12. Informal Sharing

The reflective discussions that followed our informal sharing marked a turning point for our expectations of participation. Tutors and peers reported that their strongest pleasures came not from participation but from watching us, especially in moments when our intimacy, trust, and choreography were most visible. This feedback challenged our assumption that participation was inherently superior. Rancière argues that spectatorship is not passive, since watching involves selection, interpretation, and connection to other experiences (Rancière 2009, p. 17).

Reframing spectating as an active mode of engagement shifted our understanding of the work. Rather than treating watching as a lesser experience, we began to recognize it as equally valid and less burdensome for our audience. We were relying too much on the energy and enthusiasm of the audience rather than embrace our roles as performers. Claire Bishop critiques the tendency of participatory art to be judged by the intensity of its participants, effectively shifting the “work” of art-making onto them (Bishop, 2012). This new orientation prompted us to offer more aesthetic value as performers rather than on the subjectivity or effort of the audience.

We also received fantastic feedback from our mentor Charlie that the catwalk scene was a highlight. It was a strong set of images that allowed the audience to understand the influences and aesthetic flavor of our piece. They pushed us to go further with the catwalk and to create things that “we have never seen before.” If we are going to do a strange and surreal catwalk, then we wanted to do it to the max. This prompted us to take our catwalk characters further and create a burlesque sequence with each. We were also motivated to tighten up our choreography.