Marita Tatari on »Narkosis«


Charlie Fouchier in “Narkosis” © Sandra Man + Moritz Majce, 2017

Marita Tatari, professor for Contemporary Aesthetics at the HMDK Stuttgart, writes about “Narkosis” in her text “The Fading of an Archimedean Point: Stage and Audience Reconsidered”:

[…] This piece does not confront or fight a given arrangement of the world. Instead, it intervenes in our perception and restores it to its underlying plasticity or formability. Narkosis dives under the level of contents, identities and given forms, under the level of that which is being shown, down to the point at which “the eye rotates in its hollow.” It is not just a meditation on seeing. It opens up a space in which, for the duration of an evening, the audience can be an audience: it can be affected by the action of a gathering, which is deeply resistant to any given order. The piece addresses and enables a non-given-common as relation. It actualizes it in its audience as well as in the performers, and bears it along, bearing it jointly together. [..]

See full text here

Call for Participants: Relational Flow Workshop | May 2022


© Sandra Man + Moritz Majce, 2022

Berlin-based visual artist and choreographer Moritz Majce, working together with writer, video artist and choreographer Sandra Man, is looking for dancers/movers/performers to take part in their next Relational Flow workshop. The aim of the workshop is to find new people to work together in the long term. The next projects by Moritz Majce and Sandra Man will take place in summer (live outdoor installation, Jul till Sep), and later in the year (live multiroom installation, Oct till Feb).
The workshop is conducted in Berlin by Moritz (he/him, AUT) together with the dancer, performer and body coach Sigal Zouk (she/her, ISR).
About Relational Flow
Together with Sandra, Moritz is creating Space Choreographies: moving installations and walk-through live performances. Choreographic videos, installational objects, spoken lyrics, dancers and performers form fluid surroundings for spectators. In the centre of their work is the relation of nature, community and technology.
One basic element of Space Choreography is a spatial practice between several dancers that Sandra and Moritz started with the work Chora in 2019, and Moritz has since developed further: the Relational Flow. In essence it is about working with a space of attraction between bodies, developing a multidirectional attentiveness and relating to always more than one other body. Dancers take the relations between each other and to visitors as impulses and as material: they let themselves be moved by proximity and distance, by spatial affects. They dance the connections between the bodies, thereby creating simultaneous streams of movement that spread from bodies through bodies to other bodies. Relational Flow practices the intensification of the bodies’ sensitivity to each other and develops a common vocabulary of relating that is visible to the outside. For visitors, whose concrete presence in the space becomes part of the dancers’ movements, it feels as if the flow of movement is passing through them. A common space is created by bodies moving together and allows visitors to relate to it in a different way. One feels how the movements of the dancers form a both common and heterogeneous group body, experiences oneself as “being danced”.
Relational Flow follows certain principles, but is fundamentally plastic. The work changes with each dancer who joins. It is an attempt to realise a different corporeal relation to the audience (we rather call them “cohabitants”) as well as inbetween dancers/performers. From a dancer´s perspective it is about taking the spatial and physical reality of the visitors seriously, leaving the concept of performing subjects in front of disembodies eyes behind, rather caring for and sharing a relational space with cohabitants. It follows a basic intuition that connects the practice with a specific understanding of inclusion.
See also: The Basic Principles of Relational Flow

Organisational Details
The workshop takes place in Berlin. It consists of one intro-day (half day, 4 hours), followed by a 4-day workshop (à 4 hours + 30 min break per day).
The intro day will take place on 7, 8, 9, and 10 May (it will be only one of these days for you in case we invite you). The intro day serves both sides to find out whether we and you want to continue working together in the actual workshop.
There will be two 4-day workshop units, which take place from 14–17 May, and from 19–22 May (i.e. it would be either one of these periods for you). The four workshop days are paid (€350 total), the intro day is not paid.
The workshop is independent from our projects, we see it however as a way to meet new people and find out if they and us feel like working together. The reason for doing this workshop is to find new people we want to work together in the long term. Our next projects will take place in summer (outdoor work, Jul till Sep), and later in the year (multiroom work, Oct till Feb).
For whom
Professional dancers/movers/performers; preferably Berlin-based (this is not a must but we cannot cover travel and accomodation costs).
For the development of the practice, each individual’s identity and experience are crucial and welcomed. We encourage dance artists from diverse cultural backgrounds, BIPOC and all gender expressions to apply. If you are interested and want to know more about our background and experience, please feel invited to contact us.
• strong movement background (experience in contemporary dance, and/or further movement practices, such as urban dance, breakdance, martial arts, acrobatics, somatic practices)
• solidly skilled and deeply grounded dancer/mover/performer
• substantial experience of performing on stage
• experience and interest in moving in and as a group
• sensitive and intuitive, as well as accurate and specific
• capable of both boldness and fragility (from holding the space on your own to caring for others to feel included)
• persistence (Relational Flow´s multifocality can be demanding, and needs time and trust to unfold)
Application Material
• some information about yourself and your experience with moving/dancing/performing
• a text (max. 1 page) – or if you prefer video –, in which you explain why you are interested in taking part
• some video links where you can be seen moving/dancing/performing in a way that allows us to get a feeling of your presence and capabilities
Please send your material to this email address:
Application Deadline
1 May
As the first intro day will already start a week later (7 May) we ask you to apply as soon as possible. If we find your application interesting, we would like to contact you for a video talk.
Further Information /

In Return – February 23-26 2022 @ Open Spaces Festival, Tanzfabrik Berlin


© Sandra Man + Moritz Majce, 2020

Space Choreography with Live Installation and Space Poem
Open Spaces Festival, Tanzfabrik Berlin

We are here, together. We are somewhere else, alone. Between the here and now of community and the vastness of being alone, In Return takes place. The work began as an exploration of paradise as a special place: space before the separation of body and environment, of life and death, of the divine and the earthly. Paradise is the origin of all living things and inaccessible to all living things. All species are united in it and each enters it alone.

In the live installation Habitat the artist and choreographer Moritz Majce creates a flowing togetherness with the dancers Ágnes Grélinger, Mikael Marklund, Florencia Martina, Dorota Michalak, and Sarah Stanley. Movements that relate to each other and to the visitors create an environment that passes through the bodies. Artist and writer Sandra Man shows Telos, a video shot with dancer Assi Pakkanen in the remote landscape of an alpine glacier. The individual human body connects with its environment, dives into it, steps out of it.

The visitors drift from the live installation to the image space. Between body and imagination, a movement of coming together, parting and returning emerges.

25.02.2022 Artists Talk with Sandra Man and Moritz Majce after the performance

Wednesday 23 02 2022 19:00
Thursday 24 02 2022 18:00
Friday 25 02 2022 18:00
Saturday 26 02 2022 18:00

Tickets: €10 / €15 Promotional Ticket / €20 Soli Ticket

Buy Tickets HERE

Address: Uferstudios, Studio 5, Badstraße 41A / Uferstraße 23, 13357 Berlin

SPACE + CHOREOGRAPHY: Moritz Majce VIDEO: Sandra Man PERFORMANCE LIVE INSTALLATION: Ágnes Grélinger, Mikael Marklund, Florencia Martina, Dorota Michalak, Sarah Stanley BODY COACHING: Sigal Zouk VIDEO PERFORMANCE: Assi Pakkanen IDEA + CONCEPT SPACE SUITS 3.0: Moritz Majce COSTUME DESIGN: Nina Loxton INSIDE EYES: Jorge de Hoyos, Moo Kim PRODUCTION: Tiphaine Carrère ARTISTIC TECHNICAL SUPPORT: Marc Lagies VIDEO DOCUMENTATION: Hana Khalil, Mariel Baqueiro STAGE HANDS: Hugo Baudouin, Pers Mastori, Bruno Aguirre, Merlin Andrae

A production by Sandra Man + Moritz Majce
Coproduction: Tanzfabrik Berlin

Funded by Hauptstadtkulturfonds. With the kind support of Land Kärnten Kultur. In cooperation with Collmot Research/Skybrush.

Follow us on Instagram: Instagram

The Basic Principles of Relational Flow

Relational Flow is a spatial practice between several dancers. Its foundations were discovered by Moritz Majce and Sandra Man while working on Chora (2019). Relational Flow is about working with a space of gravitational pull between the bodies, developing a multidirectional receptivity that is directed outwards and connecting to more than one other person, so that the movements created as a result form a dynamic, open continuum, creating new connections over and over. This in turn creates a space of community, which is produced by the bodies being moved by each other and allows the visitor to connect in a different way. They sense how the dancers’ movements form a group body that is shared and heterogeneous at the same time, and feel as if they are being danced with the dancers …

Read More

Aeon (II) August 5 – August 12 2021 @ Tanzfabrik Berlin


Aeon (II), Laura Siegmund © Moritz Majce + Sandra Man, 2021


Open Air Live Installation.
Free admission.

Aeon is the time of the planet, geological transformations take eons. They exceed the presence of the humans, they embed them into the long duration of the landscape.

In two parts, the artist and writer Sandra Man and the artist and choreographer Moritz Majce, each of them together with three dancers, invite you to meet in the urban nature of a wasteland in Berlin Lichtenberg. Located next to the six-lane Landsberger Allee, surrounded by apartment blocks and shopping malls, you will find a place opening itself up to silence, vastness and to the future.

Landsberger Allee 320, 10365 Berlin
Entrance: Gate at the roundabout at Möbel Höffner

Part I
Sandra Man: The Reunion

August 5 + 6, starting at 19.30

In a live installation of two texts, dedicated to The Swamp and The Street, Lisa Densem and Joséphine Evrard let themselves be moved by the real landscape and by imaginary ones. Delving into the deep times of the planet, we will come together elsewhere.

Joséphine Evrard at Aeon

Joséphine Evrard at Aeon, 2020

Lisa Densem at Aeon

Lisa Densem at Aeon, 2020

Laura Siegmund at Aeon II

Laura Siegmund at Aeon, 2020

Together with the performers, Sandra Man is working on ways of speaking a text that open up to the ones who are present as well as to a future. The continuous speaking of the performers and the vastness of the landscape without stage and auditorium allow for a new relation between speaking and listening. The words are calling us, and at the same time the tale is far away. The voices are addressing us, and at the same time they are going somewhere else. Within kindness and intimacy an unfamiliarity is welcomed; inside of nature the artificial is allowed to appear; within the human the program can reveal itself. At the periphery of the city, at the limit of being human, speaking and listening continue outside, in a new landscape.

One text is in English, the other one in German. The English translation is by Anna Galt.

PLEASE NOTE: This part was originally performed by three dancers, including Laura Siegmund. This time, Laura cannot take part.

The area is freely accessible at your own risk. The daily Corona regulation of the state of Berlin applies. Currently open air no testing obligation.

Part II
Moritz Majce: The Clearing

Monday, August 9, 19:00–21.00, open doors from 19:00–20:00
Tuesday, August 10, 19:00–21.00, open doors from 19:00–20:00
Wednesday, August 11, 19:00–21.00, open doors from 19:00–20:00
Thursday, August 12, 19:00–21.00, open doors from 19:00–20:00

Together with Jorge Rodolfo De Hoyos, Samuel Draper, Mikael Marklund, Moritz Majce will present The Clearing.

One year ago, after the first lockdown, artist and choreographer Moritz Majce started to work intensely on Relational Flow, a movement practice that aims to create a living space in-between bodies. Letting themselves be moved by each other, the dancers take the relations between their bodies as source and material; they constantly feel where the others are and allow this sensation to move them.

From the beginning, Relational Flow, has been a practice not only in-between the dancers who are rather activating than performing it, but it includes also the visitors. Understood as sensing bodies rather than as watching spectators, the moving space is flowing through the audience and is happening around them, crossing and enveloping them.

Relational Flow is an ongoing practice research that fully unfolds itself only in the presence of visitors. In the frame of Aeon II the part named “The Clearing” is dedicated to the experience of Relational Flow. Inviting every body into the flow of presence it creates a sensation of being together even when we are apart from each other. Taking place on the vast wasteland on Landsberger Allee, “The Clearing” is opening up the space in-between us humans within the landscape.

For questions and more info please write to

Reviews Aeon:

Felicitas Zeeden “Zu Aeon – Spuren der Ewigkeit”
Laura Siegmund and Sandra Man on their collaboration
Beatrix Joyce on Aeon

IDEA + CONCEPT SPACE SUITS 2.0: Moritz Majce COSTUME DESIGN: Kristina Weiß-Busch TRANSLATION: Anna Galt PRODUCTION: Tiphaine Carrère

A production by Moritz Majce + Sandra Man
Coproduction: Tanznacht Berlin

Supported by the NATIONAL PERFORMANCE NETWORK – STEPPING OUT, funded by the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and the Media as part of the initiative NEUSTART KULTUR. Hilfsprogramm Tanz.

Follow us on Instagram: Instagram

New Live Art Writing Platform STREAM


Stream is a platform for texts motivated by live art.

During the first lockdown in spring 2020 the idea for a writing platform was born. We came together as a group of dancers, performers, choreographers and curators busy with live art and the desire to write. We founded Stream because we want a channel for writing about live art that is neither daily nor academic business.

Interviewed by Elena Philipp from the journal TanzRaumBerlin we describe our motives and motivations:

Kanal für die Schreiblust (1) (text in German)
Kanal für die Schreiblust (2) (text in German)

The current authors are: Angela Alves, Sasha Amaya, Beatrix Joyce, Inky Lee, Sandra Man, Lea Pischke, Nicola van Straaten, Susanna Ylikoski, Felicitas Zeeden.

Video Broadcast of “Chora (Satellite Views)” on April 16 at WUK performing arts


Chora | Stillshot from Open Spaces Festival, Tanzfabrik Berlin, 2019

Starting from today we would have presented to you a new live version of our work Chora at WUK performing arts in Vienna. As you all know, this is impossible now due to the virus.

Instead we are broadcasting on April 16 at 20.30 CET a video based on the first episode of Chora from last November in Berlin on the page of WUK performing arts.

Facebook Event here.

Additionally we are releasing a very special piece: the textual documentation of Chora by writer and performer Beatrix Joyce.

What Forms The Present? – Sandra Man and Marita Tatari, Talk at Flutgraben Performances #4, 9 Feb 2020

At the fourth event of Flutgraben Performances on February 9th 2020 Sandra Man invited philosopher Marita Tatari for a lecture. The text that was read at this occasion is an excerpt of an ongoing talk between the two, initiated by Sandra Man in late 2019 and to be continued all over 2020.

SM: In a recent talk that you gave at the conference in Munich in November 2019 you spoke about the becoming irrelevant of tradition, of history as a frame and source for the new in contemporary art. You said something like: Not that today’s art forms would not refer at all to their history but – in contrast to strategies of breaking up, overcoming, deconstructing etc. – the progressive relation to the past is no longer the reference or the source for the new.
The contemporary change in the relation between art forms and a certain understanding of history, between art and its past, actually has been the core of your thinking for some years now. Let’s start from here: Could you describe today’s shift in relating to the past? Why and how is it no longer out of a “post” to the past that art forms emerge? What is it that is changing so radically today that you even headline it in your talk as “the change of change” itself?

MT: If we take the term „contemporary art” beyond the restrained meaning of the art-period coming after modern art, the idea that artforms respond in a very particular way to their present time, was shaped in modernity: the idea that they respond to their present time by giving to it a form, opening it up as such, all by opening up in it something new, a possible (or impossible) future. The change of artforms has been related to historical change both as a result and as anticipation. Modernity projected this idea of art retrospectively into the past as well as into other, non-western cultures. In the core of this idea lies a precise understanding of relationality at stake in all artforms.
We could even say that the word and the thing of “art” were invented in modernity to designate a relationality that on the one hand is concrete and singular, let’s say, a touching, an affective relation in the present moment (affecting not only for instance visually or acoustically, but also a sensuous feeling even of ideas or thoughts). But at the same time “art” designates this relationality as bringing at play or opening up in each one of its addressees, in each one that is affected by it a non-defined relation: this is its public, its addressees is a non-defined “we” – the common, namely when the common is not conceived as a given order, when it is not defined or definable in a hierarchy. It is from this non-given common, this universal activated in the public addressed by art, that comes all the trouble with art.

SM: Let me interrupt you shortly, I would like to insert a question: How does the public, relate to what we usually call an “audience”? I am asking because I think there is a relation to it but however what you mean by public is not simply spectators as opposed to performers, makers, authors etc. (they are also affected and addressed by the work). Is and how is the public you are talking about an audience?

MT: Well it is first of all a change of perspective, a way to think of an artform/artpiece/artwork/artprocess I mean, it concerns everyone implied in it. But if we think of it in these terms, then we can’t take audience as a ready-made concept, applied to each artform. We have to think of the audience out of the way this special kind of relation takes place (it is actually an emanation of relation). So, if the central question concerning the arts is where lies the extreme limit, that enables relation under different cultural conditions not to be relation between given things, but emanation, then we have to think of the audience and its transformations out of this question too. There is a whole field of artistic research that can be opened up by this change of perspective.

By common as non-given order I mean here the extreme limit that allows for anything to come to the foreground and relate, to appear not as defined by something else (as in an order). The common in this sense is mortality and natality together, the extreme limit on the one hand, and the emanation of relation on the other, the extreme limit as emanation of relation. This emanation of relation has also been called techne and technique, because it does not belong in a pregiven natural order. If art has been touching to these extremities, if it has been touching to the common as non-given, that is to say to relation as emanation, it has been opening up a non-given, an excess of the given, in the punctuality of its form, or of its taking place.
This non-given, this emanation may be felt as intensity, and intensity is an emanation of a “more”, a surplus. But at the same time art opens up in us, in each one touched, a distance – the limit or nothingness, that allows to address all “me” as other than “me”, namely „we” as emanation of relation. This emanation exposed as such in a form interrupts the flow of time and opens up a non-time into historical time, an infinite. Christianity understood this infinite as a moment or a pretaste of eternity.
In contrast to this understanding, the modern designation of art in singular, the modern invention of art, distinguishes art from cult and ritual. While the latter addresses the “we” in its distinction from gods (as in non-western or pre-western cult-practices) or, in Christianity, in its relation to God opening up an eternity as an outside of the historical time, art in singular – this modern invention – deals with the surplus interrupting and exceeding the given, the surplus exposed as such, as newness arriving into historical time.
That is to say as change projected into historical time. “We” as exceeding any given, is then being translated in terms of the demand for equality, for inclusion of alterity, inclusion in a non-given order, inclusion of everybody in a non-given and non-hierarchical “we”, a demand opening up a future. The new in art, the change of artforms has been related to this demand and has been interpreted as progress.
All forms of “post”-art: postmodern, postdramatic, posthuman, some tried even to speak recently of postcontemporary art, they all neither just designate a new artform, nor just an artform that gives form to their present time, but also they relate overcoming the older forms to a better realization of the demand for equality into historical time. In other words, emanating relationality was still until the beginning of the 21st century perceived as in modernity, perceived as a non-hierachical and all inclusive “we” to come – be it in Derrida and Agamben’ terms as always to come, suspended in the present, never given, open to its non-giveness; be it as disillusionment from and denouncement of the utopias in which the 20th century still hoped (as in Lyotard’s “sublime”, vertiginous, postmodern art); be it by permanently subverting given orders and hierarchies – for instance between spectators and actors, beholders and art objects, keeping open the non-given common (as in many positions ranging from Ranciere to Judith Butler and theories of performativity); or be it as non-anthropocentric, subverting the established hierarchies between humans and non-humans (as in new materialisms, in technoecologies and OOO)… The variations of the modern scheme conceiving art, history and the evolution of artforms in their relation to history as progress, history as a project of a better realization of the demand for equality and art as progressively contributing to this goal – even as a goal impossible to achieve, or as an open horizon – all these variations are still inscribed into the modern understanding of relationality at stake in artforms. The address exceeding any given as common or universal is being translated into the demand for equality exceeding the present into historical time.

Despite all kind of critique of the concept of art, of its singular, despite the critique of the bourgeois beauty, the bourgeois ideal of state, later on the critique of the political utopias, the emergence of participating artistic forms, etc., etc., the progressive understanding of the evolution of artforms remained untouched until the beginning of the 21st century. Anthropocentric criticism, non-anthropocentric art-forms, as well as postcolonial-art, colonial-criticism are in this sense extensions of western enlightenment: they serve an always greater demand for equality. From a posterior point of view (im Nachhinein), the public each time at play in an artform, is restricted. Forms to come have to address otherness again and as progress, better, more, they have to bring at play a greater openness to otherness.

Today it is said that the oneness implied in the modern invention of “art”, its public (the conception of public upon which the concept of art was based) and the universality implied in it have been founded on racist and anthropocentric presuppositions. We are thus seemingly confronted with the paradox on the one hand to stand for the western demand for equality (which cannot and did not exist in societies not dealing with the non-giveness of the common, that is to say in societies not dealing with the autonomy of the common), and on the other hand to denounce this same western demand for not being enough at its own height. I say seemingly because actually this paradox obeys the scheme of western logic itself, it is projecting into historical future an improvement of the previous conceptions of the common and of the public implied in art, so to include non-western realities or non-humans.

Saying that all these critiques of the enlightenment’s conception of art are still inscribed in it, sounds today almost as an insult; yet this is not how I mean it. Why does art have to be new, why do forms have to be new? Newness was not a request for “artistic” practices in ritual communities. Art, this modern invention projected, I repeat, retrospectively into other cultures, has to be each time new because it addresses a non-determinable “we”. Hence this can only be addressed each time under the conditions of its time. It has to bring at play a „we” escaping the given.

Nevertheless, there is currently in my view a shift of this same western scheme. While the demand for equality, enabled by the autonomy or the non-giveness of a “we” persists, as well as the need to address “us” (in other words the need to address the absolute in us, extreme limitation as emanation of relating), oneness has lost its hold over the contemporary world. Under current technological (and actually techoeoconomic) conditions there is no one horizon to project change, and no one history to understand the present. Maybe this is why currently the new in arts, “contemporary” art does not appear in the form of a “post”: not a new artform defined by overcoming the older. The demand for equality, the denouncement of colonial or anthropocentric blindness do not help us understand what is happening currently in terms of art, because they are inscribed in the scheme they denounce as its improvement and continuation. Hence it is this very scheme that shifts: it is not in terms of a new artform, it is not in form of a “post”, that the demand for equality in art persists. So how can we grasp what is happening in terms of art, in terms of form, of artmaking?

When we say that the new in art is not conceived in terms of form as an overcoming of older forms, we say that the surplus of relationality at stake in it, the excess of the given in it is not projected into a horizon. But also, that the given is not the oneness of a history. We could then say that it is rather the framing of what is a form that shifts and with it the very notion of public, the space of appearance, the space in which relation accesses an extreme limit able to address its free course, its emanation. For instance, I find interesting in the case of the so called decolonialization of aesthetics or of postcolonial art, that the demand for equality – the confrontation with the pain and violence caused by colonial blindness in western-global culture, is paired with an experience of limit that is completely strange to western culture: an experience that cannot project the excess of the given into future, an experience of alterity that cannot be motor for historical change.

Audience Voices on Chora


Chora | Concrete Runners | 2019

“Es ist ein wirklich einzigartiger Raum, den ihr geschaffen habt. Auf eine Weise unaufgeregt und tief berührend zugleich, die ich noch nie erlebt habe. Ich war sehr glücklich darin.”

Christine Börsch-Supan

“Dears Sandra and Moritz. I came to watch Chora and I found it very precious and deep. I loved how it is so connected with bodies, persons and relations but speaks to me at the same time about the world, the environment and human/nature. I loved the installation and the dance and how the two are interdependent. It opened new possibilities of imagination and I loved as a public member to be inside this game/performance/state of being.”

Elena Dragonetti

“Ich liebe den Raum, den ihr kreiert habt, die Filme, die Präsenz. Am Ende habe ich bemerkt, am besten ist es, wenn ich mich mitbewege und beeinflussen lasse von der Umgebung, dann ist jedes Teil ein Element vom Ganzen.”

Joséphine Evrard

“Thank you for the space you created with Chora. I was there on the last day for many hours, and I experienced a peace that I rarely feel within art. A lot of accepting, specific energy from the performers that was very unique and ego less. There was something very safe in the space and I am grateful to have been there and absorb and just be. I felt very connected to this work, and I am happy for experiencing it, visiting this poetic world.”

Anna Fitoussi

“Sorry for my thousands of likes but I am in love with your project Chora?
Thanks for sharing it at Tanzfabrik.”

Paola Fontana

“I was very moved and inspired by the work I saw from you and Sandra. There were so many layers of my self in context to your work that I had to transgress, but once I did, it was like a doorway to another world of feeling and sensation and new spaces and possible paths. I was very happy to have experienced it. And I really mean ‘experience’, because I think If I had just watched, I wouldn’t have understood all that the inside of that work was offering so generously and so efficiently. So thank you both again. I think my words aren’t doing my experience of it all justice.. but I just wanted to express how happy was to have been there and to have stayed. Thank you”

Jared Gradinger

“I wanted to say thank you !
I really enjoyed your work, enjoyed entering this whole world of Chora. It felt like something very special to come on a Saturday morning after breakfast and being able to take part for some moment. This world you created felt very open, opening up, transparent, inviting, stimulating, as if answering open questions somehow. Always something subtle changing and giving a new impulse, a new tempo, some new information: let it be your movement, some change of bodies in space, the connection in between, all platforms, the videos changing, the light, the doors opening, fresh air, new colors, new visitors.. I enjoyed it all.”

Friederike Heine

“Ich wollte euch sagen, dass mir die Performance unglaublich gut gefallen und mich sehr berührt hat und ich froh bin, den Tag miterlebt zu haben!”

Lara Lehnert

“I came in without knowing and expecting what to happen, not even much about the program of Tanzfabrik. I walked in, stood in the space to experience what is happening, then visiting the space to see what is there; the screen, the poem, the landscape (video and reality), the materials, the people/ performers… it seemed to me that the setting was participatory since we, the audience, are not assigned any specific way of being in the space (apart from some pillows on the brown square blocks). Then I asked myself how much I am also creating the landscape and how much I can be involved. Then I see the poem about cells, eyes, skin, and I embodied them in a way that I am part of the everything, like an animal walked into the human made nature. It took some time to settle, text the boundaries, and not to disturb the space and the habitants, and it was a meeting to the existing things in the space, and I feel happy to be noticed that I am there but not overly taken care, it gives me space to keep regenerating my senses and thoughts. Sliding was fun, meeting through clashing softly and meeting bodies, being in the space with others, thanks for allowing.

I enjoyed the screen was placed outside the studio. Seeing the reflection of people dancing on the window with the poem together have brought me a special way of seeing the space. Thank you once again for the creation.”

Cary Shiu