Cristina Gallizioli is an Italian architect who mostly works in duo. But she had never worked with a performing artist before, let alone a circus artist. ‘The particular use of space and tools in contemporary circus can be really inspiring for my architectural practice.’
Why did you apply for Circus Without Circus?
I found it by chance, I think through the newsletter of Metropolis. For some time I was already looking to make the connection between performing arts and architecture. I did some courses, but that’s not the same: when you’re in a workshop, with a teacher, there’s a clear frame in which you work. The proposal of Circus Without Circus was different: working from zero, from the same level, with another artist to achieve something. I like the residency format in general; I do a lot of residencies, that’s my primary way of working.
What sort of residencies?
Research residencies on architecture. But not creating big buildings – not even real buildings. Most of the time it’s research about space. I mostly do it in duo, actually, I always work with the architect Marco Ferrari (for an example: see this link). Some of our projects overlap and some not – it depends on the project we apply for. It’s interesting to work this way. Our duo is our main path, but we can bring in different threads from the projects we do solo. My thread is definitely the performing arts.
How do you combine performing arts with architecture?
For example: tomorrow I’m leaving for a residency, a project about inhabiting landscapes. It’s joining the fact of the presence of the body with domestic actions. It’s going to be outdoors and there will be an audience. So it will be Marco and me living outdoors, we’re going to build a house without walls – furniture spread in the landscape. We will be living there for one month, the audience can join us for a sleep over, play guitar together, sew, … all sorts of domestic actions in this outdoor landscape.
You will not perform, but just ‘be’ there as Cristina?
Yes. It’s not about acting but about the presence of the body and how action can create architecture. In this case there’s barely nothing, mostly landscape and a few objects that remind of specific actions: a bed reminds of sleeping, a stove reminds of cooking, …
Another example of what we do is a project of this Summer that we call ‘soft architecture’: architecture made of textile. It’s about imagining architecture getting lighter and lighter until it becomes made of fabric and you can pass through it. The interesting thing is that people are tempted to touch the fabrics and really interact with it – that doesn’t happen with ‘real’ architecture, we usually don’t touch concrete walls or windows. Marco and I are still developing this concept of soft architecture; more big scale, match it with scenography, or other threads. So our projects are more about the actions of people and the presence of their body in connection with space.
We also did one performance in which we were lying down and were considering our bodies as if they were landscapes, with little architectures lying on top – it was about changing the scale of the body. This was also with a public presentation: people could pass by and see us lying on the ground. I think this was the first time we performed for an audience. It’s really interesting to combine something steady like architecture with something very moving like the body.
Did you know circus before Circus Without Circus?
Not so much, no. I think I was more into the big box of live arts, but at the same time I studied my master thesis in Chili, where a lot of spontaneous circus is happening, and actually there are architects working with the circus space – taking the circus tent or other elements from the circus and transforming it in normal daily architecture. I found it really interesting, I had a very strong impression of this kind of unexpected match.
I saw one traditional circus, I think, and some little contemporary circus groups, mostly people I met during the residencies I did. I knew that a Chinese pole exists, but I didn’t know it by name. So when I heard I was matched with Nicolas, I did some research on his discipline. It’s interesting that circus is often about using tools, just like architecture.
Let’s jump to your CWC residency with Nicolas Fraiseau. In short, what did you do?
We were talking together before the residency; we understood we both liked to worked with materials and see them in connection with actions, so we took that path. Nicolas wanted to research fire and Chinese pole. Chinese pole of course because that is his tool, and fire because he wants to develop some shows with it. In the beginning I wasn’t really excited, but after a while I thought ‘okay, why not’; thinking of fire as an architectural material could be interesting. The first days we were kind of performing for each other, so we weren’t doing so much things together at the same moment – besides the warm-up. But I liked it that way because it gave me space to try to develop the physical stuff I’m not good at. I didn’t want to just build and Nicolas perform, we constantly switched roles.
What did you do with the fire?
I thought of building some structures with paper and put them on fire, but this was too dangerous as we worked inside the theatre – people were already complaining – so this was a thread we didn’t follow. And actually this was a good thing, because building stuff and putting it on fire is an external process, it has nothing to do with your own body. Our second thread was more interesting for me; using candles and wax in relation with our body (for more information: see their logbook).
Was there some kind of breakthrough during the residency? A moment that you felt: yes, this is it.
Yes, I think so. Especially in the talks. We had some very interesting talks, trying to wrap things up and bring things together. Questions, most of the time, about what we were doing… Of course in 12 days you can’t answer everything, but it’s nice to have new questions to keep for further investigation. But I don’t think that anything we did was something I can use in my future work – not exactly as it is. It was more about developing a sensibility and sharing it with somebody else.
And Nicolas was the right person to share your sensibility with?
Yes, although at first I was a bit frightened. He had very precise ideas to research, and he is used to perform. But he really supported me – I didn’t feel ashamed of improvising with him, I didn’t feel any barrier. It was very natural the way we worked together. This is not obvious at all. I’ve worked with many people before and sometimes it just doesn’t match.
You felt you were equal?
Exactly. And also we didn’t keep things for ourselves. Sometimes you don’t say everything you have in your mind, but we were really open to each other. Or me at least. (laughs)
What’s the most important lesson you’ve learned? Or insight you had?
(pause) The time you give to movements and the fact of following while you’re body is leading, but at the same time having somebody watching – I never really considered this, I didn’t know how to approach it. This is something I’m taking with me, I’m still thinking about it. Actually, we didn’t present this in our logbook, but we did some nice things in the city too: blindfolded walks, or some exercises in which we related the dimensions of our body with different parts of the city – trying to hack the city. This was a spare thing, a thread we didn’t really dive into, but it was something I really wanted to do. I was more up to do something in public space to be honest, but as Nicolas was more into materials and I also like that thread, I thought okay, this will be better for our collaboration. I can try the public space in my second residency. (laughs) But this concept of being watched while doing something physically is quite new for me.
Are you interested to go further into performing yourself?
Maybe. I don’t know if it’s too late, I’m thirty, I don’t think I can become a circus artist anymore. I tried the Chinese pole, but I really didn’t succeed. (laughs) But yes, integrate the performing aspect more in my architectural practice – although I don’t know yet how exactly.
If you had more time during the residency, what would you have dived deeper into?
Going more big scale with fire would have been nice. Another thing were the wax plates; we made big wax plates, really interesting to experiment with, but it wasn’t easy because they were more stiff than expected. This needs more time to research. And a last thing was the public space, as I said before.
Did you find a common language, not knowing each other and coming from different art forms?
Yes, totally. It’s almost surprising. Actually I googled him before and saw that he did very different stuff than me, so I was wondering: how are we going to communicate? But our underlying topics are very similar, for example the topic of exposure and vulnerability. I like to work with soft materials and make subtle and intimate structures instead of huge concrete buildings, Nicolas is working a lot on the human side of circus instead of being a hero who can do everything. From the moment you go for vulnerability, you go in relation with other things.
Now you know circus a bit more, what do you think of it?
(pause) I think there is a similar approach between contemporary circus and contemporary architecture: questioning the disciplines and the traditions, trying to go on, trying to unbuild what’s already known. I really liked the fact that Nico was questioning the tools of circus and building new tools himself. Changing the existing tools can be considered as a zero point: what happens if you throw them away and make new ones? I’m planning to see more circus shows of this kind. The particular use of space and tools can be really inspiring for my architectural practice.
Do you have some advice for other artists who want to do cross-disciplinary research projects?
Maybe just be curious and try to do the things you’re not comfortable about. Try not to judge the other one when (s)he is doing stuff (s)he’s uncomfortable about. Show and except each other’s vulnerability.
Interview by Maarten Verhelst (August 2021)