 This is the one, this is for the last section of our conference. The one that should go up, it's called Welcome in Address. Gotcha. Okay. Yes. This one. Yes, correct. Thanks. Got it. Okay. Let's try that again. This is for the last. Yeah. Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the networks mapping labor in theater and performance. DTSA Graduate Center, a graduate student conference 2020 presented by to you by the PhD program in theater and performance at the Graduate Center City University of New York. My name is Rachel Dong and I'm a PhD student in the program. This is the conference organizing committee, Taylor Colbert, Mayura Kashi, Alex, Victoria, and myself. I want to first thank Professor Shannon Jackson, Professor David Severin, and all the presenters and moderators for kindly joining us to make this conference possible. I'm extremely grateful for the tremendous work you have done, and we are all excited to hear the work that you're going to share with us today. We also want to thank the Cohen Fund, the Roberts Fund, the Lotel Fund, the Executive Officers Fund, the Martin E. Segal Center, the DTSA, and the doctoral students council for the support for this endeavor. We also want to thank Howround, especially VJ Matthew and Thea Rogers, for your help, patience, and the warmth over the past month. It would be impossible to put together such an unusual conference without all your generous support. And again, we thank all of you with our full hearts. Next, we want to thank all the audience for tuning in today from your living rooms, bedrooms, kitchens, or hallways. It means a lot to us and gives us a purpose here during this difficult time. So we invite you to join our live Q&A session after each panel and the keynote speech, and you can participate in three ways. First, you can post your questions as comments underneath our Facebook live streaming. Second, you can tweet your questions at Howround's official Twitter and use the hashtag networks 2020 so we can track your questions. You can private message us on our official Instagram, and you can find us at Ph.D. Theatre Grad Center Q&A. And in light of this current crisis, our conference organizing committee redistributed part of our budget towards donations. If you are able, we encourage you to do the same. There is a link, sorry, there is a link on our Howround page where you can find a non-exhaustive list of organizations working for people in need and other resources for artists who are struggling. Thank you so much. Next, please welcome Professor David Severin, distinguished professor at the Graduate Center Q&A. Thank you. Can you hear me? Let me welcome you all to a conference that has become utterly different from the face to face encounter originally planned. Living in unprecedented times, we face unprecedented challenges in almost every aspect of our lives. And rather than postpone, a conference whose subject has become increasingly urgent, the planning committee has wisely decided to move it online. So, how do we analyze and theorize the negotiation between seen and unseen labor at a time when these relations have been wholly transformed? How do we talk about offstage labor when theaters everywhere are shuttered and on stage labor has been disappeared? When the relation between the visible and the invisible is constantly being reworked? When performing artists are among those most devastatingly impacted by the drying up of employment and termination of contracts? When live performance becomes screen performance? When cams and mics are indispensable props? When pre-recorded videos are connection to a once real world? Musclead from now on used the past tense in talking about the theater. I want to express my deepest gratitude to the graduate students who have dedicated themselves to making this conference happen. My thanks to all the other participants for sharing your labor, and especially to keynote speaker Shannon Jackson, whose scholarship has been so tirelessly dedicated to the analysis of the work of art of knowledge production of pedagogy and of social practice. Before relinquishing the mic, I want to steer your attention to what for me has been a lifeline. The streaming of countless full productions from the archives of German theaters and opera houses. I sing the loud German language theater because it is a primary area of research for me, but more important, because it has long been distinguished by its relentless reflexivity. It is a timeless reconceptualization and restaging of the process and the politics of making and receiving art of the relationship between stage and backstage live and mediated. If I were doing a paper today. I would speak about director of Russia whose productions are so movingly about the work of making theater. When I say movingly, I mean that quite literally, in that all his productions are set on constantly moving stages, employing either gargantuan treadmills or turntables or both. Forcing actors always to walk or sidle or March stages their bodies as engines whose sweat tears gas and the spittle represents the surplus labor that both lubricates and threatens to obstruct the machinery. I especially urge you to tune into YouTube to watch his overwhelming void sec, perhaps the or textual indictment of the exploitation of the working classes. If those are the link serve should be in the chat stream. In the meantime, I invite you to sit back and join me in collaborating with colleagues in what is perhaps a new kind of theater whose walls may be electronic, but whose conceptual boundaries are limitless. That was really beautiful. And our first panel will start at 1120 and we will take a short break. Thank you guys. Thank you. Okay, welcome back everyone here as our first panel labor and a sociality. So I will hand over to our moderator. Ashley. Okay, here you go. Hi everyone. All right, I am unmuted. Welcome to this exciting conference. Thank you again to the fabulous organizers and the wonderful David Savrin for his fantastic remarks. We're going to jump in and get started with our first panel, it is labor and sociality. We have our first presenter. We have three fabulous papers. Extraordinary scholar practitioners, our first presenter is Tim Reed. Tim is an artist and he's presented work in Los Angeles at Pam Residencies machine project highways, lax art and human ideas as well as links hall and the chicken coop contemporary as part of Pika's 2018 TBA festival. He has been an ensemble member with the neo futurists in Chicago and God awful National Theater in Los Angeles, and a curator at Pam Residencies, and an editor with Tim Reed. He has a BA from the University of Chicago and MFA from Cal Arts and Writing, and in the fall will begin working toward his PhD in performance studies at NYU. The paper he's presenting today is entitled clowns and fungibility fungibility, the bird of the birthday of the birthday party clown. And if you have any questions, please go on Twitter and hashtag networks conference, and we will be able to participate you'll be able to participate in the Q&A after so Tim, the floor is yours. Great. Thank you, Ash. And thanks everybody for for putting this together. Let me see I'm going to share a screen. Okay, here we go. So yeah, this paper is called clowns and fungibility understanding the birth of the birthday party clown. In World War, on the other side of the Atlantic, there were parallel attempts to corral the image of clowns. These figured competing sorts of copyright. In England, an informal norm space register was made a portraits of clowns painted on eggs, while in the United States, an out of work actor Larry Harmon license and franchise the character of Bozo the clown until there are hundreds of different clowns who look virtually identical on local stations across the country. Together, these two histories give an approach to the degraded figure of the birthday party clown, which appeared in the 1960s and 1970s. A set of anxieties attend that figure, and its intimacy to the nuclear family that have led more recently to its deployment as a character of horror. How did clowns get into homes in the first place. It has something to do with the talent of clowns for imitation, and their ongoing attempt to be original. Bozo was an English chemist and clown enthusiast 1946 he founded the International Circus Clowns Club. To honor members he painted their made up faces on hollered out chicken eggs. Clowns of a certain ilk, primarily event clowns hired on an individual basis, rather than circus clowns to worked on contracts could now protect their personas as quote, the register created a durable archive of clown makeup designs, preserving the art form for posterity. Overseeing the archive bolt confirmed the uniqueness of each clown. In excess of the individual clowns depicted the clown eggs have enjoyed their own sort of history. Since bolt, three other enthusiasts have revived his practice of painting the portraits on eggs. Newspaper articles over the years tell the story of this register as it moved from bolts private collection to a restaurant in London to a museum and wookie hole near Somerset, where most of the surviving eggs have lately been kept and are on display. In 2017, a small photo book was published, which showed many of the eggs and gave quick stories of the clowns depicted. However, the book coincides with the definite waning in the membership of the English Club now renamed clowns international. In the last several years the club has admitted only one or two members per year, and the membership is mostly older performers. A pair of American legal scholars, David Fugundez and Aaron Perzanowski have written on the clown egg register and the way it maintains an informal form of copyright. Ostensibly, or so the clubs members have argued the register functions to uphold the quote on written rule within clowning that no clown should copy another clown's look. Curiously, the article finds that the exclusive property function is not especially operative. There was on record only one incident where a clown was encouraged to change their makeup based on a previous design. The whole register sometimes seems like a curious imitation of copyright laws, as if this group is amusingly trying on the guise of state guaranteed ownership. It is a bit of a performance itself, which speaks to a particular a peculiar contradiction, how my meat basis and copying may actually be what's proper to clowns. The author show. In addition to the exclusive rights regulations, how the register serves non exclusive functions which operate to organize and identify the members. The clown egg signal cultural historical value and professional quality foster a sense of belonging and prestige and promise some posterity. The article states that in some sense that quote in some sense, the register offers clowns the promise of immortality. The promise of course is different from delivery, but that promise refers to a part of the register that for goodness and person. Dowsky don't spend a lot of time on the eggs themselves. What if I wonder the register was considered as a form of performance documentation. Philip Ausländer's claim that quote the act of documenting an event as a performance is what constitutes it as such and quote suggests documentation always does more than it seems to function the documents themselves perform specifically by their decay and the ongoing threat of their disappearance to understand where these clowns come from the couple hundred painted on the shells. It's necessary to dig under the makeup and look at actual eggs, the materiality of the medium must be consulted. It is the thinness of the surface of the eggs, this membrane that somehow both like skin and bone and their fragility that enables the collection to perform. The set of eggs and their attempt to communicate a history produces an idea of clown, perhaps even a theory that continues to proliferate. My research is ongoing. It's no doubt harder given the current conditions. I've gone to the store of course, and looked at the various eggs by the dozens and half dozens. I've looked at their different sizes and colors. I've talked to my friend Caitlin who lives in Brooklyn and has three chickens, Norma, Lucy and Nadine. Norma who is lowest in the pecking order and has to be kept in a cage separate from the other two makes the largest eggs which are beautiful blue. I spoke to a artist in Portland who runs a gallery in a chicken coop called chicken coop contemporary, which Ash mentioned where I once performed a play and was interrupted in a poignant funny moment by a chorus of screeches and clocks. That artist Shree described to me how the chickens regard him, but even more his wife Anna and their daughter Lily as the rooster. I spoke with my teacher, Alex, who during this quarantine with the kids at home, ordered a set of chicks whose different breeds they picked out online from Cackle hatchery in Missouri. The chicks arrived in a box, and they'll raise them to lay. One of the clown eggs protect against is so the story goes what happens to bolts original eggs painted it in London they were kept at a restaurant after bolts death but in transport a number were crushed. It's easy to imagine how from then on the portraits were painted on ceramic eggs meant to look like chicken eggs. A number of the destroyed originals were remade and clowns from other past eras were added. So, the claims to originality, as well as the appearance of fragility even of hollowness are all part of the play in giving this appearance though the register upholds and transmits a particular sense of clown, which goes back to the English clown Joseph Grimaldi, famous at the beginning of the 19th century, who popularized the stock character of the clown in British pantomimes. He established the white face of the clown and a makeup pattern which later clowns emulated and responded to the register refers back to Grimaldi as its Archon and also any egg holds the potential for Grimaldi's return. This all begs the question about which came first, the chicken or the egg. It is a very pre-sacratic kind of question about an anxiety of origins of arriving at origins. The clown egg register attempted to settle that somehow to locate an origin in a cultural history, while the norms account for an order within this group of clowns they do not account for the relationship of this idea of the clown to the public at large. When the clown egg register caught on as an item of popular interest, it gave them a performative force that could then be drawn back to organize this group of clowns. If only clowns cared about the register, it would do no work. The consolidation of these clowns was primarily, I believe, to assert this theory of clown toward off another era that would take the screen as its surface. In 1946, the same year that Bolt began painting his eggs, Alan Livingston of Capital Records created the character Bozo the Clown for the first read-along record. A picture book accompanied the record where a clown's voice led the listener. It was voiced by Pinto Colvig, who was also the original voice for Disney characters including Goofy and Pluto. Bozo at the circus was a hit, selling over a million copies and beginning a series of read-along records. The clown became the mascot of Capital Records and was known as Bozo, the capital clown. Its popularity led to a local TV show in Los Angeles with Colvig in a starring role in a number of promotional appearances. Demand was high and additional performers had to be hired for these events. The third person hired to play Bozo was Larry Harmon, an aspiring actor and musician who after serving in the U.S. Army during World War II had moved to Hollywood from Ohio to pursue his dream of being an entertainer. Harmon eventually played Bozo in a 1952 TV pilot called Pinky Talks Back. It was not developed into a series, but feeling some power by inhabiting that character, Harmon sensed an opportunity. In 1956, with a group of investors, he bought the rights to Bozo. He developed a series of cartoons and slightly changed the hair and costume of the live performer to better match those cartoons. He used yak hair to make the orange wig go straight out from the head and added three big white cotton balls to the front to the blue suit, adapting a touch inherited from the classic 19th century French clown Piro. In addition, he changed the name to Bozo, the world's greatest clown, likely after Al Jolson, his hero and icon who was known as the world's greatest entertainer. Having made these changes, Harmon began to sell the character to local TV stations across the country. It was this act of franchising that fundamentally changed the way that clown functioned and displaced the model which the clown eggs had tried to preserve. It altered the economics and controls by which a single individual could marshal and control the proliferation of clowns. As Harmon wrote in his memoir, I would start Bozo locally and then franchise the show like a restaurant chain or a play after it leaves Broadway. Harmon claimed to have trained over 200 separate entertainers to play Bozo. At one point, he claimed there had been over 180 concurrent productions happening at local stations across the country, including additional shows in Brazil, Thailand, Mexico, and elsewhere, each having their own live audience of local children. At some point, even Harmon, it seems, realized he was part of something he could not control. In 1965, he bought out his other original investors and claimed the rights to the read-along records as well, taking sole complete ownership of Bozo. He tried to make a single show that could be nationally syndicated and never caught on. At one point, the local Bozo tended to dominate. There was Bob Bell on WGN in Chicago and Frank Avruc in Boston. And then there was Willard Scott, later famous as the weatherman on the Today Show, who Harmon trained for the local station in Washington, D.C. After leaving that job, Scott was hired for an ad campaign by McDonald's and became the first Ronald McDonald in 1963. Bozo then was already reproducing on its own. In addition to this proliferation, and along with other shows made for children stations around the country, and along with other shows made for children, stations around the country also made and produced their own local clown shows, many premiering before Bozo. These included JP Patches in Seattle, Rusty Nails in Portland, Flippy the Clown and Colonel Clown in Hartford, Connecticut, and Willie the Clown in Montgomery, Alabama. It really does go on and on. Whereas the different local clowns with their different names could be told apart, not being part of the franchise. With Bozo, they really did all blur into the same and after time couldn't be told apart. The quote unwritten rules of clowning, which the clown egg had perhaps coyly tried to assert had been supplanted by the legal and state supported laws of copyright. The memoir Harman Bragg backing himself up with the literation quote that he really could clone a clown. One way to state the difference between the English and US model is that with the clown eggs there is a body and performer at the end, the arc figure of Grimaldi holding the symbolic space inside the egg and so giving some animation to the design painted on the egg. Whereas for Bozo, there is no body or performer underneath the makeup or the gunk as Harman called it is a ceramic egg, simply a body of laws. The image is reproduced endlessly and just needs a body or life so the image has a screen to project itself on. This is the situation which makes the birthday party clown possible and a little unnerving. The performer simply steps into the place of the commodity. Alongside the cake and balloons and toys there's this other thing, and that thing is alive. Marx writes quote, as soon as it emerges as a commodity, it changes into a thing which transcends sensuousness. It not only stands with its feet on the ground but in relation to all of their commodities, it stands on its head and evolves out of its wooden brains grotesque ideas, far more wonderful than if it were to begin dancing of its own free will and such is the life of a true entertainer. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you so much, Tim. That was fascinating and I really appreciated your images as well. Once again, a reminder to anybody who's just joining us. You can ask questions of our panelists on Twitter at towel round with hashtag networks 2020. There's also Facebook live and Instagram. We're now going to move on to our next presenter, who we paying we paying completed her MA in theory and literature at the University of Lisbon in Portugal and MA in theater and performance studies at State University of New York in Buffalo. This is the director her recent environmental work, Nietzsche goes bananas here, premiered in July 2018 at the Museum of contemporary art in Shanghai, who is research explore spectatorship, participatory art and digital humanities. She presented at national conferences on theater, dance and cultural studies. Her paper is entitled the commitment and commitment return in remedy protocols remote Macau. Thank you so much. Yeah, thank you. So on this paper, this conference paper actually is to rise from my past articles. So, but now I'm still on kind of like smashed down it and making an another article. I'm looking for another performance, which has the same parameter and I want to do a comparative study in terms of talking about the race digging in interactive and participatory theater so I'm really looking forward to your feedback and comments. Yes, so remote Macau derives from remote Mac remote acts, a theater project created in 2013 in Berlin by remaining protocol as the official website indicates as means different city quotes as the project towards from city to city. Each new site specific version views a pound the geometry of the previous cities and quote. I consider remote acts to be a theater theorist that is always been adapted or even updated, but each iteration is not a commodification towards perfection, because different version are strictly dependent on the city's infrastructure, transportation, urban planning, public policy and among others. Every version is unique and non reproducible remote Macau is a Macau version created in 2017 adapted from the original archetype remote Berlin in 2013, as well as the previous cities version. It is a site specific version in for an off the city Macau and remote Macau. The stage is the city itself there are no training life actor who are prepared to perform for the audience member, given the pair of hat film around 30 audience member and I are directed by the voice to wander around downtown Macau, in terms of when to go, where to go, and even how to go. As one of the audience member, my experience is mainly dependent on the voice instruction. This machine live voice is available in three language, Mandarin, Cantonese and English, in which I chose the channel of English. I committed a voice through obeying almost every directed from it, ranging from staring at the photo on the tombstone, taking a selfie in the mirror of street corner, stage a running race in the school and dancing the commercial plaza. In one location from a Macau rooftop skyscraper, the voice releases optimal order to jump off this building. Obviously, nobody jump. However, this suicidal order suggests a kind of imbalance between my commitment to the voice and the commitment return. So in this conference paper, through an auto ethnographic lens, I examine it activation that urged me to keep responding to the voice, either in a sensorial or physical way. I argue that there is an other response feedback system that encourages spectator participant to keep committing to the voice without considering the immediate commitment return. I argue that the non-jump position still see shape well in the feedback system, but it clears the collapse of the system in itself. Lastly, I can see from Macau as a case study that could contribute to the discussion of race taking interactive and participatory theater. So before analyzing the feedback system, the voice itself needs to be examined in screenity. This embody machine like unnatural, creepy, this adjective burns out when I recall the voice in remote Macau. Actually, the voices quote, reconstituted from some 2500 words of previously recorded voice by software that risked to the blind end quote. The voice experience a gender transformation throughout the performance. It was female at the beginning, turn into a male in the middle and remain so until the end. However, the categorization of other is dependent on the location rather than a gender. What interests me is that, either well by a female or male persona, the voice maintains self as subject who could motivate and activate a spectator participant to respond to his other quote. I have no lips, I have no mouth, I have no head and quote the voice exclaim. The voice does not intend to hide its ontological ambiguity. This machine like whisper, this haunting murmuring is somehow difficult to capture in the now is on packing feelings where it live in this vanish presence. The voice become itself through the experience. So from the perspective of the ambiguous voice, how does this infameral, fleeting existence interact with the living people in an active way. Besides a supportive and caring role it plays such as that guiding through hazardous roles offering reminder about the car flow and sometimes anticipating the waiting second of the traffic like. What is the essence of the activation rendered by the voice that eventually push all the spectator participant to a risky ending. In the book reality is broken why game make us better and how they can change the world game designer and performance scholar Jane McGonigal introduced a powerful feedback system of games, which is capable of absorbing people's intensive concentration and maintaining their motivation to play in games. For Jane, the feedback system is a promise for the player which has two key elements. First, it always has a clear goal. Second, it indicates actionable next steps. James analyzed on feedback system sheer slide on all the response mechanism in remote Macau. The ordering remote Macau include every direction from headphones such as 100 degree turn right, raise your left hand, sit on the floor. This straightforward directive are concrete and clear specifying the spectator a series of actionable next steps. Given this, the spectator participant are easy to follow and capable of accomplishing every small task. In doing so, they endow with a strong sense of agency and a possible feeling, sometimes even an optimism. They are rewarded by the positive feedback loop of the system and are prepared to tackle upcoming level of task. The concateness and clearness of the order are a guarantee of a motivation in remote Macau. Other times when the order seems to take time such as choose someone to have eye contact with or find one of your belongings that show your personality, the voice demonstrates patience and understanding, counting the seconds or playing music to ensure everyone in audience's collective fullest direction. In this circumstances, the slightly tougher tasks are not directly broken down into actionable steps, but its difficulty and flexibility is within a setable spectrum. Even though some of them fail to complete a task, they will keep engaging with the performance base because on the one hand, they are being rewarded in their previous completed action, and on the other, the essence of the feedback system is not about success in itself, but a powerful drive to succeed. Jane vividly explained that in a good computer game, the player are always playing on the very edge of their skill level, always on the blink of falling off. The falling failure is fun and enjoyable, and is what motivates the player with a better whole of success. Quote, winning tends to end the fun, but failure, it keeps the fun going. In remote Macau, similarly, even though some spectator failed to complete the tougher task, the state of being intensely engaged may ultimately be more pleasurable than even the satisfaction of winning. So the fun failure, I will make your theater experience unique rather than a proof of their capability in capability. They can of course try their best to complete every order emitted by the voice, but if they miss some of them, these failures are still fossil fuels that pump them up to continue to look at the feedback system. In some, either success or failure, both could be conceived as an activation that keeps them engaging in the performance. So the feeling of activation is concretized in two ways. One is a series of actionable next step, the other is a motivation to succeed in completing the step. Given these two reasons, as one of the spectator, I conceive myself becoming what our history and performance scholar, Claire Bishop, caused an active subject, a subject who is empowered by the experience of physical or symbolic participation. I embody an augmented perceived autonomy of self-governing and independent decision-making. Concretely, in any given moment during the performance, I can decide for myself whether to take out the headphone, listen to the voice, and respond to the otter. I can decide for myself the kinds and degrees of participation in performance. In the article, Audience Participation and New Liberal Value, Risk, Agency and Responsibility in Immersive Theater, scholar Adam Alston states that, quote, the demand made of audience to do something are stretch and magnify immersive theater, end quote. Although remote Macau is not a typical example of immersive theater, it still meets the criteria of what Alston mentioned as the audience demanding endeavor. In remote Macau, my magnified effort mainly results from two strengths. One is the augmented sensory, the other is the physical mobility. Considering the increased effort is significantly crucial to pinpoint or at least delineate what is the archetype of being a spectator. Only in doing so could we understand how much is increased or magnified. However, unlike other quantitative research in humanity and social science in particular in theater and performance study, it's not easy to articulate the alpha and omega of a particular model. That is why I take my embodied experience as a case study. I believe the commitment that I will articulate at length is extremely subjective and partial. On the other side, my empirical experience is also unique and unreproducible, which is not a face that resemble the whole performance but a valid entry point to approach a comprehensive picture of remote Macau. First, my commitment to rise from the augmented sensory awareness. As usual, in concurrence with what I do in my traditional mode of watching, I prioritize the aural and visual. Given this, I pay extreme attention to the voice in this order. Directed by them, I was asked to stare at the photo on the tombstone, watch a live show across the street and observe the passing commuter daily behavior. What differentiates spectating in remote Macau from that of the traditional theater is that I observe from within rather than watching from outside. I was in an experience of spectating. My five cents are activated with augmented sensitivity. With heightened sensory awareness, I can feel the temperature of the afternoon, humidity in the air and hear the unnoticeable sound from the street corner. I became what performance scholar Robin Nelson calls an experiencer. Who was characterized by the broadly visceral sensory encounter in spectating. Based on this experiential spectating, I take the initiative to do the meaning making rather than mere selecting, comparing and interpreting what is presented for me. In remote Macau, I made those random passing commuter into character and break them into a narrative. The sirens of the car and the rumbling on the local market, I incorporate into the background music for my character. The motive shadow of the tree, the vivid red in the banner and the trace of the rod at the bottom of the streetlight, a process of ready made in the story. The experiential spectating supported by my sensory involvement is what I commit to the performance as an experiencer. Second, my commitment to rise from my physical engagement. In remote Macau, as mentioned, there are no trained life actor who performed for us. Under the command of the voice, the spectator execute a repertoire of action. In other words, they play a character role directed and shaped by the voice. In a review of remote London, the critic Math Truman questioned, quote, who needs actor anymore. In responding to this, York, Karen Bowen, an artist who had worked with remaining protocols since 2005 said, quote, if there is a story to tell, why not let the people that experienced that story tell to themselves? And quote, given this response, the spectator with headphones on will ask by the voice to take on the role of actor and tell their own story in remote Macau. The reason for addressing the performer spectator autonomy is the pre-substition of the two. The performer on the stage in the conventional theater, comparing to the sitting audience member, are more likely physically active. In Josephine Moncon's turn, the traditional actor customarily take the responsibility of direct involvement through body and bodily movement, ranging from vocal expression to corporal action. Given this role setting in remote Macau, my commitment to rise from taking on the responsibility of a traditional actor. With every other, I embody an urge to respond to it, that is to take an immediate action. The action requires a certain degree of physical engagement. From the micro-skill, the engagement includes a not limited to walking, dancing, jumping and running. The body exhaustion reminds me of the labor within this physical engagement. From the micro-skill, the roof starts from the San Miguel cemetery and ends in the Sky 21 bar in the restaurant. The straight line distance roughly 0.8 miles between the beginning and ending point, but actual roof of the participants match more further. The nearly 90 minutes rolling in downtown Macau creates mobility, which attests to the physical investment of the performance. The bodily movement and mobility are how I respond to the voice in a physical way, taking on the role of traditional actor. Here we see an implicit ethical problem from the voice because it requires a potential bodily reaction and action, which possibly could be precarious. The system is cultivated and materials through the spectator participants' response, either in a sensorial or physical way. The commitment and commitment return are not the equation because not every commitment return is concrete and definable. The relationship between the two is more like an analyst's self-sufficient circle. The order before the final suicidal jumping suits well and not reach the system. However, the final jumping destabilizes and even disrupts the self-sufficient feedback loop. I now focus on the final jumping order and see where to pinpoint it within this other response system through two-distance perspective. From the perspective of the maker of the system, that is, the Rimini protocol and the local assistant director of Rimini Macau, the jumping is the last order in the performance and the performance moves to the end with the other jump off this building. The artist did not expect a response to the jumping order. However, the endeavor to prevent an immediate response to the order. According to an interview with the assistant director of Rimini Macau, he explained that in total, seven coordinators at a final location will on standby and guarantee the spectator participant were not going to jump off the building. Actually, there are five coordinators hidden in the audience group throughout the performance and there are two other one waiting in the final location. So for the artist, the jumping order was a scripted non-jump in Rimini Macau. From the perspective of the spectator participant, the final order is only many orders during the performance, such as move backwards, sit on the floor, take a selfie. It seems not to be an unusual one towards which the spectator participant would pay extra attention or consideration. They could decide for themselves whether to respond and to what degree they respond to the voice. Within the feedback system, what should be illuminated is that the relationship between the pairs of other responses is consecutive rather than causal. By this, I mean my response to the previous order cannot influence the next order given. The order from the voice are pre-recorded program like setting, which is independent of my reaction and action. My response to the voice will only influence my consequence modes and manners of response. In this sense, the other response mechanism is more like a change of order that looks forward to potential response. The point is not how do the spectator participant get to the motor jumping. The jumping is already there. It will be released as soon as the spectator participant arrive at a certain time space. The point is always how they respond to the voice. As mentioned, no spectator literally jump off the building. The inactive actions refuse to jump off the building is somehow different from the previous sensory as well as physical response. The rejection is a complete denial of the order rather than a lower degree of engagement and participation. Rejecting to jump off the building declares a collapse of feedback system. The spectator's participant's vulnerability and self-blame resonate assistance breakdown. After all, no commitment, no commitment return. Thank you. Thank you. That was fascinating and insightful. Thank you so much for that. And welcome to our friends, scholars and practitioners and students and everyone else who are joining us from around the world. If you're just tuning in, you can ask questions of our presenters on Twitter at how around hashtag networks 2020. You can also ask questions on Facebook live and on Instagram. If you go to the PhD department, CUNY Graduate Center's PhD in theater department, you can send messages. We have one more presenter in our section. I'm going to introduce Cara Novella. She's a performing artist, researcher and doctoral candidate in performance studies at UC Davis working at the intersection of socially engaged art, dance, improvisation, installation, visual poetry, and performance art. Insisting in movement practices and material textures, her work bundles health and politics and takes form in workshops, community process based events, performances, site installations, sensory, more than human explorations, texts and teachings. She is the creator of Onco Girls 2011 ongoing and multi-species platform co-sensing. Her paper is entitled on co-creation, a practice-based interrogation on labor and socially engaged performance. Cara, thank you so much. The floor is all yours. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ashley, for your introduction and for everybody for your hard work putting this conference together. And thank you all for being here. Barcelona, May 2013. I reunited a group of eight women and queer folks to make a performance about our cancer experiences. It was the first Onco Girls creative residency, a project that I launched in 2011 to make cancer performances with others. On the first day of the rehearsal, we all shared our cancer stories and some of its pains. Through the conversation, we discovered that we all had, in one form or another, been put aside of living. Our doctors had enacted variations of the advice now, place your life in a parenthesis and only care about your health. As an initial stage to the creative process, we came up with the question, what are we waiting for? And for over a month, we moved with the notion of waiting. In the rehearsal sessions, we uncovered and shared the intimate pains of the disease, particularly the pain of having our bodies handed and passed as mere objects. The rage of having others beside on and excites us from our desires, the trauma of isolation, and the aches of having to set a life aside. Throughout the process of making the performance piece parenthesis, we animated new cancer questions, touched and moved each other with care, and engaged in a larger than ourselves process of creation, where we transformed the waiting into engaged curiosity and joint creation. Despite I had been doing work on health, performance and social change for a few years by then, in the making of the piece parenthesis, I realized of the potential in rehearsal. Even though it was a rehearsal for a performance, the rehearsal itself turned into a change process. Imagine this. You are one of the participants in the creative process. Instead of diagnosis prognosis and prescriptions of medical treatments and protocols. You are invited to ask the questions that matter to you, and to take a field trip into your process of change are given the tools for attending to the physiological transformations and for noticing that many bodily processes happening. Your bodies are not attacking you, but are in tune with and responding to ecological conditions and generating profound social change. This invitation even extends to people and friends who also care about cancer relations. Breaking isolation. Imagine you are invited to actively participate in a process of joint discovery where not knowing becomes a platform to play with expectations or even a space of relief where moral social family labor sexual medical dot dot dot obligations are softened release turned upside down. That uncertainty is not to be treated, but embraced as a space as a space for engage curiosity and play. This is what rehearsal can offer to people living with cancer. And let's face this. There is no escape. We are all already living with an alongside cancer. Taking Michelle Murphy's concept. We are already living altered lives. Besides the increasing numbers of cancer incidents in the world. cancer has spread into our existences as a material metaphor for the worst. A kind of somatic relation technique of horror. And as a, as a mode of engaging health, toxicity, economics, research, and all kinds of live on earth through fixed notions of hope and fear. Trust me, as a person who has been in the oncologist office more than one. I know that neither this kind of hope or this kind of fear are allowing for living and dying well. We might as well fight for changing the kind of relations possible and then with some of the pains of cancer and certainty. Who knows, even with some of the causes. While cancer is recognized under the umbrella of disability as theater scholar and cancer activists brilliant level notes in terms of activism and mobilization mobilization cancer and chronic illnesses are still mostly confined to the medical individual model of disability. Where open quote, it continues to be seen primarily as a personal problem, afflicting individual people, a problem best solved through strength of character and resolve and quote. And cancer performances. Lovell says, for the most part, an individual experience in cancer performance, an incipient pool of scholars looking at cultural texts and art and performance works. Engage with the solo pieces as both dealing with individual issues and also aiming at critical engagement with discursive structures. I hope to contribute to this pool of performance scholars by looking at rehearsal and joint cancer performance making to move from an emphasis on performance to rehearsal. And to the literature, literature on socially engaged practice. Despite the divide between social disruption and social bone present in current social practice debates performance scholars performance studies scholar Shannon Jackson proposed to attend to how our practices contribute to processes of interdependent social imaginative aware that many critics mistrust feel good collaborative performance as lacking social antagonism. I hope to contribute a situated situated practice in cancer performance making that offers a both and response where co creation, and it makes a soft mode of social antagonism. This piece is a is part of a chapter of my practices research dissertation in which I articulate the main principles and practices of rehearsal as method. And I asked, how does rehearsal as method engage individuals in joint exploration and creation of new cancer relations, while making performance pieces. What are some of the practices and principles, how and why they work. I will me, I will briefly mention them all now, but I will center the rest of this presentation on mostly co creation. First principle, I need score inquiry, not resolution. This principle aims to frame the whole creative process as an open and setting exploration that never aims to tell a story or find one only solution. This principle insists on ongoing curiosity and asks, what else throughout the process. It avoids jumping ahead the process with explanations of what the piece should be about and avoid suffocating other people's curiosity with projections and interpretations. Instead of aiming to find one solution, or to make one critique, this principle could also be described as keeping curiosity as enough. The second principle is ground in the somatic experience and always return to the body doings. The third principle of practice, I, it's transpose and I score it as moving somewhere else and see what happens. It's a mechanism that anchors the process as an exploration. And finally, the principle that I call on co creation. That is a pun, clear words with oncology and co creation. And I name it, let's do something about it and let's do it together. So co creation is an approach specific to the task of an individualizing and animating networks in response to the isolated and individual pure orientation of biomedical experiences. In response to the alienation of being separated from society, attending to co creation aims to do something about it and do it together. So the principle of production that anchors the process in the group through the practices to distribute ownership and nurture response ability. Over the years, I have developed some practices to further co creation, such as centering the groups question start with a potluck practice contagion and hold it all. Some of the practical challenges and institutional limitations to co creation later on. But now, what does co creation look like. Del por que me, al por que tantas, or from the way me to the why so many. This story follows the four stages of co creation in a multi city laboratory held in Spain. I had seen a group of people meeting in Faragosa addressed and opened up the question to cancer. Why me. I'm going to look at each stage of co creation. So the first one starts from their question or avoid being the sole researcher. I asked the four groups in this multi city laboratory to send a how question that they would ask cancer. I put all the questions and distributed them to other groups as a relational technique to connect the explorations across cities. The question posed by the organizer in Granada traveled to the group in Saragosa. Yet, instead of a how question will receive why me. A demand that centers the individual in origin cause stories. We embrace the challenge and took this question as an opportunity to create practices to open to more than one and soften the bounded medical individual. Number two, start with a potluck and share strengths, assets, locations, networks, experiences, or avoid being the sole producer organizer director. Everyone for the first time at Martha's apartment, Monica leticia be a Jesus Marta myself and Kevin, a Canadian choreographer and friend who joined this local exploration. We cook together, ate together and talk. We shared our stories discuss discussed the schedule and approach why me for the first time with a collective writing exercises. To the exercise, the image of a traveling nipple emerged, as well as many words and bashing rhythms that continue rated with us throughout the project. Monica leticia had been booking community spaces to rehearse and Monica brought the materials for our exploration. Leticia taught us to sign the sentence. I bet my nipple to grow. Practice contagion and shop authors infect each other diffuse borders or avoid being the sole facilitator dramaturg or editor. In the studio, Kevin, Kevin share some touch based practices, he called them the tenderizing score and moving with and away the touch as practices to soften the borders of our bodies. I shared a drawing practice as a mode for each of us to return to the group with what we notice without too many words. I did a jamming poetry exercise inspired by the work of Pocha Nostra with the images and words emerging from the previous touching base scores. Kevin and I designed a drawing session, a joint version of the inclusion score by our mentors Joe to meet Donna Harway and engage the nipple in the world and the world in the nipple. This inclusion practice is an exercise that unpacks objects and pieces open the economic economic technical political organic historical mythic and textual threads that open up its teachers and quote. This is very in says how we once we finished the inclusion score. And before we could move into a new somatic and movement practice, everyone starts talking about their own medicines. The self-preferential pool is extremely strong in current in biomedical. It's extremely strong in current biomedical dealing with life and death. In the national world, we had just opened up. We offered an impromptu humming practice in which a storm of spoken poetic images became the rhythmic background for an spontaneous alter making practice. Okay. For principle of procreation. Hold it all and avoid simplification. Or avoid being the salt storyteller. In the exercise, we aimed to compose a living image tableau with our cancer care objects and oncosanctuary to hold our experience. We started by making room in the studio for an alter. We had a piece of drawing that emerged from the inclusion score as a sort of headstand. Then we cleaned the floor, installed a red carpet as an inviting device to enter into our world and place a chair in the middle. Once we had the space ready, we collected all of our objects of care in the middle of the carpet. In the practice with a softened focus and a relational attention to the whole, we then yielded the touch score, moving with and away the touch into a gentle dance with objects while we post them all within the space. In a slow and lengthy and choreographed dance, we aroused an ecology of care and obligation that extends beyond the white me question. The realisation of bodily exposures that challenge how self and causality currently operating cancer relations and offer by posing a manifold composition a soft mode of joint and vulnerable resistance. So now, what can co-creation do or why co-creation? Marta shared these questions, now what? And from why me to the why so many in a fanzine that we made that collects images, scores, texts and reflections emerging from rehearsal processes in Sarajosa. I'm going to read Leticia's quote. This process started with the big question of why me, a question surrounded by fear and responsibility loads that this society brings upon us, diagnosed individuals. The time and bones built with people with own co-affinity has allowed me to transit new parts of trust, liberation and sorority with other bodies who also denounce the self-referentiality in cancer and other diseases. Now, other questions emerge. What is social responsibility? The political responsibility of those who immerse us in stress and productivity dynamics of harmful alimentation and polluted spaces. How will the medical system and the medical coverage coverage access to health evolve? Okay. So, as Leticia recounts how the process, the time and the bones developed, the center of the question towards a form of socio-political critique, while Marta's quote that I haven't read extends an invitation to the reader to join oncologist groups and work together until there is no trace of carcinogen products left on earth. What is in their studies? How the process of rehearsing together changes the focus from the why me question to an outward look into the world, a mobilization outward through being together. Trans feminist scholar Judith Butler writes about vulnerability as resistance in brief in reference to groups of activists taking the streets being exposed as a mode of resistance to recover the right to be in the street. She has also thought with disability poet and activist Sunayra Taylor on disability vulnerability as public space resistance. Thinking with them allows me to articulate own co-creation as a form of resistance where bodily and affective vulnerabilities are actually mobilized to resist the individualism and isolation imposed by cancer relations. Despite the spaces of joint performance making are not necessarily public squares and on co-creation mostly happens in the space time of rehearsal studio in attending to togetherness. Let's do something about it and let's do it together. We also occupy the material symbolic space of cancer of cancer land and entangle it with the world. On co-creation we thread a network of joint exploration that enables world cancer together differently. We break the spell of medicalization, enabling cancer performance to move into a kind of cancer activism. Some of the debates for either some of the debates for either social critic or social bone in the field of social engaged performance are grounded in assumptions that either reduce collaborative work to feel good monolithical critical and therefore easily instrumentalized or that reduce the political potentiality of art making to its antagonist capacity to raise awareness of larger discursive structures. In rehearsal as method co-creation is not only a feel good collaborative gesture but a formal and political experiment to resist the individual spell of current biomedical cancer relations. On the one hand, being together in a creative generative space is already enacting cancer socialities otherwise. Offering a joint response to the dominant biomedical and cultural expectations of individuals living with cancer. In this sense, on co-creation is somehow aligned with performative politics of protest and direct action as Shannon Jackson reminds us. On the other hand, a soft form of social antagonism also emerges through shared inquiry, a process that asks questions beyond individual bounded position and pure narratives that holds multiple and co-invocated realities without causing difference. To finish, these days, I am currently training students on methods for community performance and social change through Zoom. I pull from the lessons learned in a decade of joint performance making on living with cancer or what I call on co-creation. As I reflect on these lessons, a question that I become more and that is becoming more and more relevant is so what does cancer offer to rehearsal as method and to the field of social engaged performance. One of the most clear offerings in these times is a training on living through really high stakes of life that uncertainty. So cancer might be the death of shared exposure that turns on co-creation into a profound commitment to social change as a survival mechanism even. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you for your paper and for your work. That's really important, important socially engaged work and I'm excited to talk more about it and to take questions. We actually we have about 10 minutes now we're going to open up the floor to questions. Again, anybody for anybody who's joining us our friends around the world or scholars and performance friends. You can ask questions on Twitter. If you go if you hashtag networks networks 2020 at how round. There's also a live Facebook feed so I'm going to I'm searching all of the different social social media sites for questions as they come to me I don't see anything quite yet, but I do want to keep the conversation going. We have oh we have 15 to 20 minutes for Q&A. Thank you. So I'm going to just to keep the conversation going. I will ask the first question of questions for all of you but I hope others will join in as well and I'm going to keep encouraging people especially those who are just joining us to hashtag networks 2020 on Twitter, and ask questions in the live Facebook feed, and I will relay them to our presenters. So, Carl, I am so moved by your work. I'm thinking about vulnerability is resistance co creation is resistance and resisting individualism and isolation is all for me it's like this performance and co creation is resistance to capitalism and our internalized capitalism, what that does to us. On the personal level. Um, you know there's a lot of talk right now the whole world is talking about illness and isolation and we are turning to technology like, like at this conference to, to remedy some of that. How can technology play a role in like in your work that you've done. How could you use technology in the future to maybe engage people or engage people with cancer who are isolated, who might not be able to be, you know, be together in a, in a space. I'm similar now with COVID like how, how would you use technology or have you use technology can you speak a little bit more about that. Thank you for your comments and thank you for this question. Yeah, I am. Actually, I am currently using technology, as I was saying, on the one side I am training on how to build community performance and how to make community through COVID through students but also I have already been doing some, some online work. It's not live, not zoom live. But one method that that we've been already using is like scoring, like creating scores that we can pass on and other and others can like play with right so like it's technology. It's not only technology but also the scores as technology are could be considered as platforms as opening platforms to engage questions in a more playful or pleasure oriented manner. Yeah. So for instance in one of the laboratories on coalesce we created a series of scores for performing beyond medicalization. And those scores are already posted online, and they are a series of poetic images. And that invite to for it to for instance, transit the skin membrane. I invite, thank you for the opportunity, but I invite anybody who wants to think differently about isolation and illness to play with this score. What would be what would be transiting the skin membrane. How can we, how can you in your home, play with materials play with your space and your body and open up this score, make a piece shared with others shared through open up conversations. Game game spaces even. And I encourage also our other participants to jump in the conversation we can have, you know, we can be informal as informal as we can be on zoom but you know please also propose questions to each other as well. Tim, I have a question for you, just coming from one of the various social media outlets. I'm more about the eggs and actually I had written that down as well. I'm specifically interested in race and clown makeup and like how, you know, we're, how does race and form the makeup. Does it, you know, and speak a little bit more about the paintings of the eggs as well. I mean, I think, I think the eggs starting in England. Coming from this guy Grimaldi at the early 19th century. It began. You know there's this thing of the white face and like doing the white face and makeup hadn't always been a part of clown like it's not like a necessary part of things part of clown so part of what I'm tracking is. The how how makeup and the kind of face design became part of this practice like so much now that it's hard to imagine a clown in some way like whatever the traditional or kind of cliche version of clown without makeup so so absolutely it was like a white thing it's like the the makeup in the clown thing like that group is basically in England started as that and it became there's like a how to tell the story I mean in the 19th century there was kind of like this like clown was this kind of like high status guy and it was kind of like this a little bit authoritarian figure and it was white face no nose. And it became like a pretty, almost like a parody of kind of the, the, the high status. And then late 19th century like in the US you had the beginning of like minstrel sea and all that stuff which kind of bled into clowns eventually in the US. And then there started to be duos like a high status low status duo and that was the low status is often called the red. And it was definitely like racialized. And so in a way, and then it changed again. In the 19th century, but in a way the eggs were this kind of like retro move to kind of shore up a certain kind of version of clown from the 19th century a more traditional one that was aligned with with this pretty traditionally white figure and kind of collect folks underneath that. I mean then when it got to the US for sure. I mean, it was got to the US like these bozo figures were like almost all like these kind of burly white guys like a little bit big white guys and that became this kind of like standard. You know, the kind of matter that you can make and paint over that. So, yes, how's that. No, that's great. Thank you. And we, I was curious about gender and we were talking about the machine voices and the experiences of the spectator participants. I was just curious if you have thoughts around if they, it has, you mentioned that these, these machine voices didn't have a particular gender, if they were to gender these voices do you think how would it have informed the work. I kind of like tackle a little bit about the gender issue in this pieces but because of the length of this paper I kind of like cut it out. I can just address a little bit so actually there, you can tell the gender transformation from the beginning to the end it was a female was at the beginning and then turning to mouth and then remain so at the end. And it also like at the beginning of the performance. So the voice says, I will be your girlfriend in the future and at the end is the female voice that I will be the girlfriend in your future I will tell you which is fit, what color suits you. And it's the mouth voice that kind of like emits this on suicidal order to jump with John of this building. But as I mentioned in the paper, the order the categorization of order actually is a location based rather than gender based because during the performance, the female voice, the female personal also asked people to do dangerous things. For example, when we arrived in the old pedestrian bridge, and then the female voice asked us to jump, but I mean, it's just like that kind of jumping is not dangerous, but there are some passing commuter stop and stare at us. So and then for the male was also kind of like, provided with us a pleasurable point of view to look at the city. So actually I feel like I don't want to kind of like reinforce the gender stereotype in terms of like female of the nose, assistantship and care. And then the, the male means that it's dangerous and commands actually because the categorization of others not gender based. Yes, as you mentioned, making the female voice as default, it kind of like reinforce that. Okay, like, for example, like historically the job of a secretary or administrative are relegated to the women. But yes, but the gender issue, I don't think is that crucial in terms of the categorization of the other. Yeah. Thank you. And just again for our friends around the world who are just joining us or tuning in on social media. You can ask questions of our panelists at hashtag networks on Twitter and networks, sorry networks 2020 and at how round. We also have a live Facebook feed. Everyone's been quiet so I have a question for Carol. Yeah, so I was particular thank you for this amazing work I was so moved when I was listening and reading. So I was curious about because you mentioned rehearsal as methods. So I was particularly interesting about the way that you archive all the rehearsal. So can you talk a little bit about archive and repertoire in this rehearsal process. It's been 10 years of rehearsal practices so tons of journaling, tons of audio visual block so I'm talking about the material archive. It's like a block where I've been very bad to continue uploading material but there's even so in terms of archiving to me has been very important to upload. Only final pieces, final performances but snap snaps or parts of the rehearsals right so there's like in the block you can see which questions we had at some moment and which practice we would make to animate that question for instance. So, yeah, yeah. So is there is there one person take the full response of full responsibility of archiving everybody is participating. Okay, I took the full responsibility of carrying on with the block. But there's been many ways so okay I've just shared my way of like the archive that I kind of like have with me, but every participant in the, in the, in the project has had different forms so for instance, we made a fanzine in Saragossa. And that got so it's in. When you say responsible for archiving you mean to keeping it or to. Like, so I think it's the so because you kind of so there are some like quotes from the partitioner so I just wonder how does it work like are you doing interview with them or you kind of like propose a question and then you have a like, so how does it goes yeah. Thank you. So these codes that I shared where actually pieces, they're public they're like written pieces of the participants in this newsletter that we made in Saragossa, not this letter as in. So, yeah, so I've basically, for instance, this one video, some of the, so if I get quotes, they're like from public materials, most of the time. So it's, I have not been doing interviews, because I was not. Yeah, because I was really interested in the process. And, yeah, I don't know. Yeah, I have a, I have a question from we have a question from one of our faculty members, Erica Lynn, and this question is for everyone. All your papers deal in different ways with the way embodied action produces particular affects how much of that affect can and should be understood as labor, and what are the implications of understanding it that way. And thank you Erica for submitting a question. I guess my, I'll start and just say that maybe this connects to thinking a little bit of we in your like kind of walking around with the voice in the head and following those commands. And so maybe the way I'm thinking about the clowns or the birthday party clown is like it's this, there's this not embodiment and a bit of the labor is just like it involves everything like the whole body and like dragging the whole body around and then that produces. There's that, like when a body is in a place where a body isn't meant to be like how does that produce a kind of, how does that sort of disorganize a kind of social space, and then, and then the need to kind of like keep it together through that. And that kind of like ongoing practice. So, I guess, in that space like the affect is kind of like in the social relation and kind of what's needed effectively to kind of like keep some kind of organization or a, I want to say, not let it all fall apart and everybody kind of like run away screening. Yeah, thank you for your request question because this kind of like question keep coming back when I'm writing this drafting this conference paper because I was saying that I want to find another case study with the same parameters and put it together to do a comparative study in terms of the race taking interactive participatory of theater and in remote Macau the final jumping jump of this building is absolutely significant in that piece, but I mean, I think, in terms of considering the effect I think I should frame it like more like how to say to more be more concise of the turn actually in remote Macau that kind of race is on perception of race or is that perception of race or is a perceived race. So I think that should be on like articulately a length like that kind of race is not a concrete and how to say concrete objective being is a kind of like perception of race. Yeah. Can I ask a question about that moment. I'm just curious like your relation to the other audience members at that. Yeah, like how you like because you must have all like checked in like are you going to do it. Are you you know that was so interesting so actually before that a final jumping actually we we have done some like dangerous things during this whole process, as I mentioned in that old pedestrian bridge, we kind of like jump and then the bridge shape heavily for several seconds, although it's not dangerous for it's not actually kind of kind of produce an actual dangerous but there are some passing commuters there to us. But the thing is that we are, we left, we're checking with each other, and we enjoy this illegitimate pleasure. And I think that kind of like illegitimate pleasure make up keep committing to the voice until the final jumping scenario, and in that scenario, like, we're kind of like shocked. I was shocked personally and then I look at people next to me and then they're like have a question mark in their face, but I mean, nobody jump. Hopefully, yeah. So, yes, and so that is something very interesting at the final scenario scenario. I have a question that just came in and I think this might be our last question. Before we wrap up. This is from Joan it who is one of our PhD students at the Kennedy Graduate Center in theater and performance. And the question is, you, and this is for we, you previously mentioned that the instruction for the spectators were pre recorded and individually accessed by each spectator. My question. How do you see the conversation among spectators before and after the performance or experience sharing among them outside the performance itself. So does this contribute to their individual experience during the performance. Yeah, so I think I should be clarify one thing. Yes, the, the, the, the voice or the, the sound other this kind of series of other is pre recorded, but it was released manually. We have five coordinator hidden in audience group. So when we reach a certain place, the coordinator in the group would kind of like release the other. So it's kind of like, um, we are we can influence the emission of the others so the way that response to the others always only influence our different manners and mode of participation. During the yeah there was very good question so during the performance. There is a there are certain moment that the voice kind of want to separate a collective, and there are certain moment they want to reunion the collective they're definitely kind of the voices play with the activity and the individualism, but after that performance, I didn't contact the spectator participant in that. So I want the group the people that in in the performance that I participate with, but I kind of like doing an interview with them other other remote version I asked their experience. So yeah I didn't get any feedback from the audience member from the performance that I participated with. Yes. Thank you. And again, we're we're about to wrap up but I just want to thank everybody I want to thank the organizers of this conference. And especially our three panelists right now are for our first panelist Caro Tim, and we thank you so much for participating today. Thank you to all of our viewers at home everybody who's listening everybody who's watching this. It's such a difficult time right now and it's so wonderful and heartwarming that people can come and come together and have this space to exchange ideas and to present their work. Thank you again, and continue to continue to do really good work. And if you can and also be safe and healthy and take care of yourselves. And continue to tune into our conference today. Again, at hashtag networks network 2020 at how round. Thank you again. Thanks everybody. Thank you everyone, and our next panel will start in eight minutes.