Well, we have had three shows so far. Houses have been small but enthusiastic. I am now thinking about the benefits of feedback. Which are not always beneficial. I do want to hear what everyone has to say. But I have to remember that art is not made by committee or democracy. It has a a director (or three). So, I have to stay true to my beliefs about this work and not be too swayed by the whims of others. I have to wait for the body shift that tells me when a comment is in line with my feelings and direction and should be investigated and when it should be let go. When its about the taste of the individual saying it and doesn't actually resonate with what I think the direction of the piece is or should be. I guess all I am saying is that its hard to put it out there for judgment but I have asked for it, and so I need to be prepared to hear it. Most of the feedback has been positive and supportive of what we thought was visible in the piece - that's validating. Other feedback has been deeply insightful and needs a few days to process before addressing. Other feedback feels like its coming from personal taste and may not be relevant. Sifting through it all is important. I have to fight my desire to "please" everyone in the room.
A good, old friend of mine was at the show tonight and we talked a bit about a piece of his that he felt was destroyed by his trying to take in too much of the feedback that came to him. It is a fine line between valuable insight from fresh eyes and the personal style of individuals who are creators themselves who may be talking about the piece they would make. Anyway, I don't have anything to brilliant to say about this topic except that it's another challenging step in the process.
We had another dear, old friend in the audience tonight - Woody Vasulka. He always has provocative things to say. One thing he said (as an audience representative) was that we had presented him with a code that is an unbreakable code. And is that fair to do to an audience. To leave them hanging in this unsettling place of knowing there is a code that cannot be decoded. This I will ponder for a few days.
Peter, Mark and I have this feeling that the end of this version is actually the middle of the piece. Perhaps we are making a two hour long piece with an intermission. A first for us. We'll see.
