What has changed, what are the developments in your work, since the last interview?

The work is shaped and evolves along two axes: on the one hand, the practice of creating dance performances that focus on the body and its possibilities and, on the other hand, the design of research programmes of interdisciplinary interest. The creation of performances is based on the exploration of the boundaries of speech, voice and movement, with the key question of how these coexist and co-construct a particular performative form that bridges dance, theatre and music. Similarly, the research projects seek dynamic methods of artistic education, alternative systems of interdisciplinary cooperation, exchange of knowledge and practices and organisation of creative projects.

The works Lady R and Speechless were created both kinesthetically and sonically/musically based on a specific text, structured discourse, and a specific thematic axis. Lady R was based on Rosa Luxemburg’s last written text, while “Speechless” was based on public speeches, proclamations, articles and texts by women of past centuries read in the present day.

In AFTERWORDS the process focused exclusively on the body and voice in order to explore the realm in which sound and movement meet their source: breath, vibration. AFTERWORDS became a vocal dance performance, a concert of bodies in response to reflection on the boundaries between communication and speech.

MAUΘ, a movement and sound solo by three performers, advanced the research on the materiality of the voice by following a paradoxical equation of sound and movement. A practically impossible goal was set in order to observe the resulting effect. In addition, the solo form was used to unleash the potential of each dancer and to observe how the “same materials” are interpreted, shaped and presented filtered by personal idiom. If the composition of a group focuses on the relationships between the performers and requires the physicality of each to be adapted to the whole, MAUΘ followed the reverse process: by highlighting “individuality” and diversity, both within the process itself and in the encounter with the viewer, the choreography was tested in more elaborate and inclusive compositions.

The required performative form that operates at the boundaries of dance, theatre and music in each work is developed through the application of the methods and strategies of voice and movement orchestration explored in the previous stages. For the final composition, the form of open structure -open form composition- is used, which allows and highlights the coexistence of improvised and choreographed parts. The open-structure form combines the security of the predetermined condition with the dynamics of instant composition, maintaining the vitality and spontaneity of the process in the final result. This form is a key compositional tool that is explored and evolved within the work. My introduction to open form composition and its functionality was during my art studies at ARTEZ, specifically through the philosophy and artistic teaching of Mary O’Donnell. Mary O’Donnell combines the potential of open form with the terms and practices that she herself highlighted and named: “responsible anarchy” and “ethical reformation,” systems that have profoundly influenced the artistic vision underlying the work and continue to create challenges and spaces for inquiry and reflection. A key question of recent years has been the exploration of the boundaries between movement and image, between functionality and representation. Next steps in the broader artistic process and research are the exploration of voice, movement and image, both on a real and symbolic level. The research aims to test practises that push the conventional boundaries of experience and analysis and mutually feed the personal, social and political fields of theory and practice, textuality and corporeality.

Regarding the creation of educational and research projects, one of them, imPROject, is a research process on improvisation both as a concept and as a practice. In imPROject improvisation is treated as an under-developed technique, which evolves according to the triptych: Body, Information, Play.

The technique studies the body in current time and real space and develops reflexes to create systems of rules that serve the ever-changing stage conditions. Much emphasis is placed both on how rules intertwine with individual freedom and on defining the concept of freedom within a stage system of coexistence and coexistence of different “players”. Improvisation is examined as a process with social and cultural dimensions and contexts, while the structures and elements of play are examined as a basic precondition and necessary condition for the formation of a performance.

Breaking Art is a model educational programme that puts young choreographers and musician-composers in synergy and studies the relationship between dance and music. Building bridges between artists from heterogeneous fields of expression, Breaking Art seeks a new, shared space between choreographic and musical creation, offering both the technical tools to participants and a direct experience of inter-artistic dialogue and fermentation. Additional goals of the program are to explore ways to artistically support emerging creators, encourage the exploration of new aesthetic codes, and connect the next generation of creators. Breaking Art has reached out to both young creatives and teenagers.

After a decade of successive crises (economic, social, environmental, health) what changes and developments do you notice have occurred in the contemporary dance scene in Greece and what do you think is missing?

A lot has happened in the last decade. We went through a period without funding, although dance productions continued, created painstakingly, as well as now again  that they’re painstakingly created. I experienced the time before the financial crisis only for a little while as I was returning from my studies in Holland. It was a more competitive atmosphere and perhaps afterwards and in order to survive the crisis a more collaborative period began. At the moment I find that there is a considerable increase in the number of dance companies and dance makers. I don’t follow the upcoming trends much, because I  am a mother and I don’t watch as many shows anymore. From what I can see also from the number of funding applications submitted, there has been a big increase in the number of people who want to get involved in the creative or research aspects of dance. I feel that all these crises are creating a blur. Speaking personally, I think it blurs both the dance landscape and the creations themselves. I’m not saying this in relation to programming or goals, but right now  everything is fluid and uncertain.  This induces a sense of insecurity in me. It’s an unprecedented situation in relation to  dance creations. I feel like there’s a pervasive fluidity regarding both how and whether  I’m going to do a production. This atmosphere spreads to the wider field and then I struggle in order not to make concessions due to circumstances, because I feel that expectations are also lowering.

As for what’s missing, I cannot and don’t want to get into the same discussion once again about the lack of touring of Greek dance, the lack of a Dance house etc. The same problems that persist (and I think are getting worse). From what I hear from colleagues and dance companies that tour, they are also insecure about whether or not performances will happen. Overall and in comparison to the past, there are more dance companies travelling abroad yet the strategies for touring are inadequate, as also the policies of institutions are problematic.

How might we imagine the landscape of dance in the next ten years?

I struggle with it so I try to avoid long-term predictions. My life plans are much more short-term. Perhaps I could respond with something in the scope of a wish or of what I would hope for. But, I am not in good terms with either of these concepts, because I believe they are meaningless unless there is a corresponding action to bring them into fruition. So I won’t answer the question. In the history of our culture, we’ve been taught  to settle for a wish and nowadays maybe we settle with a like. I suppose I could respond by what I would probably do in the next ten years, but this is complicated.

Concerning my current production, I made the decision to create a silent piece. Not only because I like silence but also because silence, the lack of voice connects the new work to my previous ones. As long as there is the use of voice in the choreography, the main question is always how to combine voice and body- if one is going to say something, why also move? I am exploring the reason for movement and its cause. If the voice is not audible, how will the body move? How does the body find the reason for its movement? I also feel that we need silence in order to be able to listen. There is a lot of noise; stressful and intense. It is a need of mine to quiet down. I regard silence both as strength and resistance. Perhaps because the calling is to speak up and have our voices heard, yet maybe silence can be another kind of opportunity. I explore these questions both choreographically and socio-politically. I build on the process of all the productions that I have done where I incorporate the voice and how I understand the voice as a bodily process. Now by removing the voice, the body’s “speech” is enhanced. In any case our culture has put too much emphasis on language for communication and has lost the potential of all the other elements of communication that are around the words and with the body. I am looking for this space around what is being said.

Additionally, for the next ten years, I will keep on searching for the words that convey what I really do in my work, rather than describe its wrapping. In the dance world, the practice of promoting performances through the texts that are written is disorienting. It disorientates how we experience these works and how we are educated as spectators of dance performances. What does the text promise that I will see, and what do I see?