performance pathologies

Notes
[a voice thinking inside another voice]

Finding another word for participation
Being-with
That which can take place when shared space
is taking place.
For that reason
I keep returning to
the body
not as space
but to what moves it
and what moves with it

Pressure
Longing
a continuous call
[some calls are already repeated internally
without interruption]

Pathology
a word that combines the Greek words pathos and logos
Πάθος
that which the body undergoes
that which happens to it
before it is named
before it is stabilized
before it becomes an explanation

and logos
Λόγος
not only study
but a speaking
an attempt
to give form
to what resists form

so pathology
is not only
the study of disease

it is a way
of speaking
about what the body
has undergone

[Aristotle does not use pathos
 as illness
 but as affect
 as that which moves
 and alters the body
 fear
 desire
 pain
 pleasure
 something that happens
 and changes the state
 of the one who undergoes it
 something that passes through
 and leaves a trace] (1)

So if I remain
with pathos

pathology
is not a deviation
it is not an error
it is not a failure
to function
it is the trace
of what has been lived
under pressure
longing
a continuous call

not located
but circulating

not contained
but passing through

and leaving
marks that do not stabilize
that do not resolve
but continue.

Performance

Performance
in Greek
does not arrive
as one word

it disperses in many

επιτέλεση
επίδοση
εκτέλεση

each one
  carrying a different demand

επιτέλεση
  toward completion
  toward an end
  a fulfillment

επίδοση
  toward output
  toward measure
  toward evaluation

εκτέλεση
  toward execution
  toward carrying out
  toward obedience

[and inside them
 there is already violence
 something being carried through
 to its end
 without deviation]

so performance

is not neutral

it already contains
a demand
to complete
to deliver
to execute

and this

is where
I begin to locate
performance pathologies

because the body
is asked to remain
inside these demands

to complete
to deliver
to execute

even when
it cannot

even when
it is already
impossible

[Aristotle separates praxis from poiesis
 praxis as action without an external end
 as something that exists in its doing,
 while what we now call performance
 is captured
 inside production
 inside output
 inside result]

So I ask
what happens
when performance
  is returned
  to praxis

to doing
  without completion

to action
  without delivery

to presence
  without execution

[energeia
 as being-in-activity
 not representation
 not image
 but something that moves
 and remains in movement] (2)

this is where
my understanding
  of performance shifts

not as an event
  not as a result

but as a condition

and this is also
  where pathology appears

when the body
cannot sustain
the demand

to be always
  in επίδοση

always
  in εκτέλεση

always
  toward completion

therefore pathology
  is not failure

it is the moment

where praxis (practice)

returns

as interruption

as interruption

performance pathologies
  is something I did not name first

I encountered it

in moments where
  continuity failed

not collapse
  but a thinning

as if the body
  could no longer sustain
  the demand to appear

this demand
  is not abstract

it is daily

to respond
  to be present
  to maintain coherence

[Federici writes of the body as a site of extraction
 that does not end
 not only labor, but reproduction, affect, care,
 a continuous availability that is naturalized.
 Exhaustion here is not an error
 but the very trace
 of what has been taken.] (3)

so
  what appears as fatigue
  is already structured

the body learns
  to remain available

availability becomes technique

and technique becomes
  a form of survival

[Lepecki insists on stillness
 not as absence,
 but as a suspension of command.
 To stop is not to withdraw
 but to expose
 that movement was never neutral,
 that it was already asked for,
 already organized.] (4)

I begin to understand
  what we call performance
  is already a system
  that organizes bodies

the stage
  is not neutral

it receives
  but also directs
  it holds
  but also asks

[I am thinking here of voice
 not as something one has,
 but as something that takes place,
 that happens between,
 and emerges in relation]

And sometimes does not emerge at all

[Luce Irigaray returns to voice
 as breath,
 as a shared condition that precedes language,
 as something that cannot be fully captured
 by articulation,
 that always exceeds what is said]

in the session
  voice does not begin
  from speaking

it begins
  before

in breath
  in hesitation
  in the moment
  where the body is not yet ready
  to enter language

I do not ask
  for voice

I wait
  for it to appear

sometimes
  it does not

and this absence
  is not a lack

it is already
  a position

a refusal
  a protection
  a different way of being present

the stage
  then
  is not a place
  where voice is produced

but where
  it can

fail
  withdraw
  tremble
  remain incomplete

[this is important
 because voice is often captured
 as clarity,
 as a statement,
 as something that must arrive intact,
 legible,
 communicable]

in the session
  voice is not required
  to be understood

it can be
  fragmented
  repetitive
  barely audible

or only breath

and breath
  is already
  a form of speaking

[Irigaray insists on breath
 as that which we share
 without owning,
 as that which passes between bodies
 without becoming property,
 without being fixed] (5)

so
  what happens
  between us
  is not communication

it is
  co-presence

a tuning

sometimes
  I follow
  the breath
  of the other

not to guide
  but to stay

this staying
  is the work

the stage
  holds this

without amplifying it
  without demanding it

it does not push
  toward articulation

it allows
  voice
  to remain
  in process

The everyday performance on stage produces
  a way of standing
  a way of breathing
  a way of being seen

[a machine of subjectivation
I am thinking here with Foucault
on how subjects are produced through structures
with Deleuze
on the machine as something that operates
that connects and organizes
and with Butler
 on how a body must appear
 in order to be recognized
 through repetition] (6)

not metaphor
  but operation

a continuous shaping
  of how a body must appear
  in order to be recognized

and the amphitheater

I return to it
  not as image
  not as reference
  but as a structure that continues.

historically
  the amphitheater appears in ancient Greece
  between the 6th and 5th century BC

it develops alongside
  the emergence of the polis

and is used primarily for
  theatrical performances
  and civic gatherings

the earliest stone theatres
  such as the Theatre of Dionysus in Athens
  are built into hillsides

with a semi-circular seating area
  (theatron)

facing a central performance space
  (the orchestra)

and later a stage building
  (skene)

this architectural form
  is designed to optimize
  visibility and acoustics

so that one voice
  can be heard by many

it also corresponds
  to political practices
  such as the assembly (ekklesia)

where male citizens
  gathered to speak and decide

participation in these spaces
  was limited

excluding women
  enslaved people
  and non-citizens

So from its origin
  this structure organizes

who can appear
  who can speak
  and who can be heard

[here
 a relation is established
 between appearing
 and being seen
 between speaking
 and being held
 inside a field of attention]

but what interests me
  is not its origin

it is how it persists

[a dispositif, we could say
 but I stay with its operation
 how it arranges proximity
 how it amplifies some bodies
 and contains others
 how it produces a collective
 that is never equal
 never horizontal
 always organized]

The amphitheater organizes
  who appears
  who watches
  how sound travels
  how attention is held

it produces
  a collective body

but not without hierarchy

of the one
  and the many

[and this is not only spatial
 it is also social
 political
 a way of arranging life
 a way of distributing
 who speaks
 who listens
 who is exposed
 and who remains in the background]

and this relation
  has not disappeared

it has multiplied

Today
  the amphitheater is everywhere

in the home
  in the classroom
  in the studio
  on the street
  on the screen

in the ways
  we gather
  we present
  we respond

And most importantly, it is
  internalized

[this is where it becomes more precise
 the structure no longer needs to be external
 to operate
 it is carried
 it is rehearsed
 even in solitude
 the body anticipates
 its own visibility]

I carry
  the amphitheater

even when I am alone

the body
  remains
  in the position
  of being seen

of being addressed
  of needing to respond

this is where
  performance begins

before any event

and this is also
  where pathology forms

not as rupture
  but as continuity

a continuous exposure

[to be seen
 even when no one is looking
 is already a condition
 a form of vigilance
 that does not switch off
 a body that remains
 in readiness
 for appearance]

so
  when I speak of the amphitheater
  I am not referring
  to antiquity

but to a structure
  that organizes
  attention
  breath
  and expectation

and that arranges life

through positions

through distributions

through demands
  to appear

and to remain available

the amphitheater persists
  as a structure
  of being surrounded

even alone

[here, the gaze no longer requires an audience
 to function
 it has been internalized
 as demand
 as pressure
 as a continuous call]
 
so
  pathology emerges
  not as a deviation

but as friction

when the body
  cannot fully comply

when it cannot sustain
  the position
  it has been placed in

In each case
  I don’t expect to explain this
  but to expose
  the condition

energy uneven
  attention fragmented
  a sense of disconnection

[not a self that is broken
 but a relation
 that cannot stabilize
 that cannot hold]

Pain appears
  but it does not belong

[it circulates
 it attaches and detaches
 it exceeds ownership
 it resists being located
 inside a single body]

It moves

[Berlant would speak of slow wearing out
 a life sustained
 within conditions
 that exhaust it
 that ask it to continue
 beyond its capacity
 a continuity
 that becomes
 its own form of damage] (7)

the amphitheater
  is not the panopticon

it does not hide
  the gaze

it distributes it

not one watching many

but many
  holding one

in a field of attention

(the panopticon produces discipline
 through the possibility of being seen
the amphitheater produces performance
 through the necessity of appearing]

and now

these structures
  collapse

the body

is both

watched
  and exposed

regulated
  and demanded

to appear.

and here

I do not move
  against psychoanalysis

but toward
  another lineage

one that does not isolate
  the subject


but understands it
  as formed
  in relation

[Melanie Klein
 already speaks
 of a body
 that is not whole
 but in pieces

held together
 through relation
 through anxiety
 through attachment

not stable
 but constantly negotiating] (8)

[Kristeva
 writes of what precedes
 the formed subject
 rhythm
 breath
 movement

a body
 that does not yet belong
 to language

that cannot be fully held
 by meaning
 that exceeds it
 that resists stabilization] (9)

so what appears
  as pathology

is not only
  inside

but in the relation

in what cannot be held

in what cannot stabilize

in what exceeds
the structures
  that ask it
  to become coherent

[and this becomes very close
 to what I encounter
 in the sessions
 where what is at stake
 is not an interpretation
 but whether something
 can be held
 can remain
 can breathe]

so I stay

not with analysis

but with conditions

not with meaning
but with relation

And practice begins here

not as preparation
  but as staying

breathing
  not as technique
  but as relation

[air is not owned
 it passes
 it connects
 it refuses enclosure
 it resists being fixed]

in IASI
 the exercise
άσκηση
 is already recovery

this is not a progression

it is a shift

the Stage of Recovery
  appears
  because continuation
  is no longer possible

[not a conceptual decision
but a bodily limit
that cannot be negotiated
within the existing terms]

a structure is built

low
  soft
  contained

not to show
  but to hold

[what if the stage
 does not produce visibility
 but protects opacity,
 allows something
 to remain unextracted]

one to one sessions
no documentation
In confidentiality

[Crary writes of a world without interruption,
 without night—
 to refuse documentation
 is to reintroduce interruption,
 to allow something
 not to enter circulation] (10)

Nothing is extracted here

This is crucial

because performance
  as we know it
  depends on circulation

[Berardi describes a nervous system
 overloaded by continuous production,
 unable to rest,
 unable to withdraw] (11)

so
  what happens
  when nothing circulates

when an encounter
  remains

without image
  without trace

this “nothing”
  is not empty

it is dense

it reorganizes
  time

[Han names burnout,
 but I am less interested
 in naming the condition
 than in shifting
 the terms that produce it] (12)

care enters here

not as support

as interruption

care interrupts
  speed
  production
  coherence

it asks
  to stay
  without resolving

[Federici again—
 care as labor,
 but also as a refusal
 when it withdraws
 from productivity,
 when it reorganizes time]

in my everyday life
  this becomes visible

in exhaustion
  In this pregnancy
  in teaching
  in not being able
  to continue
  as before

[the body changes tempo
 and the system
 does not follow]

so
  performance pathologies
  is not something I study

it is where
  I find myself
  working

and maybe
  this is where
  a different form
  appears

not performance
  as event

but performance
  as condition

a sustained attention
  to how bodies
  are held
  or not

[and here the question shifts
 not how to perform,
 but how to remain
 without being consumed]

and even this
  is not innocent


because remaining
  is not equally possible

for every body

for every condition

for every time

to remain
  already requires

support
  access

space
  permission

and these
  are not given

They are unevenly distributed

so when I say
  remain

I am already speaking
  from within
  a contradiction

because I am here

speaking
  performing
  circulating

while carrying
  Two bodies in me*

while exposing
  a condition
  that is not supported

while taking a risk
  that is not necessary
  but required

[this is the violence
 of artistic labor today
 that it presents itself
 as choice
 while operating
 as an obligation]

to travel
  to be present
  to deliver

even now

even while being pregnant

this is not neutral

this is not dedication

this is a system

that continues

through us

through our willingness
  through our attachment
  through our fear
  of disappearing

[Marina Vishmidt makes this precise—
 precarity is not outside the work
 it is the condition of the work
 and the artist is asked
 to absorb it
 to embody it
 to normalize it] (13)

so self-care

what is self-care
  here

when the self
  is already
  distributed

across demands
  across timelines
  across expectations

self-care
  cannot be

an individual correction

it cannot be
  a small adjustment

inside the same structure

it has to be

a refusal

a withdrawal

a reorganization

of what is possible

and at what cost

[feminist thought (Selma James, Angela Davis, Nancy Fraser)
 has already said this
 care is not a supplement
 it is the ground
 and the fact that it remains unsupported
 is not accidental
 it is structural] (14)

So for me to be here
to speak from here

is not coherent

and I don’t want
  to make it coherent

I want to stay

inside this incoherence

because this is where
  the condition becomes visible

not resolved

not healed

but exposed

and maybe

this is the only place

from which something else
  can begin

not a better performance
not a sustainable version
of the same demand

but a break, a shift, a rapture, a crack

small
  unstable
  incomplete

but real.