intel

[from a letter to laurie o…]

Laurie!

IOU a letter! April is blindingly busy (all good, but packed!) here…

Saw Dan’s ver of Double Aspect today – will be back on Fri. See you then! It compliments your work beautifully…

To your question about intelligibility – It’s always an issue with my stuff – always. Sometimes it’s a void or ineptitude… With the Soulographie plays I’m trying to make this feature (unavoidable after years of trying) somehow instrumental.

So, overall – Plays are meant to be set free from carrying too great a burden of information. Conversations, notes, story-telling, etc. have to accompany the productions, and – importantly – the plays require each other. The Rory cycle plays out over several pieces, and repetition helps (somewhat!) build the story over time. The guiding motive is that the 17 plays, together, add to a sensibly whole experience – a journey through a range of passions and positions.

Watching Dan’s play, the arc (in both the characters and the audience) went like this:

Shock (a swimming feeling – the loosening that comes with the sense of tears; sadness or horror not yet organized as grief or indignation).

Confusion (a scrambling after plot). For the first time, I think I understand why I invite this in… After first exposure to a massive trauma (Guatemala, El Salvador, Rwanda) – a long period follows where I pursue understanding with limited success. I’m after the physical trip from back brain to front brain – in both cases: a flooding, an incapacity – that causes a breaking/opening (when it works).

Grief (release; similar to forgiveness; more on this – elsewhere).

Is this a pattern for Architecture too? Not sure! I guess though that I’m inviting the consideration of the dramatic usefulness of  limited mental confusion (as a path to a deeper clearing-out…).

See you Fri!

Peace,

E

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *