forms that can be used to fabricate real objects. Schematics & maps of objectivity. These may serve as simple hand outs to give others, as conversation starters & containers for shared brainstorming.

Instruments: drums, dulcimers, simple bowed forms, singing bowls, bells & reeds bound in a bushel, large glockenspiels or chimes. Instruments as furniture, architecture, place-attention/space-time generators, maybe permanently installed in a place or at least uniquely adapted to it.

Maps: for choreography, movements & locations - physical & also charting the meandering attention through various psychic obstacles= maps to compile & illustrate the various planes of awareness, attention, intention, intuition, function. Overlays, layers, superimpositions: esthetic double, exploded informatics with text descriptions, or maybe physical conduits of energy meridians (tai chi, feng ship, acupuncture) of how to pass through a space, as a direction of what could be (an ideal) or a document of what was (reverse engineering objects from direct/spontaneous/improvised experience; a drawing made from a dance or a notation made by an instrumentalist, etc).

Notations: a map of an instrument, a path through the process of playing, marks upon the landscape left by the coursing river, track marks of motion. Chelsea speaks of needing to be in a space, sonic space & architectural space, a corporeal response to physicality - but then musicans describe their music as responsive to space/time/place & architects design buildings in response to a specific landscape, spatio-temporal coordination, so who/what is at the source of this influence? The source is not the beginning so much as a focal point of attention, a moment of determination, a decision to balance upon a particular focal point. Why are creative experiences - as conceived by the makers - always conceived as a response to an era-area rather than attempting to infuse/influence/determine/redirect the information in the data stream. Nature is a factor: that mythological pre-existing essence of a place, but does this exist beyond an idea? Chelsea's point must be considered as a necessary corporeal validation of affect, the truth of experience, but this way of working as always in response opens questions (in me, my perspective, my process) of this always-other source. The purpose of the opera should be to meditate upon this source - again, not an origin/beginning so much as the locus of focus - to spin a new series of events, instigate a new way of feeling-through action/response, move towards articulating another way of "being in a space" as an era-area-aria, with ramifications bleeding out of the periphery of the purely creative act, with real consequences & repercussions in daily lives existence = a determination of the future path of art, towards the radicalization of mundane existence, reconsideration of how & why we act, in relation to others/each other/all others. If Chelsea (or a dancer, choreographer, performer, actor) requires a space to feel through, this should be what I focus upon crafting, considering, modulating, "meditating upon" (meditation bench/pillow, the seat of consciousness.)

These are the drawings, schematics for new forms of awareness, derived from activated conversations with performers concerning their needs of a space & reverse-engineered experimental notations documenting the trials of the experiences playing-through the scenarios. The drawings are intertwined with the play, determining & also documenting. Collaboration with others should emphasize & amplify their strengths while also deterring the traditional ways of working, to destabilize/loosen the impediments, introducing chaos in the system to dislodge awareness & offer other possibilities for conversation & action.