Critical Correspondence

John Jasperse in conversation with Sarah Maxfield

Download this interview as a PDF

The Center for Performance Research (CPR) is 4000 square foot arts facility in Greenpoint Brooklyn, co-founded by Jonah Bokaer/Chez Bushwick, Inc. and John Jasperse/Thin Man Dance, Inc. CPR strives to address the critical need for space designated towards artist research and development in contemporary dance, performance and related forms. Recently Sarah Maxfield, who has worked on capital projects for Lincoln Center and Danspace Project, spoke with Jasperse about the development of CPR and its planned programming.

Sarah Maxfield: What led you to create CPR?

John Jasperse: I had a studio in a loft in Bushwick that I moved into in 1991. I kept that loft for 14 years, and various projects happened, people rehearsed there, it was an incredible resource for my work and for many other people. It became clear to me how important that resource had been and how it allowed me to basically experiment with different kinds of ideas about space and architecture and design in a way that would have been completely impossible had I been rehearsing by the hour. It was a kind of space that doesn’t really exist in New York anymore. So when I lost it, I began the process of exploring what it might be to buy something. From the beginning I was committed not only to how this could serve my own needs as an artist, but how I might be able to create some kind of context of permanence. [Having experienced] the classic oxymoronic thing where the artist gets displaced by the change that they’ve actually brought, I felt that I needed a sense of permanence and actual ownership.

The developer of 361 Manhattan Ave sent a proposal to a lot of different organizations. That began the discussion, and I pursued that relationship with the developer for about a year before it became clear that it wasn’t really tenable as a project solely of Thin Man Dance. I began to look for potential partners, and we brought on Chez Bushwick.

The biggest thing about it is the sense that if something isn’t done the working artist is just going to be forced out of New York City, particularly in forms like performance and dance where there is a need for space and time. Those two things cost money that has now become prohibitive for many people. It’s so challenging to find the space to actually develop the work. If we don’t find a way of supporting that in this community, that’s ultimately going to change the fabric of art-making happening here.

Sarah: Even performance venues that are mostly focused on presented product are talking about this need. It’s prevalent – the need for research and development. There’s a general clamor that the quality of the work is suffering from too much focus on product.

John: I’m actually interested in a way of thinking about how to bring other people into process. I’m not just saying as artists – I’m talking about a community. I think there is a lot of confusion and lack of literacy in the public [about contemporary dance and performance]. One of the things we’re trying to figure out now with CPR is how to use that – how to make the situation actually a win-win.

Sarah: I understand that you are conducting a study focused on community involvement. Can you talk more about that?

John: It’s important to make [CPR] a space for research and development and make community outreach that is symbiotic with the central mission, not in competition with it. This is complex because CPR is in Williamsburg, and Williamsburg is a socially and ethnically complicated neighborhood. There are really long-standing communities that in some cases view the artist as the displacer of those communities. It’s a complicated thing, especially that we’re in a condominium. We’re very committed to creating a feeling that we’re not trying to ignore the complexity of those issues. We’re trying to bring that complexity in.

Sarah: Do you have a sense yet of how you might do that, or is it just a desire at this point?

John: That’s complicated because it’s a long-term process. One of the things that has to be unfortunately really clear on the front end is money. We’re in a very tight situation. We [are strategizing] what we can do on the front end so that we don’t have this fantastic program and in six months the thing is dead. We’re going to avoid that, and one of the ways to avoid that is to be really focused on how we’re going to make this project stable in its first two years of operation. A lot of people who are going to work [at CPR] are going to have to rent the space. We would like eventually to move more into a curatorial process, but we need to get through this first stage.

Sarah: In this first phase of two years or so, are you planning to curate the rentals, or will it just be a case of booking whoever comes along with the cash?

John: I think it’s a little bit of both because obviously we’re seeking out people who have the resources, but who also fit. There may be lots of people who we’d love to do something with that we can’t right now. It doesn’t mean we’re not thinking about them, and it doesn’t mean also that those people wouldn’t be rehearsing there on an hourly basis. It’s difficult to say definitively how it’s all going to pan out that this point.

Sarah: I want to go back to what you said before about the importance of owning the space so as not to be constantly displaced. On your website you describe CPR as a “dynamic new model for sustainable arts infrastructure.” Is that related to the ownership concept, or is there more to that?

John: There’s a huge history of artists getting together and making do with the situation at hand; there’s a lot we can learn from that. I think one of the things that we’re excited about are environmental initiatives. The building itself is seeking LEED certification. It’s the first mixed-use building of its size in Brooklyn to [do that.] I think when we’re talking about environmental responsibility and trying to combine that with economic sustainability, that’s slightly different than other models out there.

Sarah: Can you talk a little more about working with a developer? It seems that artists are being approached by developers seeming to offer a fantastic gift of space, but with significant strings attached, though that era may be over in light of the recent economic downturn. In any case, what was your experience on this project?

John: A friend of mine once said that a good deal is a deal where everybody thinks it’s a good deal. Here’s an example of a commercial developer trying to make some money for investors and also trying to address some larger need and identifying a product that has an appeal to a certain market. We become part of the product, and I’m ok about that. But, we’ve experienced frustrations, and I fought really hard to get the best version of this space. There are some battles that I’ve won, and there are some that I’ve lost. Even in the moments where there has been a lot of conflict, there has been nonetheless a feeling for me that the developer has been really behind the project and wants to see it succeed. That’s really exceptional because it’s not an easy thing to maintain and has become increasingly difficult, given that the market this project started out with is not the market that we’re in now. [The developer’s] capacity to make money has diminished dramatically. That puts him in a very challenging position to continue to maintain the commitment and support.

Sarah: While working with the developer to realize the space, what were your priorities? What was achieved, and what had to be let go?

John: We got the ceiling as high as we could; that was a big uphill battle. It’s not perfect, but I also was not interested in a space with a dramatically beautiful high ceiling that would require an enormous amount of money to heat. So we were trying to balance those things. We asked ourselves, “How do you make a space that is ultimately very good in terms of working conditions, but where you’re making some choices that make it possible to actually run the space?”

Sarah: I’m curious to hear more about the choices you made related to flexibility.

John: Well flexibility has to do with cost and labor. I mean, you can move everything around, but how much does it cost to really do that? The lighting is a perfect example. We [have a bid in] for the first fully-LED facility in the country. Now, LED does some great things – it uses less than a quarter of the electricity of a conventional setup, which is a big plus for operating costs. It’s a very specific kind of light. It has enormous capacity in terms of color; it doesn’t have any expendables, so you don’t have to use gels, and you don’t have lights that burn out. It’s a soft light; you can’t get a really sharp light. So, me, being somebody who spends an enormous amount of energy thinking about light, I went through all of this trepidation of getting this thing. It will always be really great, but it’s going to be in a way, specific.

So, there are certain things like that where I feel like we tried to enable things without getting too grandiose and having this fabulous thing that nobody could ever afford to use. [We’ve installed] bleachers; they’re not the most comfortable seating in the world, but they’re super-light. Maybe this isn’t the perfect thing, but for somebody experimenting who wants to move the audience, two people could [move the audience seating] in four minutes. That’s what I think is really key: trying to set it up in a way that it becomes like a laboratory.

Sarah: To what extent do you plan to use that laboratory for your own development, and to what extent is the space available to other artists?

John: Included in the whole business plan is a commitment to 600 hours of activity for us, and we pay to use those 600 hours. So it guarantees income for CPR at a certain level, but it also guarantees to us a space that we can work in. Otherwise, I don’t think it would be possible to put in as much energy as we have. That still leaves over 4,000 hours of activity for others. I think it’s really exciting that organizations are trying to figure out ways to use resources that are there. That’s why I’m doing CPR. Some people think it’s a little bit crazy to be putting that much energy in, and it is just the beginning. The last four years have been huge. I feel like I care about my work quite a lot, and I feel like I’ve made some really exciting and interesting work, and I’m excited about what I’m working on right now. But I also feel like the world’s a big place, and I feel like I’m interested in a kind of role that’s bigger than that and seeing how I can be a part of something that isn’t just about meeting my own needs.

Do I want to become a producer or a curator or a programmer? Absolutley not. I’ve no interest in that whatsoever. But hopefully, putting forth this thing can create possibilities. And even when I decide I don’t want to do this anymore, there’ll be something left. For some people, the hourly rehearsal model really works fine. If they’re not working with any kind of objects, if they’re really only working in movement, it’s not such an onerous model. It’s the people that begin to think about how they are dealing with space and design and objects even in the simplest way that it can drive you to insanity. You’re just schlepping shit all day. If there’s anything I can do to create the slightest bit of a resource to buffer that, it changes the way people think. I think people don’t think about [working with objects], not because they don’t want to, but because they can’t. In my touring, people are like, “Oh, well New York work has no sophistication in relationship to scenography or production.” I’m not interested in glitz, but I do feel like there is some truth in that people don’t really have time to think about it. That has to do with the process in which people are forced to work, or the circumstances.

Without the artistic community engaged in [CPR], it’s just a big empty box. What I think is interesting about this project is also that it’s asking for engagement. It’s going to rely on the community to enliven its content. It’s going to rely on the community to continue to support it in an economic time that is not going to look so easy. I think together it can be something really exciting. Our responsibility as directors of this organization is to continue to make sure that [CPR] is responsive to the needs of that community. I’m interested in that sense of how the space becomes something that’s really useful to people in that community, so that they can take it somewhere. You have to put effort into engagement. We all do.

Sarah: There’s an opportunity in that.

John: A strange one. Not your typical notion of an opportunity, but nonetheless an opportunity – for all of us to somehow begin to think beyond our own myopia and ask, “What is it that I can do that’s going to help the whole of which I am a part?”