The development of thinking about art and science as intrinsically different matters, and therefore two fundamentally different spheres is to be assigned – let us bring this to mind – to the historical phase of the 18th century in Europe. Along these lines, thinking about the sexes as completely different beings has to be related to that era. The separating compulsion, as Dieter Wuttke (2003) characterised the phenomenon, stands for a new world view becoming established, in which the orders of knowledge and the sexes were closely interwoven. If we are aware of this historical development and the hierarchy within knowledge and the sexes, the desire becoming obvious in many places to bring art and science into contact again in the 21st century, is more than comprehensible. It can be understood as an instigation to explore the potential of that which is between the poles – the inter, the trans, the hybrid. Not least, this means working on the relations of thought and the relation between different forms of knowledge.

A scientist invites a choreographer and dancer for a project. “Science and Art in Dialogue. Theoretical Reflection and Experimental Arrangements” is the title of this undertaking, which developed out of an engagement with the connecting lines of science, art, and gender (Ingrisch 2012). The first experimental arrangement is a space of encounter, of getting to know each other.

We started out with lots of conversations. I, scientifically socialised; KW, who’d had dance training early in her life and then gone her very own way on which we eventually met. What brought you to dance? Why did you end up in science? What were, and are, your themes? What did you think? How did you do it? What happened to you? So many differences, so many parallels. Much that differed, but also much that didn’t.

What is your working process? Is there a first, second, third point? And yours? What happens when you’re developing a piece? After many conversations we decided to continue our getting to know each other in a rehearsal room, and thus on another level – not a room filled with books, records, thoughts and writings, but an empty room. A room with mirrors. Focussing on the body. Seeing the body. Perceiving it. And the shadow of the window frames on the sun-speckled parquet floor.

Pas de deux – a dance in pairs, classically danced by a woman and a man with their movements in exact accordance, often the climax, the most poetic moment of a ballet.
Our pas de deux created a thought space in which we moved and communicated – through text, body, gestures, actions, statements, expression, observation, response, dance, and impulse. Finely attuned movements between art and science, with art and science, through science and art.
We had gotten to know each other. Etymologically, to “ken” (know) comes from Old Norse and is connected with sensing and enjoyment.

Our next experimental arrangement put the focus on Beyond. What happens when I no longer rely primarily on my discipline, you no longer on yours? If we are no longer moving on the secure ground of our disciplines? What are we evoking then? When both of us enter a territory where our expertise will not carry us along? The equivalence on which our work was based – now it lay in the insecurity and the lack of familiarity to which we exposed ourselves together.

My thinking, my expression in many cases takes place via language. The cautious notion of incorporating various other levels of perception into scientific research developed to become a desire. The desire to complement the effectiveness of language in the humanties with additional levels of experience, and thus dimensions of thought, perception, and expression. This means counteracting the separating compulsion and the hierarchies inscribed therein. On the level of thought relations this means intensive experimentation with the As-Well-As, the And, in order to explore it (Ingrisch 2012).

Starting serious attempts not only to describe various modes of thought, and thus again stay within language, but to experience them myself in doing. To set myself in motion. Giving space to hearing and seeing in other ways. Trying out the potential of forms of knowledge and cognition, playing with them according to the complexity of the world.

Working with images and sounds, with movement and rhythms in a research project means offering a special place to the senses. In our new experimental arrangement, each of us chose an approach of their own. A theme began to emerge. Media came into play. A Pas de Trois began.

Medium – it mediates, is in the middle. So, a magical-technical in-between. It is capable of transmitting information and energy. Or, according to Marshall McLuhan, of extending the sensory organs (McLuhan 1964). Medium – a means of communication, of relation.

Forms of knowledge and being in process. Putting our professional identities at stake. Consciously thinking our being-in-the-world differently, in spite of taxonomies retaining us in 19th century structures. We are so much more, so much beyond the scientist, the choreographer and dancer.

Not getting absorbed in difference, not getting absorbed in otherness. Recognising ourselves as agents who, if they choose not to remain in the close confines of their disciplines, expand their perception, the spectrum they have at their disposal beyond these boundaries, in which they can move, can be. Which effects will we then unfold? What shows when material-discursive practices are not oriented along hierarchies, demarcations, and exclusion?

We entered into exploring the in-between of movement and moment, of taking a path and backpedalling, undisturbed attention, advance and repose.We entered into exploring the in-between of movement and moment, of taking a path and backpedalling, undisturbed attention, advance and repose.

A continuation of the statement “Video is political in the deepest personal sense”(Torcelli 1996), and a redefinition of alternative spaces. An invitation to expand one’s perception. To fathom realities. Perceiving the punctum. An effect, thus Roland Barthes (1981), that indicates an indescribable element. An element that irrates us, touches us and hints at the possibility of going far beyond association. Here we encounter the atopical, placelessness as the sign of a kind of positioning outside hegemonial thinking conditions.

Images, so Vilém Flusser (1989), “mostly point out something in space-time ‘out there’ which they are supposed to make conceivable to us as abstractions (as reductions of the four space-time dimensions to the two planar ones).” During contemplation, we can let our gaze wander, moving with our intention in connotative symbol complexes, establishing relationships, breaking up before and after. A meaning forms in which linearity no longer plays a part, the logic of cause and effect is suspended. They make the world imaginable, their character is magical. Linear writing further promotes abstraction and corresponds with representational thinking, and therefore with a different consciousness. In this way the past can be deciphered as a long struggle between image and text, magic and term.

Further themes emerged.
Spaces formed.

Walking, we connect ourselves with the experience of 5 million years of upright walk. We can sense our outside and inside, feel that which we are used to calling identity, in a different manner through the conscious perception of our body in motion. A common space of walking and thinking developed. A caleidoscope of connotations opened up. By allowing ambiguity and complexity, a mode unfolded which, in opposition to that which separates, put the focus via phenomena on relations.

Movement, walking – a form of transformation. “Spiritual transformation”, so Trinh T. Minh Hà (2011). “And that is why you have the whole tradition of leaving a place, putting themselves in a state of instability, and also in a space of movement where they are walking in order to open up their receptivity and their relation to the world.”

Which spaces can agents in art and science open up together, transcending historically constructed boundaries? And – how do they do it?

20
Walking/moving as method. Why do we act as we do in a research project? Method, methodos – the tracing back of the path taken, reflection of the actions generating cognition. Meta, after, hodós, way, i.e., the retraced way, cannot only be interpreted as a from-here-to-there, but also as an in-between, a movement in between. How do I generate cognition? What do I include in this process, what do I exclude? And what does this tell about the quality of the insight gained? Understanding movement in the context of the orders of knowledge and gender, conceding body knowledge its appropriate position in knowledge architecture, still poses a challenge for the classical concept of knowledge which is defined via rationality. For it means thinking knowledge in context with movement. Here, the body – and therefore bipolar, female-connotated matters – can no longer be omitted. Performative knowledge which again and again experiences activation in practices (Klein 2014, Bachmann-Medick 2012).

Indication 44 of Jean Luc Nancy’s “58 indices about the body”:
“Soul, body, mind: the first is the form of the second, and the third is the power which engenders the first. Therefore, the second is the expressiveness of the third. The body expresses the mind, i.e., it lets it gush out, presses out its juices, extracts its sweat, snatches up its sparks and throws everything out into space. A body is a flare-up.” (Nancy 2010)

However, one could also speak about a world-making by dance and choreography which occurs through the body and through movement. Gabriele Klein: “As a world of the body and the senses, of movement and feelings, as a world of metaphors, for which words fail us, dance in the modern age, according to the modern dance discourse, constitutes an alternative world, namely a world beyond language and rationality.” (Klein 2011, 17) In this ensemble of discourses – not by chance either – dance was constituted as “the other”. But art can be thought inverted. Jacques Rancière understands art and politics as connected with each other, two forms of the distribution of the sensual, an indication of how closely – much opposed to a separated thinking – the sensual-physical, the perception of movement is interwoven with the production of culture, sociality, and politics (Rancière 1991). Art is “neither political due to the message it conveys, nor because of the way it represents and reflects social structures, political conflicts, or social, ethnic, and sexual identities. Art is political first of all because it creates a spatio-temporal sensorium that determines certain ways of being together or separated, of being inside or outside, opposite or in the middle. Art is political in that it portions a certain space and a certain time” (Ranciére 2006,, 77).

Through movement, we perceive space and at the same time we shape it. In walking, in thinking. By moving through them, says Michel de Certeau, we create spaces. In reflecting about the talking of steps trailing away, he presents the play of steps as the shaping of spaces. “Whereas in the active-passive commonsense model, time and space are located as stable signifiers into which the body enters, within a relational space and time are qualitatively transformed by the movement of the body. The body does not move into space and time, it creates space and time: there is no space and time before movement” (Manning 2007, xiii), so Erin Manning.

Through movement, we perceive space and at the same time we shape it. In walking, in thinking. By moving through them, says Michel de Certeau, we create spaces. In reflecting about the talking of steps trailing away, he presents the play of steps as the shaping of spaces. “Whereas in the active-passive commonsense model, time and space are located as stable signifiers into which the body enters, within a relational space and time are qualitatively transformed by the movement of the body. The body does not move into space and time, it creates space and time: there is no space and time before movement” (Manning 2007, xiii), so Erin Manning.

Between us – a We, “a part of the world in its unconcluded becoming” (Barad 2012, 38).