We spent 4 weeks in the south of France working with Emma Daniel. Most of the time in Cevennes mountains: Sainte Croix Vallée Française and some of the time in Corbieres: Sigean and Thézan.

In the Cevennes we lived and worked in a camping site. Emma borrowed us the 70’ies camping wagon which she got for herself and for her kid, when she separated from her husband. The camping grounds were mostly empty, so we used them as studios and rehearsed outside.

Toni Steffens, a beloved friend and colleague, came with us the first week and Andrea’s sister and parents came for a visit in the last week.

Generally it was a very positive experience to work like this, off the grid. We had been worried about being able to work without access to regular childcare (school). But once in the mountains we also realised how much time and energy were saved by not having access to the city. It sounds cliché, but there is so much ambient stress and distraction in the city which invisibly inhibits our ability to focus and work. And also makes Penélope require more care and attention. In the mountains we were all calmer and that made work easier.

In the weeks without visitors we found it worked best to take turns, so 2 adults worked together and the last adult went on an adventure with Penélope (and Emma’s kid when he was around). It was precious to have this kind of long duration, low stimulation hang out with Penélope. To move slowly through the landscape, find pretty stones at the river, build castles of rough sand, look for the frogs, dip the feet in the cold water.. She would go to the river everyday, so would know it better than us and teach us things she learned with Toni in the first week. For instance, the difference between the nettles and the wild mint. (“ese pica y ese huele rico y es para la tee”)

The moments with Toni and with Andreas’ family being able to help with babysitting were also precious for our ability to work. It was moving to see the friendship between Penélope and Toni develop. How precious it is when a child and an adult who are not biologically related get the chance to spend 1-1 quality time together for long durations several days in a row. It made me think of a friend of my mother who often took care of me as a child and how this friendship became a social and emotional safety net for me till this day. I wish for 1000 initiatives for organising childless people and children to have such chances.

It was a pleasure to work with Emma. On a personal level it has been an experience of transforming a big fear which I accumulated during the years when she was still married. To what this fear is being transformed I don’t know. I wouldn’t call it healing. There is no way to undo the violence done. I am still horrified that it happened and keeps happening to so many women. It feels more like a grounding and mobilising fear now, no longer stultifying. 

The first public version of the work became a 50 minutes dance performance. We narrated archetypes in order to translate the conversations, practices and materials we had developed with each collaborator. As a tarot card these tried to condensate the conflicts, dynamics and concerns we were working through: 

Let’s say The Child has been abused but insists on humor and dignity; while The Babysitter is essential but disposable, juggling the ambivalence of freedom and childlessness. The Fighter plays with limitation and breath in the aftermath of domestic violence. Meanwhile, The Artist carves a new mother tongue, and the Lover retains opacity by keeping their cultural assimilation ridiculously theatrical. 

This text was spoken at the beginning of the performance to situate a narrative context of the performance. I am not sure exactly what I mean with that. But the text does something that is neither being the caption of a dance object nor being a realism. I think it opens a series of doors both for us and for the audiences, without indicating whether or when to go through, in our sensing and making sense with the materials. 

I guess I still wonder how and what we need to offer the audience in terms of narrative for this work to make sense? What is the line between (moralising) liberal realism and dance as a messy art which can help us sense and make sense of a solidarity beyond the family without preaching this solidarity? Is there a line…? What logic of composition does the work need? 

From this version it feels that the individual practices and materials are much more grounded than the logic that assembles everything and organises transitions. I am a bit weary of this, because it seems to lean on an objective way of relating to immaterial art practices, which I have explored extensively with Simon Asencio, but which for some reason does not seem appropriate at all for these materials.