Amphibious Trilogies

The passage of co-design fiction and the NSR

The Northern Sea Route is a complex, emergent and Arctic phenomenon that is remote for most of us. Yet, it is increasingly in the news as a venue for marking the passage of climate change, from melting ice to navigable waters for shipping. Carbon fuel extraction. Nuclear energy and militarisation. Methane and anthrax exposure on its adjacent land mass. Much here is undergoing transformation and movement is central to these changes. The ice as solid, surface, barrier and a given is under erasure.

What are we moving toward? And through? What might we enact as artistic researchers who draw together, that is co-design, choreography, narrative, design and mediation?

Context is everything for this is a zone where ‘development’ has been central to massive and at times brutal state driven change. It is important them to look into the rapid and long terms changes of these arctic waters and passages, but not merely as routes and opportunities for the movement of goods and military shipping. There are deep systemic, historical and current policy related matters at play. These are closely entwined and they are dynamic geo-political and globally significant manifestations of a choreography of arctic transformation that is always discussed as movement as change.

Yet seldom is this change addressed in terms of wider analyses of mobility that has been applied in other areas of public policy, culture and technology, such as in urbanism (e.g. Bucher et al. 2011), and of course public art. What might we co-create when the canvas is a vast global passage undergoing rapid, contest and motivated change?

‘Building a poetics of design fiction’ (Markussen & Knutz, 2013) in the wider context of ‘being ecological’ (Morton, 2018) in an ecosphere in which design, ecology and politics are entwined via design (e.g. Boehnert, 2018). This entwining would be shaped through a transdisciplinary co-design mode of connecting movement, critical play, and the facilitation of ‘anticipation-oriented thinking’ (Kerspern, 2019).

I’ll expand on this below with reference to the work of our partner in this project, Bastien Kerspern from Design Friction and their ludic approach to design fiction. In short, we wished to develop a mode of co-design fiction to address this entanglement as Bastien presented on prior work at the 3rd International Conference on Anticipation in 2019 at AHO in Oslo. He visualised this threading and its generative verbal futures kinetics as follows:

In addressing the range of issues, possible, likely and conjectural survivable futures and the NSR, we would need to engage people in a design fiction that would both play with and play the future. However, those given and contemporary projected futures, form utopian to supremacist, linear to dystopian, would need to be repositioned to facilitate a mode of ‘replaying futures’. Here we intended, both as a transductive method and a multimodal digital rhetoric, to use irony as a key mode of address and engagement.

This would allow us (note the movement verbs!) to shift, to transverse, to evade and even to land on critical connections, diversions, disjunctures and separations via humour and by way of asking readers to consider, position and differentiate their own responses to sets of scenarios and potential outcomes and consequences.

For us this is a matter of probing further the shaping and performative illocutionary force of ‘Trust and the illusive force of scenarios’ (Selin, 2006).

It was also a matter of enacting and indirect discursive dialogue space generated through scenario building (Selin, et al., 2015). The intention here was to provide a means for an interplay between the personal and potentially interpersonal, whether distributed or physically face-to-face, engagement with the options, contradictions, effects and sensibilities generated. In this sense, the decision to develop a set of scenarios situated within and across timescales of the NSR, would realise a number of discursive movement acts: to pose and expose, position and propose, directly and indirectly.

In developing OCTOPA especially with Amanda and Bastien, we have been interested to engage in matters arising concerning the conceptualistion, enactment and critiques discourses of the Anthropocene. Where there is important focus on being in a non-dualist relation to other species and beings, creatures and living entities, landscape and the bio-spherical, we sought to articulate a kineto-discursive narrative of animation and enlivenment. This contrasts for us to the compelling work on reading into and through the Anthropocene in terms of ‘ghosts’ and ‘haunting’ (Tsing et al., 2015) and historical ghosts and monsters

In ‘Introduction. Haunted landscapes and the anthropocene’, Gan et al., (2015: Kindle) note that

To track the histories that make multispecies livability possible, it is not enough to watch lively bodies. Instead, we must wander through landscapes, where assemblages of the dead gather together with the living. In their juxtapositions, we see livability anew.

We arrived at a design fiction on the NSR as a follow through on work on the persona OCTOPA in the project as an act of multi-species critical worlding (Dunne & Raby, 2013, 2016). Our intention to make an installation like work quoting the scenographies of Russian constructivists, such a that of Lyubov Popova for the play The Magnificent Cuckold, was interrupted by the Covid-19 global pandemic. In effect a lockdown or limitation of assembly and movement. We needed to shift mode into an online rendering of the NSR in ways that would hopefully engage participants in troubled times. We certainly felt we were ‘staying with the trouble’, as Donna Haraway phrases it (Haraway, 2017).

With OCTOPA and the 28 scenarios we co-devised, we wanted to escape ghosts and monstrous sea creatures. Instead, the being of a multi-brained, many armed and shape shifting character would demand of us similar tenacity, regenerative acts, distributed and connected thinking and an ability to move amphibiously, literally and physically.

Join OCTOPA on her arctic journey in the NSR

Taken together, in and over an experience of ‘counterplaying’ futures, as Bastien calls it, this would employ irony and satire to make apparent and to reveal entanglements and potentialities that would accentuate the fictions of proposed developments. We designed this as a way of ‘gaming futures literacy’ (Candy, 2018) in which movement and language are intertwined. It would also reveal to some measure that we are in such play engaged in acts of alternate world building in which narrative is a central co-creative futures resource (Raven & Elahi, 2015).

This is not for play itself but for moving into, being moved by and moving on discourses the of the NSR in not only the time but the dynamics of the Anthropocene. Here were we reminded of the practice differentiations Matt Malpass (2015) makes between associative, speculative, and critical design. In his paper at Anticipation 2019 Bastien (Kerspern 2019) charted this as follows:

Octopa’s several brains, munificent sensory tentacles, many armed simultaneous and yet directed movements (probe, secure, jettison, reach, propel etc) not only a vocabulary of articulating potential thinking and acts of transformation.

They also allow us to think through the role of scenarios and narratives as modes of agency and articulation that have potential to further interest in agency and engagement, for designers, by way of choreography and as forms of mediated communication that take critical news articles, policy drives and environmental critiques closer to our imaginary selves and our identification with others, places and changes.

These may be species and environments that are geographically and even temporally remote but are in our own minds and extended choreographic perception and sensory connections that reach beyond given hands and brains and actions to coordinated, dynamic and connected change.

Today, in the midst and mists of the global pandemic, some go as far as talking about a trans-arctic or polar passage not only a NSR or North East or North West Passage. The expanse just expanded. Expanding choreographies.

In ‘The Arctic shipping route no one’s talking about’, Bennett (2019) discusses how ice breakers, once a future technology and currently a needed companion to most passages across the NSR, may become an obsolete technology. She further observes that it is only China that has fully engaged with these possibilities and seems bent upon strategising long term trade and geo-political programmes and influence.

OCTOPA’S JOURNEY just got re-routed by an alternate future pathways, with new players. Extending choreographies in new passages with new scenarios needing to be imagined, shared, shaped and shifted.

Speculative fabulation is something everybody sitting around this table does. Taking fabulation seriously entails proposing possible worlds, inhabiting them with different sorts of work practices, or disciplinary skills, or whatever. Such proposals are not made up. It is a speculative proposal, a ‘what-if’. It is a practice of imagination, as a deliberate and cultivated practice. And it is a deliberate and cultivated practice that we know a little bit about how to do. It is not a ‘set-up’, and you do not really know if anything is going to come out of it, or not. People may decide to work together on something, or not. But it will grow out of somehow having affected each other’s imaginations. (Haraway, 2016: 555).


Auger, J. (2013). ‘Speculative design: Crafting the speculation.’ Digital Creativity 24 (1): 11-35.

Boehnert, J. (2018). Design, Ecology, Politics: Towards the Ecocene. 1st ed. London: Bloomsbury.

Bennett, M. (2019). ‘The Arctic shipping route no one’s talking about’. Editorial. The Maritime Executive. 05.08.2019.

Büscher, M., Urry, J. & Witchger, K. (2011). Mobile Methods. London: Routledge.

Candy, S. (2018). ‘Gaming futures literacy: The Thing From The Future.’ In Miller R. (Ed.). Transforming the Future: Anticipation in the 21st Century, 233-246. New York: Routledge.

Dunne, A. & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction and Social Dreaming. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Dunne, A. & Raby, F. (2016) ‘Critical world building’. In Coles, A. (2016). (Ed.). Design Fiction. EP / Volume 2. Berlin: Sternberg Press. 47-68.

Haraway, D., Ishikawa, N., Gilbert, S., Olwig, K., Tsing, A. & Bubandt. N. (2016). ‘Anthropologists are talking – about the Anthropocene’. Ethnos, 81(3): 535-564.

Haraway, D. (2017). ‘2 symbiogenesis, sympoiesis, and art science activisms for staying with the trouble’. In Tsing, A., Swanson, H., Gan, E. & Bubandt, N. (Eds.). Arts of Living on a Damaged Planet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 25-50.

Kerspern, Bastien. (2019). ‘Game design fiction: Bridging mediation through games and design fiction to facilitate anticipation-oriented thinking’. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Anticipation, Oslo School of Architecture and Design, 9-12 October 2019.

Malpass, M. (2015). ‘Between wit and reason: defining associative, speculative, and critical design in practice’. Design & Culture, 5(3): 333-356.

Malpass, M. (2017). Critical Design in Context. History, Theory, and Practice. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Markussen, T. & Knutz, E. (2013). ‘The Poetics of Design Fiction’. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, DPPI 2013, 231–40. New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery.

McCorristine, S. (2018). The Spectral Arctic: A cultural history of ghosts and dreams in polar exploration. London: UCL Press. (Kindle edition).

Morton, T. (2018). Being Ecological. Kindle Edition. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Raven, P. & Elahi, S. (2015). ‘The new narrative: applying narratology to the shaping of futures outputs’. Futures,74: 49-61.

Selin, Cynthia. 2006. ‘Trust and the illusive force of scenarios’. Futures, 38(1): 1-14.

Selin, C., Kimbell, L., Ramirez, R. & Bhatti, Y. (2015). ‘Scenarios and design: Scoping the dialogue space’. Futures, 74: 4-17.

Tassinari, V. & Staszowski, E. (2020). Designing in Dark Times. An Arendtian lexicon. London: Bloomsbury.

Tsing, A., Swanson, H., Gan, E. & Bubandt, N. (2017). (Eds.). Arts of Living on a Damaged Planet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

Horizon video #5

Shot on the research vessel, Prof. Molchanov
Arctic Floating University Expedition (NArFU), 22 June – 11 July 2019

Expedition Route: Arkhangelsk – “Kola meridian” transect – Barentsburg – Ny-Ålesund – Pyramiden – Longyearbyen – Barentsburg – Arkhangelsk

This silent stop motion video assembles sequential photos, frame by frame, shot with a game camera tied to the mast of the R/V Prof. Molchanov. With 24hrs of lightness its impossible to know what is a day and what is a night. On the outward bound journey we struggle to protect the camera from the weather. When approaching the Svalbard archipelago the camera became more stable.


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

Horizon video #4

Shot from the White Sea to the Northern Divina River
Arctic Floating University Expedition (NArFU), 7-11 July 2019

This silent stop motion video assembles sequential photos, shot with a game camera tied to the mast of the R/V Prof. Molchanov. Homeward bound, on the last leg of the Arctic Floating University Expedition.


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

Horizon video #3

Shot on the Barents Sea
Arctic Floating University Expedition, 5 July 2019

This silent stop motion video assembles sequential photos, shot with a game camera tied to the mast of the R/V Prof. Molchanov. We have left Svalbard, heading homeward bound on the Barents Sea. A storm is brewing!


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

Horizon video #2

Shot in the Barents Sea and the Isfjorden
Arctic Floating University Expedition, day 29-30 June 2019

This silent stop motion video assembles sequential photos, shot with a game camera tied to the mast of the R/V Prof. Molchanov. We approach Svalbard by way of the Barents Sea. The port of call is Barentsburg.


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

Horizon video #1

Shot on the Barents Sea
Arctic Floating University Expedition, 26-27 June 2019

This silent stop motion video assembles sequential photos, shot with a game camera tied to the mast of the R/V Prof. Molchanov. Suddenly, we encounter a massive area with sea ice and icebergs, the biggest up to 14m high. The captain changes the route several times Fog, sunshine, openings and closings. Remarkable.

. . . . . . . . . .

Related posts: Sensing the Sea


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

SLIPPERY video art #1

Shot on the Barents Sea
Arctic Floating University Expedition, 8 July 2019

Raw footage, captured with a GroPro camera tied to Brynjar’s chest when doing the practice of tai chi tai chi, on the top deck of the R/V Prof. Molchanov. A storm is coming. We feel the force of the storm and struggle to keep balance in this unbalanced world. Seabirds, however, are in their essence, gliding elegantly in the slipstream of the vessel.

. . . . . . . . . .

More on this: Tai chi before the storm


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

SWISH video art #1

This one-shot wonder was taken on the research vessel, called Prof. Molchanov, when on the Russian Arctic Floating University.
Location: Kola meridian in the Barents Sea, 25 June 2019.

Marine scientists are trawling a device called ‘MANTA’ alongside of the research vessel. The aim is to capture micro-plastics in this region. My aim is to capture the movements of MANTA. I put my POV camera into the MANTA’s mouth to see what she sees.

Eye in mouth. Swishy. Hissy. Slippery. Speedy. In between the frames you might see the underwater world; gasses, valleys and mountain tops. You might encounter a tentacular creature, amphibiousness in character.

. . . . . . . . . .

Location map: See 1. Oceanographical transect, Kola meridian.

. . . . . . . . . .

For more, see the post Manta Ray Moving Plastics


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

On transductive methods in artistic research

Addressing matters of feeling, sense and the elusive, from a view in art therapy and art making, Learmonth and Huckvale (2013) discuss how more systemic concepts and methods may be developed when working reciprocally with inductive and deductive methods. We quote a paragraph of their work at length as it echoes many of our own concerns, even though we have been working with movement rather than the image as our core conceptual and contextual material. Learmonth and Huckvale, (2013: 105) write that:

The vivid, vivifying, libidinous, Dionysian and mercurial creative process will not disclose much knowledge to capture, vivisection and autopsy. We need to study our creative processes as dynamics every bit as alive as natural habitats. Sometimes the life of images feels like a glimpsed, imaginal, flora and fauna at work and play in the ecologies of how we think, play, feel, imagine communicate, suffer, survive, grow and change. With their apparent autonomy they assume personalities and shape-shift: as shy as deer, as magical as Invisible Lions, or as sly as Schrödinger’s cat disappearing into the bushes, just when we want to ask them some questions.

Central to artistic inquiry as they too assert, is to be cautious when working with the slippery. From a therapy view creative expression needs to be let go of in order to find its possible realisations. 

In Amphibious Trilogies this has meant we have literally needed to discard many of our preconceptions yet also refer to prior knowledge when and as needed, always influenced by its existence and at times presence, not always explicitly sensed or known in the moment, of a visit or an event. On occasion this has been much a matter of working with improvisation, drawing on practices and techniques and prompts from dance and choreography, fiction and photography. Concerning mixed methods – form the humanities, social science, art, design and technoscience – we have enacted an experimental practice (Papadopoulos, 2018) that has been a hybrid of the method and techniques choreography, narrative, historical, societal, systemic and mediational.

As the project has advanced, rapid changes in climate science and change, global economic and public health, geo-politics and social movements and social media have occurred. Papadopoulos (2018), who also works with migration as we did on this project, also refers to a Baroque methodology as I do (Morrison, 2017): from vocabulary generation to fieldwork meanderings, including historiography and speculative fiction. However, in contrast, our ‘amphibious project ship’ sails with a dancer and a choreographer, an artist and an actor, a social scientist and a historian, a fiction writer and a teacher, more skills than surnames, more hats than heads, in effect an octopus like factive-imaginative hybrid (see our OCTOPA and OCTOPA’s Journey).

A globe spinning on its axis but also in a spin. We had not known that the metaphor and mechanics of our interface would be quite so expanded and expanding! Early in the project we looked at Paul Carter’s work on vortex in the context of climate change and the design of complexity (Carter, 2015) and the Bakhtinian centrifugal and centripetal. Extended choreography has not only addressed matters of an expanded field and its movement actualities and potentialities. It has needed to engage on the move with the turbulence and models for knowing and working with it transductively.

The research has also been how responses to emerging and changing matter and contexts – often steeped in history or challenging understanding of the present – have demanded improvisation related to settings and people, extending into fieldwork experiments and experiences, and to seeming contradictions between the given and the transient, the graspable and the slippery (see also Levine, 2013).

In ‘Capturing the transient’ Corinna Brown (2013) discusses ways dance/movement therapy (DMT) may be more actively and insightfully a part of the content and processes of creative arts research. She argues that it is possible to conduct such inquiry by ‘asking and analysing through movement’ (Brown, 2013: 120). Noting that sensitive material, especially when deeply personal, needs careful communication, and often to small audiences, Brown also notes that ‘findings’ may be performed for different audiences, in different venues and with varied intentions and to allow a diversity of feedback, review and critique. Here she refers to her own more autoethnographic enactment of her work, referring to the ‘creative analytic practice’ outlined by Laurel Richardson and Elizabeth St Pierre (2005). For Pat (Allen 2013: 17):

A critical part of art-based enquiry must be the physical inactivity of the stories our images tell, bringing them to life before an audience, performatively and emotively transmitting the truth of the images so that they enter bodies as well as minds. The image and its information of it it’s not only the mind but also through the heart and the gut.

Here ‘truth’ is visceral, embodied and felt. Yet, in writing on artistic research methods concerning modes of knowing, Learmonth and Huckvale (2013) examine what may be provided and prompted by working from deductive and inductive methods. They conclude as follows:

Deductive reasoning can make the slippery and elusive behaviour of art glimpseable, and never quite graspable. Unchecked, inductive processes grow magnificent associative briar patches that can soon hopelessly entangle clear thinking. Spontaneity and discipline are as implicitly interdependent in art-based research as an art making: gardeners need seeds and secateurs …. (Learmonth & Huckvale, 2013: 107).

In closing by saying that artistic researchers can only have peripheral vision at best, we are reminded that this is similar to our experience in seeing shapes and patterns and problems and potentials just at the edge of our field movement. Our interest is not the image itself but knowing through moving artistically and by way of shaping moving methods and moving practices themselves: in, as, by and about movement.

There is a key opportunity for artistic research views on enacting making knowledge: a need for a far fuller and indeed exploratory and experimental engagement with knowing by movement and critiques of knowledge that are arrived at by moving. Slager (2015: 90) motivates for ‘Models inventing dynamic notions of mapping (or counter mapping’ able to communicate that the world is in the process of becoming fluid with open models for a “coming community”.’

One way we need to develop the notion of reciprocity further in working towards common methods with different horizons  is to move to include and move through the abductive or transductive in our making and inquiries. This is less a reciprocity between top down or bottom up methods but more a matter of identifying and enacting ways to MOVE through and across and between elements of a what is no less than a creatively infused, dynamic, unfolding methodological becoming. This is a matter of enacting and critically reflecting on not two but three relations: deductive, inductive and abductive.

In addition, and using movement to articulate a wider notion of extending choreographies as practices (that is as verbal and plural and dynamic), we suggest that these three modes of analysis and methods are related by way of their being transductive. This entails a move from the general to particular and the reverse and by association and allusion in abductive ‘logics’ and transdisciplinary assemblages. 

Given the title of the Amphibious Trilogies project with its focus on amphibiousness, concerning creative and critical methods we have adopted the notion of  ‘a transductive trilogy of kinetics of knowing’ to encapsulate the complex weaving of relations – needed and used and offered and only half known – through our investigations together.

. . . . . . . . . .

Allen P. (2013). ‘Art as enquiry: Towards a research method that holds soul truth’. In McNiff, S.  (Ed.). Art as Research: Opportunities and challenges. Bristol: Intellect. 11-18.

Brown, C. (2013). ‘Capturing the transient’. In McNiff, S. (Ed.). Art as Research: Opportunities and challenges. Bristol: Intellect. 221-228.

Carter, P. (2015). Turbulence. Perth: Puncher & Watman.

Learmonth, M. & Huckvale, K. (2013). The feeling of what happens: A reciprocal investigation of inductive and deductive processes in art experiment’. In  McNiff, S.  (Ed.). Art as Research: Opportunities and challenges. Bristol: Intellect. 95-108.

Levine, S. (2013). ‘Expecting the unexpected: improvisation in art-based research’. In McNiff, S. (Ed.). Art as Research: Opportunities and challenges. Bristol: Intellect. 125-132.

Morrison, A. (2017). ‘Design-Baroque-Futures’. 2nd International Conference on Anticipation. 8-10 November. London: University of London.

Papadopoulos, D. (2018). Experimental Practice. Technoscience, alterontologies and more-than-social movements. Durham: Duke University Press.

Richardson, L. & St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry.’ In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 959-978.

Slager, H. (2015). The Pleasure of Research. Ostfildern: Hante Cantz.


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.

Extending choreographies

In shifting from choreography to choreographies we wish to encompass ways movement may be placed more fully in focus in addressing pressing, emerging and demanding social issues thereby informing understanding and working with issues such as climate change, the Covid-19 global pandemic, and efforts to shape and meet anticipatory futures needs and their navigation. In addressing these issues in Amphibious Trilogies we drew on a variety of earlier publications and works, including some key ones of our own in arriving at an understanding of extended choreography as related enactments

For Amphibious Trilogies we continued with these as artistic ‘enactments’ but also as performative events through visiting, travelling and consulting amongst other movies in the world. When visiting Arkhangelsk in Russia, we became even more aware of the vast presence of nuclear power – civilian and military in the Russian arctic, at the scale of the particle to global geo-politics. While encountering such matters in a prior project called Future North based at AHO, in which we also collaborated, in Amphibious Trilogies our artistic and design practice orientation in addition needed views from the arts, for example, The Nuclear Culture Source Book edited by Ele Carpenter (2016).

In one of our posts here about a speculative design-artistic artifact entitled A dynamic relational terrella , we write that:

[…] To think about movement in today’s world in the context of climate emergency, or perceptions and practices of fake and trustworthy news, of the societal pressure and forces of migration, survival and sustainability, of a globe exposed to its own carnivorous actions. 

Exposure. Encounter. Enactment. Exposition. 

These are key terms we continued meet in such endeavours of our own and in published accounts of art and design in terms of social innovation, sustainability and futures. They also come to mean demanding and challenging things, and invisible forces, realised as nuclear technologies built on ridiculously long after lives in respect to human ones.

These terms and their modes of inquiry appear too in other domains and disciplines, in the Social Sciences but also the Humanities, where a diversity of  active and productive working is taking place to understand and meet these challenges. Concerning artistic practice, in the edited collection entitled Art in the Anthropocene. Encounters among aesthetics, politics, environments and epistemologies, Heather Davis and Etienne Turpin (2015: 3) position the diversity of contributions as

reaching urgently beyond its paginated form towards environmental concerns’ amongst others … [as] … an intellectual disparate structure, operating as a conceptual centrifuge for further speculation and future action.

As these artistic researchers talk of thinking with and through art, so too we think with and through movement in the complex contexts, systems and times of the Anthropocene, and that we are all implicated in its making (Davis & Turpin, 2015: 20). This is a ‘making as movement’ that occurs in landscapes, and through abductive and linked relations to other studies in which the amphibious, the Anthropocene, landscape and movement are articulated (see e.g. Ness, 2016; Pauwelussen, 2017).

However, in these serious yet creative ventures, there is little that explicitly and persistently conceptualises and articulates ‘movement as material and as medium’.

Behind an emergent movement praxis, stand published works on dance and choreography. Following on from key works on researching dance, performance and choreography (e.g. Fraleigh & Hanstein, 1999), in the past decade there has been a slew of book publications on dance, choreography and the body. This has included focus on body and writing relations (Rethorst, 2012), relations between choreography and the dancer (Poillade, 2017; Foster, 2019), choreography and embodiment and the contemporary dancer (Roche, 2015), embodiment and philosophy in dance and movement research (Katan, 2016), somatic aspects and change through movement (e.g. Fraleigh, 2015). Diverse views on dance and politics have also been circulated in a key edited collection (Kowal et al., 2017) as well as a critical reader on contemporary choreography (Butterworth & Wildschut, 2018).

However, seldom in these texts does one find mention of relations between the choreography, dance and the kinetic in the wider word (e.g. Birringer 1989). Rarely too does one encounter reference to research on movement in other disciplines. In ‘moving on’, this posed a number of challenges in working towards placing knowledge and practice in wider social and political contexts outside of the traditional stage and performance for gathered audiences. These too, as our colleague Snelle Hall (2018) observes regarding the doctoral work of choreographer Ingrid Fiksdal, may be understood in terms of kinaesthetics.

We have engaged in shaping a polymorphic space of opportunities to go further into, that is what Blades and Meehan (2018) term ‘performing practice’. We mention performative practice elsewhere in this website, in our presentations, as well as in related earlier projects and earlier projects and enactments. We encourage our colleagues engaged in movement based inquiry and choreographic practice and writing to join together and amplify their insights in a spirit of not just extended choreography but in what we term ‘extending choreographies’.

In doing so ourselves, we explore and offer some ways through which co-creativity may motivate and inform further studies on and through extending choreographies: pedagogically, collaboratively, expressively and analytically. Here our use of language is key. These multiple, individual and linked enactments are braided not separated, they stretch, veer, dive and surface, they pause and query, judder and rush, all entangled in a needed set of purposive and improvisational moves, seeking to appreciate, understand, elaborate, share and engage.

This is just one indication of how our own views and values as well as the ways of realising and engaging with movement as material and moving practices emerged and multiplied.

As Slager (2015: 89) argues, ‘a non-paradigmatic artistic research explicitly requests an open, non disciplinary, delta attitude, and the insertion of multiple models of visualisation and interpretation.’

And we’d add movement.

. . . . . . . . . .

Birringer, J. (1989). Media & Performance: Along the Border. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.

Blades, H & Meehan, E. (2018). (Ed.). Performing Practice: Sharing dance and choreographic practice. Intellect: Bristol.

Butterworth, J. & Wildschut, E. (2018). (Eds). Contemporary Choreography. A critical reader. (2nd edition). Abingdon: Routledge.

Carpenter, E. (20166). (Ed.). The Nuclear Culture Source Book. London: Black Dog Publishing.

Cunningham, M. (1952). “Space, Time, and Dance.” Transformation 1(3): 150–151.

Davis, H. & Turpin, E. (2015). (Eds.). Art in the Anthropocene. Encounters among aesthetics, politics, environments and epistemologies. London: Open Humanities Press.

Dunagan, C. (2018). Consuming Dance. Choreography and dance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Foster, S. (2019). Valuing Dance. Commodities and gifts in motion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fraleigh, S. (2015). Moving Consciously: Somatic transformations through dance, yoga, and touch. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Hall, S.(2018). ‘Kinaesthetic transference. Production of presence’. In Fiksdal, I. (Ed.). Thinking Alongside. Oslo: KHiO, 57-64.

Katan. E. (2016). Embodied Philosophy in Dance: Gaga and Ohad Naradin’s movement research. London: Macmillan.

Klien, M. and Valk, S. & Gormly, J. (2008). Books of Recommendations: Choreography as an aesthetics of change. Limerick: Daghdha.

Kowal. R, Siegmund, G. & Martin, R. (2017). (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Dance and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Leon, A. (2020). ‘Between and within choreographies. An early choreographic object by William Forsythe’. Dance Articulated (Special Issue: Choreography Now), 6(1): 64-88.

Pauwelussen, A. (2017). Amphibious Anthropology. Engaging with Maritime Worlds in Indonesia, PhD thesis. Wageningen: Wageningen University.

Poillade, F. (2017). Unworking Choreography. (Transl. Pakes, A.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rethorst, S. (2012). A Choreographic Mind: Autobodygraphical Writings. Helsinki: Theatre Academy Helsinki, Department of Dance, Kinesis 2.

Roche, J. (2015). Multiplicity, Embodiment and the Contemporary Dancer. Basingstoke. Palgrave Macmillan.

Rothfield, P. (2017). ‘Experience and its others’. In Attiwill, S., Bird, T., Eckersley, A. Pont, A., Roffe, J. & Rothfield, P. Practising with Deleuze. Design, dance, art, writing, philosophy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 120-161.

Slager, H. (2015). The Pleasure of Research. Ostfildern: Hante Cantz.


Click & Drag: Rotate the view.
Right Click & Drag: Pan the view.