clothing. The accidental impression is both geriatric and infantile. The bodies of the performers and their garments are conflated but the growing difference between them is made meaningless. Much of the performance is about the theatrical experience itself, the excitement, the pleasure, the fear and possible embarrassment both for the performers and the audience. The audience becomes part of the unstable fiction. The performers describe the audience’s responses, sometimes plausibly, sometimes as ridiculous flights of fancy. Encumbered by their clothing, the performers struggle to roll out a carpet over the remaining garments strewn about the floor. The carpet forms a mound and an island. The performers reappear after is an interval ridiculously expanded, as if the process of accruing clothing has continued. The convention of an interval becomes an issue and there is a discussion of how much time has passed in the meantime. The performers are finally engulfed in clothing. Buried under clothes they try to represent themselves with models. Beer bottles stand in for them and are placed on a small table representing the stage. The table is precariously balanced on the mound of carpet and the bottles slide off onto the floor as soon as they are released.

A man and a woman stand apart behind separate pieces of furniture. They are, in part, identified with the particular piece of furniture but they also use them as a protective barrier to hide behind. The armchair and table are not arranged to make a coherent interior space but stand on the stage as isolated objects. The performers talk about the items of furniture as if these had an attitude to being on the stage. The performers rehearse two incompatible accounts of their relationship with one another. They are alert to being caught, like naughty children, dressing up in someone else's clothes. The man puts on more trousers, one over the other, while the woman puts on more skirts. Their bodies are transformed by the clothing. The accidental impression is both geriatric and infantile. The bodies of the performers and their garments are conflated but the growing difference between them is made meaningless. Much of the performance is about the theatrical experience itself, the excitement, the pleasure, the fear and possible embarrassment both for the performers and the audience. The audience becomes part of the unstable fiction. The performers describe the audience’s responses, sometimes plausibly, sometimes as ridiculous flights of fancy. Encumbered by their clothing, the performers struggle to roll out a carpet over the remaining garments strewn about the floor. The carpet forms a mound and an island. The performers reappear after is an interval ridiculously expanded, as if the process of accruing clothing has continued. The convention of an interval becomes an issue and there is a discussion of how much time has passed in the meantime. The performers are finally engulfed in clothing. Buried under clothes they try to represent themselves with models. Beer bottles stand in for them and are placed on a small table representing the stage. The table is precariously balanced on the mound of carpet and the bottles slide off onto the floor as soon as they are released.

A man and a woman stand apart behind separate pieces of furniture. They are, in part, identified with the particular piece of furniture but they also use them as a protective barrier to hide behind. The armchair and table are not arranged to make a coherent interior space but stand on the stage as isolated objects. The performers talk about the items of furniture as if these had an attitude to being on the stage. The performers rehearse two incompatible accounts of their relationship with one another. They are alert to being caught, like naughty children, dressing up in someone else's clothes. The man puts on more trousers, one over the other, while the woman puts on more skirts. Their bodies are transformed by the clothing. The accidental impression is both geriatric and infantile. The bodies of the performers and their garments are conflated but the growing difference between them is made meaningless. Much of the performance is about the theatrical experience itself, the excitement, the pleasure, the fear and possible embarrassment both for the performers and the audience. The audience becomes part of the unstable fiction. The performers describe the audience’s responses, sometimes plausibly, sometimes as ridiculous flights of fancy. Encumbered by their clothing, the performers struggle to roll out a carpet over the remaining garments strewn about the floor. The carpet forms a mound and an island. The performers reappear after is an interval ridiculously expanded, as if the process of accruing clothing has continued. The convention of an interval becomes an issue and there is a discussion of how much time has passed in the meantime. The performers are finally engulfed in clothing. Buried under clothes they try to represent themselves with models. Beer bottles stand in for them and are placed on a small table representing the stage. The table is precariously balanced on the mound of carpet and the bottles slide off onto the floor as soon as they are released.

A man and a woman stand apart behind separate pieces of furniture. They are, in part, identified with the particular piece of furniture but they also use them as a protective barrier to hide behind. The armchair and table are not arranged to make a coherent interior space but stand on the stage as isolated objects. The performers talk about the items of furniture as if these had an attitude to being on the stage. The performers rehearse two incompatible accounts of their relationship with one another. They are alert to being caught, like naughty children, dressing up in someone else's clothes. The man puts on more trousers, one over the other, while the woman puts on more skirts. Their bodies are transformed by the clothing. The accidental impression is both geriatric and infantile. The bodies of the performers and their garments are conflated but the growing difference between them is made meaningless. Much of the performance is about the theatrical experience itself, the excitement, the pleasure, the fear and possible embarrassment both for the performers and the audience. The audience becomes part of the unstable fiction. The performers describe the audience’s responses, sometimes plausibly, sometimes as ridiculous flights of fancy. Encumbered by their clothing, the performers struggle to roll out a carpet over the remaining garments strewn about the floor. The carpet forms a mound and an island. The performers reappear after is an interval ridiculously expanded, as if the process of accruing clothing has continued. The convention of an interval becomes an issue and there is a discussion of how much time has passed in the meantime. The performers are finally engulfed in clothing. Buried under clothes they try to represent themselves with models. Beer bottles stand in for them and are placed on a small table representing the stage. The table is precariously balanced on the mound of carpet and the bottles slide off onto the floor as soon as they are released.

A man and a woman stand apart behind separate pieces of furniture. They are, in part, identified with the particular piece of furniture but they also use them as a protective barrier to hide behind. The armchair and table are not arranged to make a coherent interior space but stand on the stage as isolated objects. The performers talk about the items of furniture as if these had an attitude to being on the stage. The performers rehearse two incompatible accounts of their relationship with one another. They are alert to being caught, like naughty children, dressing up in someone else's clothes. The man puts on more trousers, one over the other, while the woman puts on more skirts. Their bodies are transformed by the clothing. The accidental impression is both geriatric and infantile. The bodies of the performers and their garments are conflated but the growing difference between them is made meaningless. Much of the performance is about the theatrical experience itself, the excitement, the pleasure, the fear and possible embarrassment both for the performers and the audience. The audience becomes part of the unstable fiction. The performers describe the audience’s responses, sometimes plausibly, sometimes as ridiculous flights of fancy. Encumbered by their clothing, the performers struggle to roll out a carpet over the remaining garments strewn about the floor. The carpet forms a mound and an island. The performers reappear after is an interval ridiculously expanded, as if the process of accruing clothing has continued. The convention of an interval becomes an issue and there is a discussion of how much time has passed in the meantime. The performers are finally engulfed in clothing. Buried under clothes they try to represent themselves with models. Beer bottles stand in for them and are placed on a small table representing the stage. The table is precariously balanced on the mound of carpet and the bottles slide off onto the floor as soon as they are released.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

A solo performance. A man weaves an elaborate and clearly bogus account of his presence on the stage. He is on stage as a way of hiding. The narrative thread is tenuous. He rewrites himself to accommodate scene changes. He constantly sabotages his efforts to fit in. He is both exposed and invisible at the same time. Finally he forces himself to tell a joke that he is ill-prepared for and faces the wrath of an audience that, having accepted the absurd premise of the joke, expects to be relieved of it by a punch line.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Multiple domestic ceiling lights hang over the stage. Three performers adopt different position by remaining still for a moment. They seem to learn the positions from each other. The positions acquire through repetition particular poses or stances and eventually these positions are given names. The performers take a place, shout the name associated with this place and run to a new position. The performers run from position to position to keep up a conversation between characters, defined by these places, which emerge as members of an extended family. The performers have to remember the names, positions of the characters, the characters being addressed and the particular subject of the conversation between the two. The three performers run from place to place to maintain the static picture. The game changes as the performers give each other objects to hold and pass to one another as another way of identifying the characters, like symbolic objects that identify saints, which enables the characters to move. The game, reminiscent of pass the parcel and musical chairs, is frantically played to prevent the picture collapsing.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Approximately 60 minutes, live performance with text. Two men sit side by side on an empty stage facing the audience. They are uncomfortably close. They are similarly dressed and both have a bandaged left hand. There is a sense of doubling, together with an intimate and indeterminate relationship reminiscent of a comedy double-act. One of the men listens intently while the other carefully describes a simple and mundane but imaginary act as if he is following it as it is happening. An imaginary glass is passed to the other man who cups his empty hand as if taking and holding the glass, but the imagined action ends in failure. There is an awkward silence as the man who has been listening and waiting for the drink lifts his empty, cupped hand to regard his trousers and the imaginary spilt water. They describe themselves as having different physical bodies. They give each other conditions in a mental game of tit for tat. They imagine their hands becoming fused with the objects they hold. One man deals with the loss of his hands, inflicted on him by the other. He constructs artificial ones that operate by leather straps connected to modified muscles. He makes an heroic effort to relearn playing the piano in his mind. Other hands are temporarily formed by their use. Actions have to be rehearsed until the hand is sufficiently shaped to perform the task. Perception, too, is altered in this imaginary space. Looking at things exerts a pressure and they test objects to destruction by examining them closely. One of the performers describes pushing his face through the wall of the imaginary room and watching the neighbours sitting in front of their television. In contrast to the complex of ideas, the staging is stark and simple. A few objects are brought on and stand in isolation, quietly resisting the suggestion of a domestic interior.

Solo performance. A man weaves an elaborate and clearly bogus account of his presence on the stage. He is on stage as a way of hiding. The narrative thread is tenuous. He rewrites himself to accommodate scene changes. He constantly sabotages his efforts to fit in. He is both exposed and invisible at the same time. Finally he forces himself to tell a joke that he is ill-prepared for and faces the wrath of an audience that, having accepted the absurd premise of the joke, expects to be relieved of it by a punch line.

A domestic space mapped out in an empty space. Isolated names of furniture and features used as co-ordinates as a single figure explored the imaginary place, inventing or remembering the house. He traveled through imaginary rooms, rehearsing, and repeating journeys to establish the architecture. It was built in his mind by physical enactment. He named details and pointed to their position without any implication of his presence in the room. He faltered over missing or uncertain details. As the space grew clearer, traces of occupation began to emerge. Yet the man's familiarity and intimacy with the house did not secure his place in it. A man walks around an empty space constructing or remembering rooms of a house. Stepping to and fro with a gesture to place objects, he names and repeats items of furniture. He reaches out and names more objects as he travels, mapping the space in his and our minds.

A performer rehearses carrying plates from one table to another. Subsequently plates fall from his hands midway and smash on the floor. A pile of crockery survives the journey and is laid out on the table. Cups are knocked over in clumsy fitful movements but in a strict sequence. The fragility of the ceramic objects becomes an obsessional interest. The performer manages to smash all the item of crockery except for one. A cup is placed on the very edge of the table. It repeatedly falls and is caught just before it hits the ground, but the pattern is broken when it is given a sudden slap and sent flying across the room. A teapot slips slowly through his fingers. Other things are smashed as he leaps to save them. Only a vase spinning around on its side remains intact on the tabletop.

And was a repeating sequence of about 40 minutes cycles of live, ensemble action for ten performers that later expanded to twenty two. It was prompted by experiments in mechanical repetition of narrative film in video. The repetition was played out live, with the ambiguity of time and continuity/discontinuity of mind. It collided the dramatic imperative to develop a narrative and a sculptural imperative towards stasis and stability.

And was a repeating sequence of about 40 minutes cycles of live, ensemble action for twenty two performers. It was prompted by experiments in mechanical repetition of narrative film in video. The repetition was played out live, with the ambiguity of time and continuity/discontinuity of mind. It collided the dramatic imperative to develop a narrative and a sculptural imperative towards stasis and stability.

Here and There was the first performance out of doors. It was designed in response to the extraordinary house and formal gardens at Serralves, the site of a contemporary art gallery. I worked with an international group of young artists as part of a residency with the arts organisation Mugatxoan. The approach developed from an ensemble performance called And where a peripatetic audience walked through a group of performers. I have often thought of the body of the performance (not performers) interacting with the body of the audience. The audience/spectators walked en masse in this case and saw performers in the distance amongst the trees or a partial glimpse of them as they interacted with each other and the features of the garden. There were distinct phases triggered within the group. They responded to one another to form a cohesive unit that was often scattered and partially hidden. They would scurry from one place to the next, set off by a single member of the group. They would conspicuously hide - this involved remaining still or hiding their face - against common elements in the garden. Buster Keaton in Samuel Beckett’s Film stands stock still with his back to us against a brick wall as the camera catches him, or like a spider that stops moving when it senses vibration. The performers would hide against trees, next prone and spread-eagled on the lawn, then against the flowerbeds, or hedges – activating different features of the place at different moments – finally against the spectators themselves, leaning on them or ducking down and burying their faces in the spectator’s chest. There was a sense of panic as the last one found a hiding place. The loose structure of the group worked in contrast to the formal architecture of the grounds. The group could compact into a tight huddle or explode in every direction.

The performance/sculpture was conceived as a series - or a collection - of clustered elements that constitute larger objects. The 'elements' were the people who take part in the performance. Dressed in their own clothes they occupied the grounds of the Henry Moore Foundation and sculpture park. The 'objects' were temporary, often momentary formations defined and named as collective entities appearing around the grounds at different times. The structures were sometimes interwoven within the environment, which includes the spectators. The performers ran for cover, lurked in the bushes, hid and stared back at the spectators, as well as forming relatively coherent masses of varying density and instability out in the open. The group suddenly ran off into the trees, in response to the behaviour of spectators or some internal dynamic, like a startled herd of animals, or explode in all directions, like a firework.

And was an ensemble performance for an array of artists and performers, some film-makers, some actors, dancers, painters and sculptors. Different phases of action were repeated in a continuous cycle throughout the day, extending just beyond the opening and closing times of the gallery. Spectators would walk among the group spread throughout the gallery, free to come and go. The performers would meet in different combinations and break a simple action into discrete parts playing various sections backwards and forwards. Two performers would get in sync, using words of a simple phrase to establish a rhythm (like playing a piece of film back and forth). This established - accidentally - a primitive dance through repetition, based on ordinary action: greeting, passing a coat, giving a present, offering a crisp, etc. It suspended progression and held a moment in pulsing, stuttering stasis.

And was an ensemble performance for an array of artists and performers, some film-makers, some actors, dancers, painters and sculptors. Different phases of action were repeated in a continuous cycle throughout the day, extending just beyond the opening and closing times of the gallery. Spectators would walk among the group spread throughout the gallery, free to come and go. The performers would meet in different combinations and break a simple action into discrete parts playing various sections backwards and forwards. Two performers would get in sync, using words of a simple phrase to establish a rhythm (like playing a piece of film back and forth). This established - accidentally - a primitive dance through repetition, based on ordinary action: greeting, passing a coat, giving a present, offering a crisp, etc. It suspended progression and held a moment in pulsing, stuttering stasis.

And was an ensemble performance for an array of artists and performers, some film-makers, some actors, dancers, painters and sculptors. Different phases of action were repeated in a continuous cycle throughout the day, extending just beyond the opening and closing times of the gallery. Spectators would walk among the group spread throughout the gallery, free to come and go. The performers would meet in different combinations and break a simple action into discrete parts playing various sections backwards and forwards. Two performers would get in sync, using words of a simple phrase to establish a rhythm (like playing a piece of film back and forth). This established - accidentally - a primitive dance through repetition, based on ordinary action: greeting, passing a coat, giving a present, offering a crisp, etc. It suspended progression and held a moment in pulsing, stuttering stasis.

Thought Bubble was developed, from an idea first proposed at the Performance Labs at Artsadmin, through a week-long practical workshop with six volunteer performers from various art schools. The basic premise was that a group of performers play each other’s thoughts by speaking aloud a prescribed theme while looking at another performer, who acts as a mute model. It is as if they were attributing thoughts to him or her. Their thoughts are represented by the multiple voices of the group. They collectively switch their attention to different performers. Each subject has a distinctive character or quality of thought, through the different mixture of elements. Each speaker may specialise in a particular theme. There may be imminent (modest) intentions, planned future events and contradictory statements on those events. Recent past experience: lists, phrases, simple or elliptical sentences that deal with things seen or done over the past couple of days or that dwell on long-term past events. It could be things or sensations that are plausible immediate perceptions. Maybe they sing snatches of popular songs, or short renditions from popular movies. They may drift off onto inanimate objects and attribute thoughts to items around the room.