The School of Infinite Rehearsals | Foreword by Nefeli Myrodia by Onassis Stegi

THE SCHOOL OF INFINITE REHEARSALS

MOVEMENTS I-IV

by NEFELI MYRODIA

INFINITE adjective 1. extending indefinitely; 2. immeasurably or inconceivably great or extensive; 3. subject to no limitation or external determination. REHEARSAL noun a practice, exercise or trial performance of a play or other work. When the title of Wilson Harris’ book (1987) came up during one of the very first long and stimulating discussions we had with Hypatia Vourloumis, something clicked inside, and moments later we knew that this should be the title of anew format we were in the process of devising:

THE SCHOOL OF INFINITE REHEARSALS Intrigued by the work of other alternative and artist-run schools like the Mountain School of Arts in California, the Black School in New Orleans, or art projects such as the Alternative School of Economics1, we were looking into new modes of learning that would go against the traditional, strict academic programs with predefined syllabi set by “masters” or “experts.” Especially in Greece, where the arts school system is infamously anachronistic, patriarchal, and functioning under extreme top-down hierarchies that reinforce the master-student chasm, the need for alternative, non-hierarchical spaces of knowledge production and discourse is more vital than ever. Our interest in experimental pedagogies was also inspired by our time in Yogyakarta2 and our introduction to the way collectives 1. For more information, you can visit: themountainschoolofarts.org/, https://theblack.school/ and www.alternativeschoolofeconomics.org/. 2. As part of the first collective research trip of Onassis AiR, in October 2019, we travelled to Yogyakarta, Indonesia, with the participants of the Critical Practices Program Fall 2019, Myrto Katsimicha, Chrysanthi Koumianaki, Marina Miliou-Theocharaki, Inés Mun~ozcano, and Prodromos Tsinikoris, in the context of the Intensive Month curated by mentor Raed Yassin.

such as KUNCI Study Forum and Collective, Bakudapan or Ruang Mes563, functioned under the principles of self-organization, experimenting with methods of knowledge-sharing “at the intersections between affective, manual and intellectual labor” (KUNCI Study Forum and Collective, n.d.). We experienced a new way of co-existing with the collectives’ members, where the boundaries of living, practicing, and studying together were intertwined in ways that deeply resonated with the ethos and principles of Onassis AiR. Our urge to enter into a collective research program came foremost by the bonds we saw being created among the very first participants of Onassis AiR.4 New collaborations, friendships, and a strong network of support—that continues to this day—was built among practitioners from very different fields that would rarely have the chance to co-exist, practice and study together. We realized that we wanted to create a program intimate enough to allow for such connections to take place and last after the end of each residency.

THE THEMES This new format would unfold in four six-week Movements between September 2020 and May 2021. Each group would consist of up to six participants who would be selected by previous participants of Onassis AiR through a blind selection process. An international Open Call invited artists, curators, activists, educators, and other practitioners to collectively study two themes proposed by the Onassis AiR team that we found urgent to explore together. Identity politics and ecologies were notions that resurfaced frequently, both within the context of our program 3. For more information, you can visit: http://kunci.or.id/, https://bakudapan.com/en/ and http://mes56.com/. 4. The participants of the Critical Practices Program Fall 2019 and the extended circle that included the first Artist-in-Residence of Onassis AiR, Alaa Ghosheh, and the first Emergency Fellow, Dimos Kallay.

and in the broader discourse and programming of the Onassis Foundation. We took these two themes as the starting point for the collective exploration and invited two colleagues to convene the Movement Groups: Hypatia Vourloumis for Movements I & II, a performance theorist working across anticolonial, feminist, critical race, and queer theory, and James Bridle for Movements III & IV, an artist and writer deeply invested in new technologies and human/non-human interactions. During Movements I & II, under the title “Identities Annihilated,” the two Movement groups would seek to attend to the ways in which identities cannot be reduced or made transparent and to practice a methodological structure of collective study and experimentation, aesthetically and poetically imagined through non-linear associative principles. (Vourloumis, n.d.) During Movements III & IV: “Everything Equally Evolved,” the participants were invited tocollectively explore some of these, and other questions: How can the tools we have at hand be reimagined to bring us down to Earth? How do we reassert the importance of community while building solidarity with the more-than-human world? What would it look like to take the intelligence of animals, plants, and ecosystems as seriously as we take the intelligence of smart machines? (...) And what is vital about doing so here and now, on the edge of the Mediterranean and other, possible futures? (Bridle, n.d.)

Our aim was to offer space, time, and resources for a more focused exploration of these quite broad terms, with participants dictating the direction of the research they would embark on. The intention was to create a model that supports life-long learning and learning with others, where the collective body is more important than the theme, a new site of creative practice initiated by the participants themselves and a program that was community-driven, with no tutors or master classes.

CONVENERS We often caught ourselves being trapped in contradictions. The invitation of conveners for the first year of the School came from our belief that bringing two theorists with extensive knowledge of the themes could initiate conversations and push the collective research forward. Hypatia Vourloumis and James Bridle were invited to propose a research framework for each of the Movement Groups in the form of possible readings, meetings with other practitioners in Greece, references, tools, methods, and approaches. Even if these functions partly worked—more for some groups and less for others—the gesture of appointing conveners added a layer of hierarchy. A series of questions emerged around this power relationship, both from the participants but also from the conveners themselves who often struggled with the ambiguity of their role. How can we encourage a horizontal, peer-to-peer learning environment when we introduce a position of expertise into the group? Reflecting on this contradiction, we decided to completely remove this role for the second iteration of The School of Infinite Rehearsals 2021/22, so that each Movement Group would be “convened” by the participants themselves.

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS The School of Infinite Rehearsals emerged in the middle of a pandemic, and the more we were socially distancing ourselves, the more we were convinced of the need for a physical meeting. At a time of a world in stillness and remoteness, we tried to create

our own “emergent utopia” (Stroh, 2021), a space where we could still be and practice together, a rare privilege for the majority of the world at that specific moment. Strict lockdown measures were imposed for most of our time with the four Movements, so the research was either confined to the walls of our building and within the limitations of curfew hours set by the government or, when we had the chance to travel within Greece, our interactions with the outside world were limited to only the essential ones. We had managed to bring people over from all around the world, but we had to stay isolated for the safety of the team and others. This publication was our way to escape this closed system and to share our collective investigation with the outside world in a moment where events, invitations, presentations, and other forms of exchange and opening up to audiences were strictly prohibited. As this need emerged after the Open Call selection process was completed, we invited three researchers, whose practices related to the two themes, to take the role of the editors. The Writers-in-Residence were Alkisti Efthymiou (for Movements I & II), Ioanna Zouli (for Movement III), and Alexander Strecker (for Movement IV), who participated fully in the program, with an additional task of organizing and contextualizing the collective research and transforming it into a four-volume publication.

ROLES The experiment on horizontal structures was expanded to our little team of Onassis AiR that a few months before the start of The School of Infinite Rehearsals doubled in size, from two to four members.5 A team with different job descriptions, institutional leverage, and salaries that nevertheless tried (and sometimes failed) to work within a non-hierarchical organization model. We were genuinely interested in participating in the group’s activities and 5. The Director of Onassis AiR, Ash Bulayev, and Creative Producer & Program Dramaturge, Nefeli Myrodia, were joined by Myrto Katsimicha (Program Documentation and Communication Officer) and Georgia Giannakea (Administration Officer).

discussions, but at the same time we didn’t have the capacity to be invested full-time as we still had to fulfill our institutional roles. This in and out of the group often created frictions, and made us realize how our role was interpreted differently by different people each time. Sometimes, we were seen as the representatives of a large-scale institution with a very specific agenda, and therefore, there was a certain skepticism towards our statements and intentions. For others, we were more like allies: the sly mediators between the institution and the group, trying to find the loopholes in the system to facilitate the group’s decisions and stretching the institutional limits in order to do so. I often caught myself in this process trying to distinguish my own voice from the one of my institutional role, uttering statements like, “I am now talking as myself and not on behalf of the Onassis Foundation.” But, after all, who is the institution? The institution is the people, the ones that run it and those who form its community (Cahill, 2018). The more diverse and inclusive the voices, the more an institution can learn and transform itself. It was not a rare phenomenon that within the AiR team we had opposing views to the same questions, and accepting these disagreements has always pushed us forward. One thing we definitely agree on is that institutional change is possible and very much needed, and that this change can come from smaller initiatives that are agile and relatively flexible. A personal note to future art workers trying to find their voice (and themselves) within an institutional context: It is important to acknowledge at all times the position of power that comes with our institutional role, but also make explicit that this power is relational to the specificities of our locality, type of organization, internal institutional hierarchies, and gender. Every group of participants is different, and there is not one way to go. Things that worked for one group do not work for others. Be open, listen, and adapt according to the needs of the

people you collaborate with each time. We don’t always have the answers to all questions, and admitting vulnerability is okay. Sometimes, we are as lost as you are. Spending so much time with others is complicated and requires a lot of (mental and emotional) energy. Self-care is equally important to taking care of others. Come with no expectations. In hybrid formats like this one, if you stick to your predispositions, you will be most probably let down. For example, we often assumed that the selection of participants with important existing practice and methodologies, knowledge of the research topics, and experience in collective environments would be enough for the group to become a collective body and conduct a collective research. But there were times that people decided to not take the role that was expected of them, and the only thing you can do is just accept it. Failure is an option. There is no way that any effort with so many variables and heavily based on human beings and their relationships will be perfect. There will be disappointment, frustration, and failed attempts. But the only thing we can do, if we wish for a change, is to learn to unlearn and keep trying.

WHAT IS THIS? At the last week of each Movement, we had one-on-one conversations with each participant, asking for feedback that would help us figure out what worked and what did not. This feedback would inform the changes we would introduce for the next Movements. The last question of these long sessions was “What was this program for you? What is The School of Infinite Rehearsals all about?” Some of the responses we received were: – How do artists set the terms for their own conditions? This is the core point of this program, and I think this is a life-long question. – It is about the (nice) struggle of being part of a collective and

a collective research, but it is very important that it also offers space for individual interests and research strands within the format. – A bunch of people figuring out the rules and trying not to upset anyone—and getting to meet themselves during this process (and get frustrated often). – It is a closed, protected community—a family that is perhaps too closed off to itself. – It is about relationality, being able to get to know and learn from and with people—without the bullshit. Understanding their motivations, where they are coming from. The most valuable question is how we can keep these relations after the end of the program. What we know today is that this program is a living organism that transforms with and by the people who comprise it. It is a process in-progress where everybody—team and participants—is learning on the way. We hope that this publication will shed some light on the microcosm of a school that ran in a year of confinement. A world of aspirations, challenges, conflicts, and refusals. A publication that poses more questions than answers, but hopefully produces another type of knowledge which can be useful to people outside of the four walls of a neoclassical building in the Athenian city center and the people who resided there between September 2020 and May 2021.

REFERENCES Bridle, J. (n.d.). Spring 2021: Everything Equally Evolved. Onassis Foundation. https://www.onassis.org/initiatives/onassis-future/residencies/onassisair/school-infinite-rehearsals/spring-2021-everything-equally-evolved Cahill, Z. (2018). As Radical, As Mother, As Salad, As Shelter: What Should Art Institutions Do Now? Paper Monument. Harris, W. (1987). The Infinite Rehearsal. Faber & Faber. KUNCI Study Forum and Collective (n.d.). About Us. http://kunci.or.id/about-us/ Stroh, L. (2021, April). Emergent Utopias: Three Experiments in Alternative Art Education: The Black School, 2727 California Street, and School of the Alternative. Art & Education. https://www.artandeducation.net/schoolwatch/390502/emergentutopias-three-experiments-in-alternative-art-education-the-black-school2727-california-street-and-school-of-the-alternative Vourloumis, H. (n.d.). Fall 2020: Identities Annihilated. Onassis Foundation. https://www.onassis.org/initiatives/onassis-future/residencies/onassisair/school-infinite-rehearsals/fall-2020-identities-annihilated-convenedhypatia-vourloumis

COLOPHON Texts Ash Bulayev, Nefeli Myrodia

Published by Onassis Foundation

Design Stathis Mitropoulos

Publication Coordination Ash Bulayev, Nefeli Myrodia

Proofreading Aliki Theodosiou

Content Manager Christina Kosmoglou Production Yiannis Alexandropoulos Distribution Consultant Ilan Manouach Printing Alta Grafico SA

ISBN 978-618-85361-3-5

This book is part of the boxed set titled and cannot be sold separately.