SUBSCRIBE TO OUR MAILING LIST



index




    • postgraduate program
    • block 2022/I
    • BLOCK 2022 I 15 January 2022
      posted by: Lilia Mestre
    • a.pass
    • 06 January 2022
    • 30 April 2022
    • BLOCK 2022 I

       

      The first block of 2022 will focus on politics of space and on care practices. It is build around the framework of 'Poliset' facilitated by Vladimir Miller with focus on collective building processes within institutional environments to shift the relationship between practice, space and authorship towards commoning and self-organization. The framework of the Participants Assembly will bring curatorial input on CARE on the second part of the block.

      2022 I - BLOCK PLANNING + Opening week detailed program

      6 -14 January Opening Week (obligatory)

      Each Opening Week is the start of a 4 months block. It consists of the welcoming of new researchers; the presentation of the participants and their research, program, curators, dedicated mentors and a.pass team; and the re-setting of the collective working structure of a.pass for the next 4 months.

      The presentations on the Opening Week focus on [WHAT] are the research questions and their planning.

      → 6 January

      12:00- 17:00 Brunch + Welcome / a.pass introduction and round table / Spaces, codes, keys, badges  and digital tools

      → 7 January

      10:00 - 17:00 -  Block presentation (Poliset and CARE) / Speed dating around Research Community / preparation for participants presentations - explanation and planning

      → 10, 11, 12 January

      10:00 - 17:00 - participants presentations + mentors presentations

      13 January

      10:00 - 17:00 -  Lexicon + participants Assembly

      → 14 January

      10:00 - 17:00 - Code of Conduct, contracts and budgets

      24 January - 11 February a.pass Poliset 2022W4-6

      Study framework facilitated by Vladimir Miller

      27 -29 January End Presentations
       
      Ana Paula Camargo, Federico Protto, Nathaniel Moore and Túlio Rosa will finish the postgraduate program with End Presentations. 
       

      17 - 25 February Half Way Days (obligatory)

      Participants research presentations (HOW) focus on methodology.

      (Preparation days 17 and 18)

      7 - 11 March CARE practices

      Curatorial input proposed by the participants Assembly

      28 March - 3 April End Week (PAF) (obligatory)

      Participants research presentations (WHY) focus on content, context and criticality. This week we go to PAF - Performing Arts Forum in Reims, France

       

      People involved in block 2022 I

       

      Postgraduate Participants

      Aleksandra Boris, Carolina Mendonça, Amy Pickles, Chloë Janssens, Sarah Pletcher, Anna- Sophie Lugmeier, Asli Hatipoglu, Martina Petrovic, Martin Sieweke, Nada Gambier, Vera Sofia Mota

      Associate Researchers

      Gosie Vervlossem, Simon Asencio, Rares Craiut, João Fiadeiro, Vijai Patchineelam

      Dedicated mentors

      Every block has three dedicated mentors that support the participants research, the presentations and feedback moments. For block 2022 I the dedicated mentors are Anna Rispoli (artist, activist), Samah Hijawi (artist, researcher) and Jaime Llopis (dancer, choreographer)

      Study facilitator and guests

      The study facilitator for this block is Vladimir Miller (artist, researcher and a.pass research centre curator)>

      The Polist guest are: choreographers Christine de Smedt, Liza Baliasnaja and Theo Livesey, architect and CIVE publications responsible Tania Garduño Israde, artist Jozef Wouters and Decoratelier, activist David Vercauteren (tbc).

      Other guests will be hosted during Poliset in collaboration with all involved.
    • postgraduate program
    • block 2020/I
    • Zone Public
    • BLOCK 2020/I 20 December 2019
      posted by: Pierre Rubio
    • a.pass Brussels
    • 06 January 2020
    • 30 April 2020
    • BLOCK 2020/I

       

       

       

       

      a.pass post-graduate program for winter-spring 2020 follows the habitual form of three collective gatherings: at the beginning: the ‘Opening Week’, in the middle: the ‘Half Way Days’ and at the end: the ‘End Week’. These are collective workdays where, at large, all the artists and researchers both present their work and feedback on everybody’s research. The three distinct gatherings propose different protocols of presentations and modes of feedback. All protocols are discussed during the block. 

      The block includes as well Zone Public, a curated seminar-like series of working sessions dedicated specifically to this block and happening mainly on Thursdays and Fridays. This ensemble of proposals is designed by Femke Snelting, Peggy Pierrot and Pierre Rubio.


      January
      6-14 : Opening Week Days
      16-17 : Zone Public sessions #1
      23-24 : Zone Public sessions #2
      30-31 : Zone Public sessions #3

      February
      6-7 : Zone Public sessions #4
      13-14 : Zone Public sessions #5
      17-21 : Halfway Days
      27-28 :  Zone Public sessions #6

      March
      5-6 Zone Public sessions #7
      12-13 Zone Public sessions #8
      14-15 Zone Public sessions #9
      22-23 Zone Public sessions #10
      30-April 5 End Week at Perfomance Arts Forum (France)

       


      The artists and researchers participating in this block with their projects are:

      Chloe Chignell
      Signe Frederiksen
      Quinsy Gario
      Stefan Govaart
      Adriano Wilfert Jensen
      Mathilde Maillard
      Muslin Brothers
      Flavio Rodrigo Orzari Ferreira
      Magda Ptasznik
      Christina Stadlbauer
      Federico Vladimir Strate Pezdirc
      Kasia Tórz
      Katrine Turner
      Andrea Zavala Folache

       

       

       

       

       


      The dedicated mentors, curators, and artistic coordinator are:

       

                 Dedicated Mentoring

      Kristien Van Den Brande
      Kristien Van den Brande is a Brussels-based writer, editor, dramaturge and researcher. An ongoing interest in the (im)materiality, image and performativity of writing has characterized her work, which engages with a range of disciplines including literature, performance, expanded publishing, urbanism and sexuality. Inspired by ‘minor literatures’, she does ongoing research about 'Support de Fortune’, a notion that refers to forms of writing that take place in the margin of print or on throw-away paper. She is a living book and co-editor in Mette Edvardsen’s project Time has fallen asleep in the afternoon sunshine. Together with Myriam Van Imschoot she set up oralsite.be, an online platform for expanded publishing. Lately, she is gaining interest in role-play as dramaturgic, artistic, therapeutic, sexual tool "to undo the creature in us”. That latter was Anne Carson speaking.

       

      Vladimir Miller
      Vladimir Miller works as an artist, researcher, scenographer and dramaturge. His practice aims at re-negotiating habitual modes of spatial production by using fragility as a building principle. He uses collective construction- and building processes to investigate ideologies of labour and territory within ad-hoc groups and institutional environments. In his latest projects he works with the materiality of fluids to challenge ideas of stability embedded within the design of spaces of cultural production. Vladimir Miller has been a frequent collaborator with the choreographers Philipp Gehmacher and Meg Stuart. As scenographer, co-author, dramaturge and performer he took part or co-created a number of performances and video installations with the two artists. In 2018-19 he is dramaturge in residence at Decoratelier/Jozef Wouters. Vladimir Miller is co-curator of the postgraduate artistic research institute a.pass, Brussels and a PhD in Practice candidate at the Academy of Fine Arts, Vienna. In 2013 Miller was Fellow at Institut für Raumexperimente, Berlin and in 2015 Fellow at Akademie Schloss Solitude in Stuttgart. Vladimir Miller has been guest lecturer at the University of Hamburg and at KASK, Gent.

       

      Femke Snelting
      Femke Snelting works as artist and designer, developing projects at the intersection of design, feminisms and free software. In various constellations she has been exploring how digital tools and practices might co-construct each other. She is member of Constant, a non-profit, artist-run association for art and media based in Brussels. With Jara Rocha she currently activates Possible Bodies, a collective research project that interrogates the concrete and at the same time fictional entities of "bodies" in the context of 3D tracking, modelling and scanning. She co-initiated the design/research team Open Source Publishing (OSP) and formed De Geuzen (a foundation for multi-visual research) with Renée Turner and Riek Sijbring. Apart from mentoring at a.pass, Femke teaches at the Piet Zwart Institute (experimental publishing, Rotterdam).

       


                Zone Public Co-curating

      Peggy Pierrot
      Peggy Pierrot lives and works in Brussels. She works mainly with different associations and educational or research structures. Her most favourite tools are human sciences and free softwares. Since there are "profound links between gesture and speech, between expressible thought and the creative activity of the hand ", she is currently working at the Ecole of Recherche Graphique (ERG) both as a technical and logistical assistant and as a teacher in Media and Communication Theory. She is also involved in the master's program Récits et expérimentation - Narration spéculative. (Storytelling and experimentation - Speculative Fabulation) She gives lectures and workshops on Afro-Atlantic cultures and literatures, science fiction, media and technology and has an active practice in radio.

       

      Pierre Rubio
      Pierre Rubio works as artist, independent researcher and dramaturge. At large and through different forms, his work questions modes of individuation to explore contemporary production of subjectivity in/through the arts. What is real for an artist? is his main research question. Pierre was a dancer and choreographer for a long time, holds a master's degree in the arts combining theatre & communication at the campus of Aix-Marseille University (France) and dance & choreography at the campus of Centre National de Danse Contemporaine in Angers (France). Pierre is currently a core member, co-curator and mentor in a.pass - a platform for artistic research practices.

       

      Femke Snelting
      (see above)

       


                Artistic coordination

      Lilia Mestre
      Lilia Mestre (Lisboa 1968) is a performing artist and researcher based in Brussels. She interested in art practice as a medial tool between several domains of semiotical existence. Mestre works with assemblages, scores and inter-subjective setups as an artist, curator, dramaturge and teacher. She’s currently co-curator and artistic coordinator of a.pass where she develops a research on scores - Scorescapes - as a possible radical pedagogical tool. In 2019 - 2021 she’s collaborating with Prof. Jill Halstead and Prof. Brandon LaBelle in Social Acoustic - a research project supported by the University of Bergen, Norway. And with Nikolaus Gansterer and Alex Arteaga in Contingent Agencies - a research project supported by PEEK -Vienna, AU. 

       

       

      More information about Zone Public here

    • NOT_index
    • the oficial 3rd block "les belles infidèles"
      03 September 2019
      posted by: Caterina Mora
    • case of: Caterina Mora
    • Block curated by Nicolas Galleazzi called   here the link 

       

      Openning week

      I didn´t prepare this presentation, I was exhauted. The day of my presentation I did the interview for the Pdh. The jury made me a very good question: "which Translation theory are you busy with?" 

      I started to look into that.

      In parallel, I was convinced about continue working on transtalion, but I asked myself: what I am producing with translation? Another "system"? What is doing the repetition of ballet history telling? And the genealogy of reggaeton? 

       

      [gallery columns="1" size="medium" link="none" ids="9215,9216,9217"]

       

       

      The 13th I had a  mentoring session with one of the person who changed my life/practise. The same person which whom I realised that translation were more important for me than just something temporary. She transforms me. 

      The 13 th May 2019 emerged TRT                                Transversal Research Training 

       

       

      Half Way Days

      A first essay focus on methodology.

      Transoceanic reading --> the aim of this practise question how do we access to reality, how do we inform each other.

                                              Is looking for transunderstanding of transrelationships.

      The exercise --> (by two) : read at news from your context // share it // try to find relationship (or imagine it)

       

       

      Another residence

      Unlearning Center // Friburg

      Three experiences:     

      -1-  Practising change of roles (I use to be a "follower") and here I am guiding Nicolas.

       

      -2- Training TRT

      Two dance courses focus on these pairs: touch and be touched // look at and being looked // resist and rest

      -3- The adoptee --> How can the one being seen influence how to be seen?

       

      -----------------

      In parallel, I was living in a.pass, practising, repeating, enjoying apass time, 

       

       

      End presentation - PAF (in the church)

      Sharing/exposing/defending/confronting TRT       

      [gallery columns="1" size="medium" ids="9240,9241,9242,9243,9244,9245"]

       

      Here you can find excerpt of the script

      For the newcommers. We can´t find PAF in Wikipedia.               (Diego, querés cebar mate?)

      This presentation is my End presentation in PAF. It symbolizes many finals. Because study in apass was a dream. It was a dream change completely of context. It was a dream built discourse and practice in relation to another context and again comeback to my home context. So this final of the APass times is for me also the final as student in Europ, the final of use Apass technology,  apass spaces, apass budget, apass mentors, apass travels, apass cooking together, apass talking together, apass openning half and end week, apass cleaning together. And I was very anguished or sad because this end. And then Nicolas told me that maybe I could see that as a start. Immediately I could remember my psychoanalyst saying me the same thing when I was preparing my travel to come here. He used to tell me: 
      • Acabar para empezar.    // Projection: if I cry please cry with me or just wait. I will stop-    Comme dans toute relation sexuelle
      • End. Final. Finish to start. Para empezar, commencer.
      • apass changed me. apass modifies me, apass transform me (I am reapiting this from my second block).            Grand écart 
      • TRANSVERSAL RESEARCH TRAINING is a device that serves to conceive my artistic practice. It is an umbrella with transversal tools.
      • Transversal à  is busy with issues that go through or cross different practices.
      • The transversal things are linked to problematize power structures, conditions of production (entertainment, shift north-south),                     questioning authorship, problematizing the way of relate to reality. Those concepts intersect in the training.
      • Training à is looking at endurance process engaging art/life. As any training, is linked to a way of face knowledge in process education. As any training, is looking for preparing and contextualizing practice focus on elasticity, concentration, balance and  coordination of different task.
      • Research à this word is so full of meaning. It seems like the word “research” gives to the frame of “Artistic Research” another status. More powerful, more legitimated, as the word “art” wasn´t enough or wasn’t already legitimated. So, that´s why TRT is also busy with the critic of the device called Artistic Research. I am here in front of a paradox: I am engaging with TRT as a device to do Artistic Research that is also criticizing the device of Artistic Research. Esto acarrea un gran peligro, this brings me to another problem, that I will address later.
      • Inspired by migration for privileges, TRT is a fiction in which I believe. And that is why we are in a church, because religions are fictions in which we believe. Somehow, TRT is my religion and it preaches confrontation between high and low culture thought translation. 
      • TRT has an Ecosystem of methodologies à  "more diversity more stable", interdependence, respect symbiosis practise (or plant) -territory, non-hierarchy, is bringing the ghost, or at least, it is inviting others. This methodology is based on transactivity practise: transoceanic reading  / Training transession / Trust in nothing (rest) / Translation addressing gender (exchange of role) in dance / Transdocument
      • Let´s say that TRT is looking at the FUTURE, is looking for the future, is looking through the future. It is trying to prepare better conditions for my work. What are the RESEARCH needs?
      • It offers services in the “transtructure". Services as the thinks that provides utility (satisfaction) to the consumer. In the literal understanding of intangible services offered by people. TRT offers the following services: method / piece / body practise/ a way of engage information.                                   And transtructure in Marxist terms. All of us are aware of difference between superstructure and infrastructure? Ok sorry Marx I don´t want to simplify you. Superstructure and infrastructure  - Just in order to simplify this, let´s imagine that infrastructure is the base of a house and superstructure is the roof. I am using now the same schema that we use to study Marxism.                Projection: the marxism house for explanaition (..........................)   infrastructure and structure (...)
      • But how did I arrive to this? So for the ones who don´t know too much what I did, I prepare this resume that summarizes all the key words or the important things and concept which I was busy with. - La gran pregunta es: qué persiste?   Trough those key words we can see some persistence --> Presentation of THE Artistic Research by Google Translator VOICE please listen HERE
      • Artistic research -->   You (-.............................) white and pretentious, wealthy middle class, coffee adict, MAC consumer, residences dependient, travelling all the time in the same little continent. This is for you, even tough is incomplete, bastard, super cheap. Because I think you need perreo: enterteiment mamita. Si necesitas reggaeton dale, sigue bailando mami no pares, acercate a mi pantalón dale, vamos a pegarnos como animales. Muevete a mi ritmo siente el magnetism. Feel the magnetism. You, symptom of artist going to legitimation in academia. I am so busy with you. I am so in love with you. I love you x4. Why? Because you gives us power. And power is so fantastic. Power makes thinks beauty. And beauty leads violence. And all of you, artistic research, you are so incredible amazing.   
      • I am so stuck in this obsession  / Everything is dark now - Everything is dark now - its blank its blank -You can comment This is the think - Responder sexy body Sexy body RESPONDER x 2  - This is from another old good song. YOU. Slippery, elitist, contradictory, indefinable. Why I am so addict to you? / You are afraid to travel because it contaminates. You are creating phd and a lot of position for what? You have the challenge of modify academia and what are you doing for that? Nothing, you are doing nothing. You are reproducing the same patriarchal standard of virility. Orden y progreso. Order insubordination submission.   subject object subject object  subject object subject object
      • I want to catch you, I want to get you, I want to be as you. I bless you here with a new name --> I will call you: ortgasmic research
      • Seductive, I must admit that I am so scared. Scared of not being heard by you, of not enter your circuit. Ortgasmic research: what happens if you don´t love me? 
      • And why this is so untranslable?                                Projection: the untranslable are motors, not obstacles     Temps de flèche
      • Affects of TRT --> (..............................................) Feed back is coming / Gracias

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      A  FEED-BACK "emu", conmovido, casi sin palabras.

      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       

       

      End communication note:

      I choose to re-used the performance that I did at Kanal. That ´s why the presentation is called:

      "Pa-küru: 47 minutes of a bastard cheap lecture performance". 

       

      -----------------------------

      Interesting references: Donna Haraway last book / Marie Bardet about translation / Katie Briggs: This little art / The new code of conduct by Feminist Movement of Tango in Argentina / Sarah Amed (video) On complaint / Karen Barad: Transmaterialities / Sherry Simon again. 

    • project
    • Making kin - the web Nicolas Galeazzi
      19 May 2019
      posted by: Nicolas Galeazzi
      Making kin - the web

      'Troubled Gardens' are cultivated by making kin with the multiplicity of our research. We want to mingle, mix and merge different aspects of our researches into each other, so they create affinity, friends, siblings, partners, kids - kin. Donna Haraway proposes to make kin with things, species and other ‚companions‘ in order to web another "we" - an other idea of the social and with this a possibility to become-with our habitat than to colonise it. 

      The experiment in this block is to ‚adopt‘ aspects of someone else’s research and accept it as part of your own research. Adopting means taking care of someone else's, as it would be your's!

      During the opening week, we all have put an aspect of our research free for adoption and picked a basked with an adoptee to care for it and integrate it into the life of our research till the Half Way Days of this block. There we will set it again free and hand it over to new parents - who will care for it till the end week where the original parent will find their research aspect back, changed, part of the culture of another research and richer in experience!

      This cluster of posts shows the trajectory of the adoptees and the all new and old parents are invited to share and tell stories of their adoptees.

       
       
    • postgraduate program
    • workshop
    • The Adoption Project
    • Troubled Gardens
    • Making Kin the adoption project
      24 April 2019
      posted by: Nicolas Galeazzi
    • Nicolas Galeazzi
    • Zenne Garden et al.
    • 06 May 2019
    • 28 July 2019
    • case of: Nicolas Galeazzi
    • Making Kin

      The primary soil of questions for our investigations in the a.pass block 2019/II is to experience us as an ecosystem in ecosystems. We take this fertile ground as an incentive to generate ideas for a 'we' that relates differently to the planes, stays differently in trouble with the damages we induce, and rather becomes-with then cares-for the life on it. Donna Haraway proposes for the generate this other "we" by makeing kin with multiple things, species and other ‚companions‘. In her book „Staying With The Trouble. Making Kin in the Chthulucene“, an essential (tentacular) body of references for this block, she offers a meshwork of indicators what 'making kin' could mean.

      "Think we must. We must think"
      (Stengers, Despret, refering to Harraway).

       

      To put it into practice is at stake. My intuitive response to this is a practice that I started developing some years before I read her text: mutual adoption of specific aspects of each other’s research seems to be a good motor to train the response-ability Donna Haraway claims as one of the needs for making kin. To ‚adopt‘ objects, practices, behaviours or ways of thinking etc. of someone else’s research means taking care of it as it would be your own! In an ecosystem, all aspects are at the same time ‚other' - and part of one and the ‚same‘ space of resonance. The complex relational web of this 'same-other', can be explored by mutual and temporal adoption of aspects of each other' research and make it part of kin.

      I propose a joint exercise, whereby every one of us

      1.) prepares to put aspects up for adoption, then

      2.) to leave them as ejects of our research aside, to

      3.) be found by others and

      4.) to adopt ourselves ejected aspect from someone else into our own practice.

      - On a regular base, we will need to swap and continue the cycle.

       

      Btw. did you know that works are acting in swarms, and take common decisions by communicating through touch?

       

      During the opening week, we will develop our adopt-ability and will exchange our 'baskets' and get ready for the impact an adopted aspect on our researches.
      The first cycle of adoption starts in the opening week, will continues with a swap in the HWD’s and will end by handing it back in the end week.

       
    • information
    • postgraduate program
    • block 2018/I
    • Making / Conditions
    • Block overview plenum & forum
      20 December 2017
      posted by: Nicolas Galeazzi
    • Nicolas Galeazzi
    • 08 January 2018
    • 01 April 2018
    • Block overview

      This post gives a short overview of the organisation and agenda of the block.


      PLENUM
      Plenums are gatherings of a.pass as a whole. All participants of the block program take part in each of the 3 plenums to share the state and development of their researches, as do the mentors, the research centre, the daily team and the core members as far as possible.
      Plenums are gatherings to exchange about individual researches and practices, and are used to discuss how we, as a group of researchers, and the structure of a.pass can best support them.

      The plenum doesn't start until everyone announced is present.

       

      FORUM
      Forums are timeframes to discuss and work on the topics of MAKING/CONDITIONS, to develop and exchange knowledge or to practice the making of research. 
      A forum can be a physical gathering from 1 hour to 5 days. Forums can be internal a.pass work gatherings, held publicly in presence of invited guests, or even take place in collaboration with other institutions.
      Forums start at the announced time, wether the participants are present or not.

       

      AGENDA

      Plenum I

      8. - 17. January: Displaying Conditions (opening week)

       

      10.-11. January: participation in U-Ghent seminar 'What are we training for?'
      by Adriana la Selva

      Forum I

      18.-19. January: 'How do we do the things that we do?'
      with Florian Feigl

      Forum II

      26. January; 2., 9., 17. February; 1., 8., 16., March: Pattern Language 
      with Nicolas Galeazzi

      Forum III

      30. January - 3. February: Critical Administration; or Shaking down the  Enterpreneur
      with Kate Rich

      Plenum II

      19. February - 23. February:  Making Conditions (HWD's) 

      Forum IV

      26. February - 2. March: 'How do we do the things that we do?' with Florian Feigl

      Forum V

      9. March: Performing Knowledge
      with Pieter Vermeulen (Antwerpen)

      Forum VI

      16. March: Alternatives to Economy (the Macao Model)
      with Alberto Cossu

      Forum VII

      19. - 23. March: Pattern Testing
      with Nicolas Galeazzi

      Plenum III

      26. March - 1. April: Reflecting Conditions (end week)

       

       

       

    • SELF / Throughout the block each participant develops a self-interviewing practice. The self-interview develops through the individual 'journeys of practices and researches'. During opening week we will introduce possible strategies for self-interviewing and start up the process. During the End Week we will share our results or work in progress. (for inspiration (and fun)... https://youtu.be/o51RdZBsv0w)

      PEER / On top of the dedicated mentoring and the self-interview practice you will also mentor - and be mentored by -a peer participant who will follow you throughout the whole block. You meet with each mentor (at least) twice throughout the block.

      This list shows the chains of  mebtorings: A mentors B, mentors C ...

       Mentored byMentoring
      Isabel Burr RatyThiagoVanja
      Thiago AntunesKleoniIsabel
      Ricardo Santana (PhD)VeronicaEsteban
      Esteban DonosoRicardoKleoni
      Tinna OttesenHektorMavi
      Mavi VelosoTinnaYaari
      Yaari ShalemMaviHektor
      Hektor MametYaariTinna
      Audrey CottinVanjaAdriana
      Kleoni ManousakisEstebanTiago
      Vanja SmiljanicIsabelAudrey
      Marta Verónica Cruz CamposAdrianaRicardo
      Adriana La SelvaAudreyVeronica

    • information
    • NOT_index
    • End Week Days 03 January 2017
      posted by: Pierre Rubio
    • a.pass
    • 01 April 2017
    • 06 April 2017
    •  

      The End Week Days are the last dedicated moments in the block for presenting our researches and for constructing a vision for the rest of our research trajectory. These days are the times for analysing the current block and come up with plans for the future. Beyond individual presentations and feedback sessions everyone is invited to propose other activities in relation to her/his/your/our research(es).

    • information
    • NOT_index
    • Assemblies, Mentoring, Workshops, Ateliers 03 January 2017
      posted by: Pierre Rubio
    • a.pass
    • 09 January 2017
    • 30 April 2017
    •  

       

      This four months block gives you the opportunity to develop your research individually and collectively.

      We organise a very diverse series of activities and possible involvements into a large range of practices for you to deepen your research.

      The schedule is divided between mandatory days (30% of the time) as well as optional dispositives for you to compose as you wish what seems right for you and your research.

      What is mandatory?

      Assemblies (opening week, half-way-days, and end week)

      Mentorings (4 dedicated mentors practice days, 2 dedicated mentors individual sessions, 1 a.pass art coordinator individual session)

      Workshops (1 workshop on the three which are proposed for this block)

      Curated Ateliers (4 days participation in the Trouble on Radio Triton dispositive)

       

       

       

    • the new structure for dedicated mentorings (3x2 or 2x3)

      The dedicated mentors for this block are Abu Ali * Toni Serra, Bart Van den Eynde, Lilia Mestre and Elke Van Campenhout. Since some participants preferred to have a more in-depth contact with their mentors, we changed the set-up of the sessions as follows: out of the four mentors each participant chooses

      -3 mentors and has 2 sessions with each of them (regular)

      OR

      -2 mentors and has 3 sessions with each of them (intense)

      Since the dedicated mentors each are responsible for one day during the first Workshop on Artistic Research, we will be able to decide on who, what and how at the end of the first week.

       

      On top of these mentors you will also be mentored a peer participant of your choice who will follow you throughout the whole block, and with whom you meet also at least twice. For this block we would like you to experiment with the mentoring format, and to contribute to our Toolkit for Mentoring, by adding alternative formats for mentoring through practice, movement, double self-interviews, through intermediary pets, objects or cooking sessions, ... Whatever you think might get the juices flowing. 

       

      the INTERVIEW SESSIONS

      Throughout the block each participant also develops an interview practice, in 3 sessions, based on questions that appeared in their own cases. The three stages of the interview throughout the block can take on different forms: through language, audio or image, addressing one person at the the time, or conducting (small) group interviews. Written or spoken or walked. In the end the three stages of the interview will serve as a starting point for the sessions during End Week in PAF. 

       

    • The House of Spirits is a common space for the (re)collection, digestion and transformation of the traces of the individual researches and workshops. The House opens up a space for the shamans/conservators of the Research Centre, as well as some of the participants. Every week another shaman practices in the House of Spirits, working with the case objects of the participants or with left-overs of the workshop, developing a shared ritual for the a.pass group. The strategies of the shaman include reordering, cataloguing, magical transformations, ritual alchemy, displacement and fictionalisation.

      Every shaman puts the individual case traces in another context, allowing them to resonate and breed new meanings and connections. The shamans together develop the Book, which documents the changing protocols regulating the workings of the House.

      The beginning of every week (Monday evenings) is marked by a shared ritual with the participants, in which the reading of the shaman/conservator is revealed and the new shaman takes possession of the House. After the ritual the group engages in the weekly reading session (the Reading Circle).

      At the end of the block (just before end week), the House of Spirits opens its doors to the public. In the form of a weeklong celebration, a curated exhibition, a mini-festival, a performative conference, or whatever at that point seems to be the most relevant to the group, the House functions in that week as a kind of temporal 3D publications that offers guests an insight in the work developed throughout the block.

       

    • old information
    • NOT_index
    • old info
    • End week 23 March 2015
      posted by: Nicolas Galeazzi
    • a.pass
    • in PAF near Reims
    • 28 November 2016
    • 04 December 2016
    • Like every block we also end this one in the former convent PAF (Performing Arts Forum)

      This is the ultimate moment for sharing and presenting your researches, inviting other participants into your practice, organized group and individual mentorings, and construct a vision for the rest of your research period. PAF is the moment we close down and analyze a block and come up with plans for the future. Everyone is invited to participate in proposing body practices, films, discussions and other activities in relation to your researches.

      The end-week is always differently organised, but the purpose of individual case presentations remain mostly the same: it is about taking and communicating a close look of where we are with our researches at the moment, and where we go to throughout the block.

    • This text was written for the magazine of the Steirischer Herbst Festival (Austria). Although the text addresses the specific spatial situation of PAF (Performing Arts Forum) in Reims (a place where a.pass goes at least once per block for a week during End Week), the thinking and writing process around this text was largely constructed around the notions of space as developed in the series of Settlement workshops that were created by current APC Vladimir Miller, and that greatly influenced the notions of ‘performative space’ and scenography as they are developed in a.pass.

      SPACES AS TOOLS
      One lonely dancer lies meditating on the grass, a challenging philosophical treatise opened on page 213 next to him. From the open windows of the nearby room the sound of a theatre rehearsal, eerily repetitive, its harshness clashing with the idyllic surroundings. The peacocks look through the window of the corner studio at a yoga session. A group of American runaway brides (with fitting gowns) returns from a work session in the nearby woods, their conversations incomprehensible to the uninitiated onlooker. And in every corridor, every time you enter the kitchen, two or more people are discussing politics, the arts, food, practicalities, planning parties, the evening film program, or inviting the others to their showings or work. Not the most typical PAF-day maybe, but surely a possible one.

      PAF stands for Performing Arts Forum: a former convent reoriented towards artists, actionists and thinkers in the French Champagne. The 6400 sq feet building was bought by the Dutch theatre maker Jan Ritsema in 2007 (2008?), and has since then functioned as an open space for artists and theoreticians from over the whole world. On its website, the place introduces itself as:
      - a forum for producing knowledge in critical exchange and ongoing discursive practice
      - a place for temporary autonomy and full concentration on work
      - a tool-machine where one can work on developing methods, tools and procedures, not necessarily driven toward a product
      - a place for experimenting with other than known modes of production and organization of work, e.g. open source production.

      1. The malaise of a generation

      In a way this description echoes the concerns of artists in the performing and other scenes of the last ten years and more. The artistic scene has little by little found itself squeezed between governmental compartmentation (through often ill-fitting and politically motivated subsidy systems) and the seductive call of the enterprise-funded 'creative industries', paving the way for an understanding of the artist as either a well-prepared and policy-aware dossier-writer, or a self-proclaimed entrepreneur totally in line with the neo-liberal ethics of self-realization, mobility and economic common sense.

      Trying to go against the grain of the times, countless artists have expressed the need and the urgency to escape these corsets of survival by pointing out their toxic by-products: the subsidy system in the well-founded European scene has started to create a way of working and an aesthetics that is not primarily based on artistic choice and necessity, but on the possibilities of touring (and reaching your minimum quota of presentations), networking (getting as much prominent arts centres to back up your project), and formatting (ideally a performance should fit as many venues as possible, not be too costly, and be adaptable to the regular programming strategies of the field). The kind of work that escapes these constraints is often overlooked or doesn't find its way into the regular programmation.

      In that sense the self-organized artist model, which depends largely on grants , sponsoring or cooperation with commercial institutions and enterprises might seem a less hypocritical choice for some. And it is true that some company grant systems (Cartier, Siemens, …) have in the last decades built themselves a reputation on supporting often experimental and challenging artists, without posing banal economic constraints on their output. But even in these 'ideal' circumstances, for a lot of artists this kind of recuperation of the artist's position, equalling it to the position of any middle-of-the-road creative worker for any progressive neo-liberal company, does seem to deprive him of any credible critical bite.

      Now, it is not the case that in the time span of the last twenty years nothing has been done to accommodate this malaise in the arts. The (European) subsidiary system for example, has invested a lot of resources in the creation of residency spaces, laboratory situations, exchange programs and learning environments that should fill the gap between the artist's needs and the governmental policies. On a large scale, networking and exchange between artists from different countries has been promoted, festivals have echoed the concerns of the neo-liberalisation of the arts, economy and ecology have entered the arts debates, etc… But in the end, the last word was and is still given to the subsidizer: the one who pays decides. And however close the bureaucratized commissions, jury's, cabinets and programmers might come to an understanding of the arts, their strategies and ideologies will always be primarily oriented towards the survival and sustainability of the institution, on the uni-formization of the field (to make it more efficient and manageable), and on the transparent and seductive promo-talk demanded by the communication departments.

      And, even more importantly, the artistic sector these last years has been cringing under the hot breath of the increasingly right-oriented politics. Recently, in the Netherlands, the funding for the experimental performance sector got all but eliminated. Portugal since one year no longer has a Minister of Culture. France is giving reign to a neo-conservative arts ideology and so forth. Not even speaking about the countless countries in the East that have no budget for the experimental arts scene whatsoever.

      2. Artistic self-organization as a way out of the impasse

      In answer to the above-mentioned reserves, artists everywhere in the world have been working on creating alternative models and frames for the development of their own work. An endeavor that has been tinged by the pull from both the comfort of the subsidized scene, and the self-promoting grandeur of the self-made artist.
      On the one hand for a lot of artists it is hard to survive out of the subsidiary system. Moreover, their dependent statute is often even structurally enhanced by the dole regulation, favoring the artist's special needs by equalling his practice to a gilded form of unemployment. Artists in the well-to-do-countries of today have grown up with the promise of employment, however badly paid. In Belgium, whole weeks are organized under the title First Aid for artist, in which the statute of the beginning artist on the market is discussed. The concern is how to get all these aspiring young creatives working in a field that seems to be overproducing already. Much like the Swiss cows whose milk production largely surpasses the European needs, artists seem to be kept (barely) alive for the wrong reasons. Where the cows are necessary props in the creation of the 'typical' Swiss mountain landscape, the artists kind of function as a band aid for the total lack of political resistance and discussion that rules the current political era.

      So artists have been residency-hopping and networking and realizing themselves like the projects they are, no longer only to sell their goods, but to attain the necessary visibility that will get them invited in think tanks, experimental set-ups and laboratories all over, the one even more critical than the other. However productive these environments might have proved to be, most of these projects come with a price: the working spaces are institutionally tagged, have a limit of validation, have to answer to certain expectations and norms. Just like any other sector in society, the arts have to prove their in- and outcomes, their future visions, their unique selling position, and the originality of their discourse. Not unreasonably, if you follow the logic of the subsidizer. From an artist's point of view, however, these discussion groups and projects often don't reach their goal: for economic reasons the time of working is often too short, or not completely answering the needs of those present. Nor do they feel the need to comply to the desire for the clear profile marketing of the institution inviting them.

      Also, as makers, artists have expressed the need to think of other production systems than the 'typical' career model proposed to the artists in the 1980's. The model of the sole author-artist, inventing his or her own esthetics, has been replaced by a much more critical and historically anchored view on how these artists themselves very quickly become commodities in a system that is in constant search for the 'new'. Artists have started to look for other ways of being together, of producing 'symbolic capital', of developing discourse, that can not so easily be recuperated and branded by the artistic economy. Mixing up recognizable solo identities, artists have been working under collective names, often changing the belonging to the 'group' underway, or working on ongoing researches involving very different participants at every stage. What they put into question is not so much the value of the artistic gesture, but the ownership over the material, the ideas, the producing and creation of the artistic material. Whereas in the practice of the Artist (I represent the model of the sole self-created artist from here on simply by adding the capital A) was largely concerned with the unicity of his production, creating his value on the artist market on the basis of scarcity, newness and shock-value, the artists we talk about in this text are rather concerned with the practices of sharing, of questioning themselves as the centre of gravity, of relating to other (historical, political, economic, discourse) realities. In these contexts, the practice becomes as important as the outcome, the way of organizing the work as important as the work itself, the way of dealing with collaborators a significant part of the trajectory leading up (or not) to a public moment.
      But for this to become a viable artistic practice, another kind of spaces has to be created: spaces that are no longer governed by subsidy policies or economic (un)common sense, but by artists themselves. Places that are not under the reign of profiling and networking, not dubbed as subsidiary placeholders for artistic merit, but simply places to work, that take into account the simple but pressing needs of the artists and thinkers concerned.

      3. Spaces as tools

      It is important at this point to focus a bit more closely on this need for sharing, for flexible collaboration, that seems to encompass a lot of artist's projects in the last decades. In a lot of the PAF discussions over the years, these notions have been put into question: what is the common ground explored here? What is to be shared and in what form? What is the underlying logic of the space? etc…
      Since I just spent three weeks in a space called 'The Settlement', created by artist Vladimir Miller, let us just elaborate a little bit on these notions. As mentioned in the website description of PAF describing itself as a tool, The Settlement as well functioned not so much as a metaphoric space mirroring society, nor as an artistic project to be realized through collaboration, but simply as a 'protospace': an open space filled with non-functional materials, used as a workspace by an unlimited group of people during three weeks time. The participants of this group could rearrange the materials to their own content, and adapt the space every day to the needs of their personal projects. What resulted out of this way of working was a space in constant transition. Momentary moments of clarity, of crystallization of function or meaning (a heap of wooden crates and metal rectangles becoming a recognizable 'desk', three isolation sheets used repeatedly as 'cinema') dissolved into new constructions over the days, charging the space with ever-changing points of focus of attention and activity. What was shared in this settlement was thus not an idea of a theme or a goal, nor a drive for the creation of spaces for 'sociality', but simply the need to work and be of everyone of the participants. In other words, instead of a group of people gathering around a project and a shared belief about what this project could be or lead to, their only stronghod was an idea of 'commonality': a 'mentality of being together', always on the verge of crystallizing into a temporary self-understood community, but always as well dissolving before this point of a shared understanding and identity was achieved.
      If we try to distinguish the community from the communality, I would propose for this text to talk about 'community' as a group that is bounded to a shared value system on the grounds of a recognizable ideology or idea system on which the members of the community agree (or choose to disagree). A community in that sense is based on an initial agreement, however flimsy, and with that agreement comes the appropriation of the individual's contributions, placing them under the banner of a shared territory. In that sense the community is settled, no longer in motion, but as any closed system, in constant dialogue with the outside world.

      (Now, we are talking about an abstract understanding of 'community', since on an individual level, we know we nowadays live under the banner of (often a lot) of very different communities, often in flagrant contradiction to each other on the level of ethics, esthetics and politics. This is exactly what makes agency and decision-making, in and out of the artistic sector, such a difficult endeavor today. But this is another discussion).

      In contrast and in accordance to this understanding of 'community' I would like to place the sense of 'commonality'. Not based on territory (1), commonality has to be understood as a process, as the forming-of-temporary-localities, as a movement on the way to another one. In this context value is not created on the basis of a common belief, but can only be relative to the situation and what is happening in it. Value in this sense can not be recuperated in this temporary zone, it can only be negotiated through the handling of the objects, through the creation of fleeting situations, through the (unspoken) communal debate. Value is, in other words, not dependent on ideological agreement, but can only be understood as 'practice value': whatever enhances the practice and makes it move is valuable for the commonality. Therefore the politics of The Settlement is a politics of circulation, of knowledge and ideas moving from locality to locality, often separated from their original creators, picked up by someone else and left behind again for someone else to find, interpret and restart with.

      In relating this experience to PAF, I think the rephrasing of a space as a tool, as a temporary locality for people to move through, work with and reinterpret, is a valid one. Although radically different in scale and scope, The Settlement and PAF have this in common that they undo the strings attached to artist workspaces as they are mostly understood. The building is both an instrument and a project in itself: whatever you get out of it, you somehow give back to the space, charging it with renewed perspectives and ideas. PAF only has three rules that have to be followed by all residents:
      1. Don't leave traces
      2. Make it possible for others
      3. The do-er decides

      In other words: all residents somehow share a common understanding of the building as an instrument for the development of their personal practice, but every one of them can develop another perspective on what that means. But at the same time, the building is not a silent partner: it is a resistant object, that carries a lot of traces of former use, not always literally materialized, but certainly abundant in the atmosphere, the kind of discussions that prevail, the working attitude, the library, the books sold etcetera… As a privately owned initiative, PAF does carry the stamp of its owner, the critical attitude induced by his presence and legacy. But its sheer size (50 rooms, 15 working spaces) makes any kind of controlled discourse or practice impossible. The uniqueness of PAF probably lies exactly there: that the size and the potential of it gets picked up simultaneously by very different groups of people, which makes it at the same time ungovernable and inspiring. The diverse uses of time (long-time residents mixing with hazardous weekend hoppers), space (the same studio used for performing, midnight dinners, exorcisms and political discussions), and exchange (everything from the lone wolf to the societal preacher), keep the space from closing up, from becoming a territory with a recognizable and forbidding identity. Although three times a year PAF organizes communal activities (the SummerUniversity, WinterUpdateMeeting and SpringMeeting) for more or less restricted participants, even those gatherings are proposed rather as a space for re-thinking and re-arranging than as moments of 'passing on the candle' to the next generation. Also at these moments, the different temporalities become clear within the unlimited body of potential residents: some struggling with questions that were circulating since years already, others looking for a way forward, thus stretching up the current moment towards past and future. Digging up the remains of former discussions for redigestion while planting new seeds at the dinner table.

      (1) The thoughts on territory and locality and the rest of this paragraph are largely based on a conversation with Vladimir Miller in The Settlement

    • Collective moments (opening week, half-way-days, and end week) are compulsory for everybody

      Beside the collective moments you should engage in alt least 2 workshops proposed in thes block, of which one should be  b-workshop. B-workshops are this block Vladimir's 'Theory Under The Commons' workshop and Mala's 'With I+II' workshop.

      In order to participate in the Common Conference at the end of the block, you should at least take part in half of the Friday open space sessions.

      In order to keep the a.pass archive alive, we have to feed it! Therefore, we would like to introduce the concept of the Caretaker: all a.pass event - workshops and common moments - should be hosted and documented by participants.

      You will have one coordinator's mentoring with Kristien to orientate yourself within a.pass and your own research.

      During the block you normally have two meetings with either 2 or 3 mentors of your choice. Please read the specific mentoring strategies for this block. 

    • information
    • Curriculum 07 November 2014
      posted by: Nicolas Galeazzi
       
      During its one-year course the program is sequenced into three blocks of four months, each block organised by a different curator towards a specific mode of research and collaboration. In general the blocks  assemble in different proportions the following elements:
      Development of artistic research practices, theoretical studies, workshops with guest practicioners, dispositives of feedback and exchange, modes of research presentation, attendance to public events related with current concerns (conferences, seminars, performances, festivals, etc), series of individual and collective mentoring sessions with invited mentors. 
      Within this curated framework the researchers are encouraged to contribute to the conceptualisation, organisation and performance of self-organized activities and practices.
       
       
      Timing & Organisation of the PROGRAM
       
      The one-year program is organised in three 'blocks' of four months, each of them divided in three months of curated curiculum in group and one month focused on self-organised individual work. 
      After the twelve months program an extra month is fully dedicated  to the preparation and performance of a form of communication of the individual research.projects within a collective public event.
      Exceptionally - when participants want to interrupt their studies for professional activities or to intensifie their personal studies - it is possible to skip one block and to extend the duration of the program to a maximum of 17 months.
       
       
      Timing & Organisation of the BLOCKS
       
      A block is structured by three collective moments: Opening Week (first week of the block), Half-Way-Days (middle of the block) and End Week (last week of the block). 
      These three mandatory collective moments are dedicated to the individual research presentations. Each of them has a particular objective and question towards the research: Opening week focuses on information (what?), Half-Way-Days on method (how?) and End-Week on contextualisation (why?)
      In addition to these three weeks the researchers  (in dialogue with the curator and coordinator) design their trajectory with a minimum of three weeks of presence and engagement in the block program.
       
      Laureate
       
      After concluding the postgraduate program with a public End Presentation, the participant will receive the title of Laureate of the higher institute for fine arts Posthogeschool voor Podiumkunsten (the program equals 60 credits).

       

    •  

       

      Researchers following the a.pass program  develop a practice-based research, take an investigative look at their artistic trajectories and engage in a particular discursive approach.
      Focusing on individual work, researchers are working in a largely self-organized and collaborative environment where they take up an active role in the development of the a.pass research environment and act as responsive agents in (re)thinking artistic research methodologies, collective feedback strategies and practical organization.
       
      In order to create this context of self-organization, collaboration and participation a.pass is established as a full time program  requiring following minimum presence and participation.
       
      For each block of 4 months researchers:
      • attend three collective moments (Opening Week, Half-Way-Days Week, and End Week)
      • and follow at least  three weeks of curated program per block
      • attend four mentoring sessions with two dedicated mentors
      • attend one meetings with the artistic coordinator per block

       

      To successfully conclude the a.pass program researchers are required to communicate their research in the frame of a public event.
       
       




APPLY TO THE A.PASS PROGRAMMES

Unfortunately we no longer have applications. Both programs: the Postgraduate as well as Research Center have come to an end due to the decision of the ministry of education to stop financing a.pass. At the moment we look into new plans for the future. More news soon on our website.

Alternativly you can upload your Research proposal, Portfolio, CV and other documents here.

Maximum file size: 50 MB, maximum 5 files.

X  

add file..


Open Call



Contact person.


Every application will be offered a copy while stocks last of the a.pass publication In These Circumstances: a collection of methodologies, insights, experiences, ideas, researches from 15 years of a.pass. If you like to receive a copy then please provide an address below.




We request you to upload all materials combined in 1 PDF - please name each chapter clearly :

Upload your file(s) here:
X  

add file..


SIGN UP TO EVENT
selected :
yes
no
ex-participant


ORDER