Live performance in digital environments

Special Edition: Live Performance in Digital Environments.

Guest Editors: Dr Kerry Francksen and Professor Sophy Smith

Digital performance practices have continued to proliferate in response to a fast-moving technological landscape; one where artists have persisted in their adaptations towards a post-pandemic vista. Yet, whilst our attention was sharply focused through the pandemic (as highlighted in the recent ‘Covid-19: Theatre Goes Digital’ Special Issue and latterly in the DRHA Affiliated Issue ‘Digital Sustainability: From Resilience to Transformation’), it is the case that using technologies fundamentally changed how many artists and practitioners compose and realise their artwork. As we emerged from the pandemic, the ‘breath in dancing, theatre, and music making’ (Birringer 2022, 192) did indeed prevail. Moreover, what transpired was the development of alternative methods and approaches, which changed the ways in which artists and practitioners now go about their work. By bringing together a collection of these artists and practitioners, this Special Issue aims to capture the variety of digital practices that have emerged. Through a range of reflective essays, artistic perspectives, and scholarly articles, this issue looks to amplify the voice of the practitioner by placing their practice-based experience at the fore.

A prime example of artists adapting to the challenges posed by the pandemic is provided by Nordin, whose article offers the first of two discussions concerning the online performance Dream (2021); a collaborative endeavour between several partners including the Royal Shakespeare Company, The Philharmonia Orchestra, Marshmallow Laser Feast, EPIC games, amongst others. Nordin reflects on his own contribution to the design and implementation of ‘the interactive music that was generated in realtime by the actors and powered by Reactional Music’. His discussion offers a unique insight into the complex and multivarious elements that make up such a production. As Arifa Akbar described about her experience of Dream, ‘We are told, at a pre-show Q&A, that it has been watched by more than 20,000 people from around the world in just three days, and there are more than 7,000 people present on the night I tune in’ (2021). Thus, the reach and significance of the production cannot be underestimated. Nordin’s article here, offers a deep insight into the impact of having to move such a production to a fully online experience. As a result, the original intentions and subsequent development of the music’s ‘original assets’ were fundamentally changed. Not least because enabling the actors to manipulate the music meant that ‘the real time input and interactions between actors and props changed everything in ways that were difficult to predict’. Nordin’s unique account not only provides comprehensive evidence of the challenges and subsequent outcomes that were achieved within the audio elements of the production, but it also highlights some of the important transformations that took place across all aspects of the creative process. It is interesting to observe the herculean collaborative effort that appears to have been necessary to bring such a production to fruition, and to consider the vast array of skills and expertise that were drawn upon from across the artistic, gaming, industry, and academic communities.

The second discussion relating to the online performance Dream (2021) is provided by Francksen, who draws on her conversations with the performers of the work to explore their perspectives on the creative process in virtual environments. As the landscape of performance art continues to embrace digital platforms, performers find themselves tasked not only with crafting compelling content suited for digital processing but also with mastering a diverse set of skills to navigate these new technological realms. The article addresses the gap in documentation that fails to capture the insights and expertise emerging directly from performers themselves. Through a series of interviews with the performers involved in Dream (2021), spanning actors, puppeteers, dancers, and movement experts, this interview-based study serves as a platform to both document and advocate for the expanding practical knowledge and skills among performers. By shedding light on the shifting demands faced by performers, the article offers valuable insights into how the development and execution of performances in virtual environments are reshaping the performer experience. Its strength lies in its first-hand accounts from performers, providing a unique and authentic perspective that enriches the discourse surrounding the intersection of technology and performance art. Moreover, the article's focus on the practical implications for performers underscores its originality, offering a fresh perspective on the transformative impact of virtual environments on the creative process within the performing arts.

The use of gaming apparatus provides the foundation for Sykes’ contribution, which documents some of the findings from her Ph. D research into ‘embodied dance improvisatory approaches within motion capture environments’. In her audio-visual essay she discusses the sculptural potentials of dance within a motion capture (mocap) environment and reflects upon the emerging connections between a dancer’s embodied gesture and her resulting digital manifestation. Throughout the dialogue, the author and her participating dancer talk about their experiences of generating movement material in correlation to their digital traces and consider what arises for them during the mocap process. The voice over also provides some contextualisation, as does the accompanying written document, and it is useful to hear directly from the dancer about her experiences. Syke’s contribution highlights her decision-making process as a maker, and it is compelling to watch her navigating and managing the technologies for herself. Some of the dancer’s reflections, such as her discussions of the tangible elements and visible traces of her movement’s potential, offer some valuable insights from inside the creative process.

Wise’s insightful contribution also focusses on dance and technology, but here the artist-based reflection explores virtual reality (VR) and volumetric capture (VolCap). Focussed on practice, Wise provides a reflective analysis that delves into the intricate process of choreographing and capturing movement for Facades, a VR dance/theatre piece utilising a single-camera VolCap setup. The article explores the possibilities and constraints of this emerging workflow, examining how the spatial and technical limitations influenced both the choreographic process and artistic decisions. Departing from the traditional studio setting involving a larger team of dancers and technicians, Wise reflects on the empowering yet unconventional experience of working alone in the studio to create and capture this work. Drawing upon audience feedback, the article explores how the solitary aspect of the creative process shaped the choreographic and artistic elements, ultimately impacting the audience's solo experience through the technology. Moreover, the article highlights the potential of VolCap technology in facilitating new forms of intimate performances in VR, while also addressing the emerging ethical considerations surrounding the presentation of performances in virtual environments. Its strength lies in its first-hand narrative of the creative journey and its thoughtful analysis of the intersection between technology, choreography, and audience interaction, offering a distinctive perspective that contributes to discussions on the evolving realm of live performance in digital environments.

Following on from the above contributions, which highlight the artists’ individual creative processes as makers and creators, Nogueira, Menezes and Maςos de Carvalho offer a systematic review of Machine Learning (ML) and its implementation within dance practice. Artificial Intelligence and more precisely ML have been gaining traction in recent times. The scope of this review usefully captures the ‘pivotal role of datasets in training machine learning algorithms for applications in the dance domain’, most specifically in terms of utilising large datasets for the analysis of different dance styles and the potential artistic outcomes attributed to training such models. The authors state that ‘By analyzing the impact of machine learning on dance from both research and artistic perspectives, this review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current landscape and identify areas for future exploration and collaboration’. They also point to some important indicators for future consideration, including the ethical implications of engaging in human-machine choreography. Important questions like, ‘What are the primary considerations surrounding authorship and ownership when the machine plays a role in creating a dance piece?’, will be especially significant as the field progresses (such questions also have reach far beyond the artistic community). The tables of information peppered throughout the article provide a useful visual reference for identification and could prove a useful tool for anyone hoping to gain a better understanding of this emerging area; an area which will most certainly continue in earnest.

Swillen, Vanoeveren and Vandeweerd’s insightful piece ‘provides insights into the distinctive experiences and complexities encountered when embodying avatars, immersing oneself in virtual realms and co-creating with AI’. By speaking directly about their own experiences, it is interesting to consider how some of the ethical problems described above by Nogueira et al have been circumvented by the performers here. This conversation offers an important case in point, where technology is used as a constituent feature of the artistic creation and is considered a positive attribute rather than an oppositional barrier; ‘We have complete control over the dataset, meaning that our biases are introduced and controlled by us’.

Next, Hughes offers a lengthy and contemplative account of his journeys into the metaverse via an exploration of the Nāṭyaśāstra, which is ‘a Sanskrit dramaturgical text written from 200BCE to 200CE’. The author’s ‘practice-based project seeks to understand how the liminal or transitional processes of performance present in the Nāṭyaśāstra, an ancient Sanskrit dramaturgical treatise, can inform the contemporary virtual stage’. Resulting in a VRChat world, Hughes describes how he created an experiential encounter that traverses across ‘real space’ and ‘virtual space’, with the aim of exploring how such technologies might imbue a deeper sense of immersion. Using the concept of liminality to theoretically underpin his investigations, his reflective paper states that, ‘Due to this event's workshop nature spectators and performers weave into a quasi-state of both, performing to each other and spectating the reaction’. The detailed account of the practice offers some interesting ideas relating to the creation of a liminal community space, which clearly had a lasting effect on the author, who mentions,

it was in experimentation in the VR häsya tryasra space with the text where we were able to generate a definite sense of what we understood to be rasa. We laughed with and at each other experiencing each other’s emotion in a pure and connected way and what is more the virtual application for me seemed to sharpen this image.

To close, one of the most significant commonalities, which runs throughout all the contributions in this special issue is a palpable tenacity for finding inventive solutions in these new environments. The ability of artists and practitioners to continually transform in response to an emerging digital landscape, offers us a vision where digital performance can indeed be reimagined as new aesthetic and hybridised form for artistic engagement.