There are three ways to think of the archetypal person: (1) Subbody; (2) Cobody; (3) Nobody.
Subbody can mean the subconscious, but can also mean the first person, Self, or Atman. The subbody is the shadowbody. Subbody is associated with depth. When we find a very deep subbody, we run into the bottom body, which is also a deep mystery. The bottom body can be imagined through a series of images or sayings: (1) “Rock bottom”; (2) Genie’s lamp; (3) “New low”; (4) Edge; (5) Threshold; (6) “No Escape”. In the words of Kazuo Ohno:
Rather than analyzing your movements…push yourself right to the very edge of
sanity… Our dance becomes godlike once the ghosts of the universe surge forth from the
depths of our consciousness.¹
Everyone will have their own personal bottom body or subbody limit/wall/edge. The bottom body can be instigated by physically forming into one’s idea of the weakest, most physically twisted, or uncomfortable position.
Cobody can mean the second or third person, the other, or Brahman. Cobody is more than one subbody.
Nobody is completely impersonal and up for interpretation. Sometimes subbody may become cobody and possibly even nobody all at the same time. Nobody can also be ambiguous or anonymous. The question of nobody is raised, for instance, when reading a Buddhist text such as the Heart Sutra. Nobody can also be one individual’s bottom body. Nobody can be associated with The Void or Abyss. It has also been called Enlightenment’s Evil Twin.
The following comes from the Russian absurdist writer Daniil Kharms entitled The Redheaded Man:
There lived a redheaded man who had no eyes or ears. He didn’t have hair either, so he was called a redhead arbitrarily. He couldn’t talk because he had no mouth. He had no nose either. He didn’t even have arms or legs. He had no stomach, he had no back, he had no spine, and he had no innards at all. He didn’t have anything. So we don’t even know who we’re talking about. It’s better that we don’t talk about him any more.²
Nobody can be the shadow of the subbody, or the subbody’s subbody. This can be thought of as the edge of the concept of the subbody itself. Because the subbody, like everything in this manual, utilizes language to express itself, the concept can also collapse under its own feet. The reason this happens can be explained via the post-modern thinker Jacques Derrida’s critical analysis called deconstruction.
Deconstruction is founded on the concept that all language has a shaky foundation. Deconstruction knocks down the concept of logocentrism. Logocentrism is “the orientation of philosophy toward an order of meaning – thought, truth, reason, logic, the Word – conceived as existing it itself, as foundation.”³ Subbody can be one such foundational concept which is also not transcendental or immune to collapse. Else, this form of butoh would be just another religion where the new God is Subbody.
But before you feel I have undermined my entire manual, there is a consolation. If indeed all is ambiguous and/or makes no difference, this certainly does not take away the ability for play. Playing is still optional. It is a coincidence that another word for “theater” is “play.” For Derrida, all is the play of difference. Difference is “defined by its relation to what it is not rather than by its essence.”4 In other words, difference means that the momentary or semblance of meaning is derived from everything which the concept is not like the term “apple” defined by other words that are not “apple” and then those terms defined by terms that are not those terms. Is there a word that sits by itself, needing no definition? Not to my knowledge because a word would cease to be a word. “Subbody” is not immune.
Children play as if their play is at the moment the case, so why can’t we? Subbody can simply be utilized as a tool to remind or allow us to attempt to go deeper, and so possibly creating a more preferable performance. Whether or not it is illusion is arbitrary. There are many ways to reach an intention, and if we have to “fake it to make it,” so be it.
Who is doing the moving? Will is ambiguous. However, the will may be closely related to in-the-moment awareness.
Exercise 1: Owning Automatic Responses
Allow yourself awareness for any automatic impulse such as twirling hair. scratching, biting tongue, and own it in one of three ways:
1. Negate the action
2. Copy the action exactly and repeat the action
3. Exaggerate the action.
Exercise 2: Sigil
See section sigil.
“Attempts to get rid of the ego can easily result in one-sided development, fostering both self-importance and a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude. Avoiding the so-called ‘dark’ aspect of human desire results in a shallow
caricature of human potentiality, a blandness which avoids plumbing the depths of the psyche.” – SKaRaB, SNaKe, Sister Apple & Bro. Moebius B5
This manual takes an integrative or taming approach to ego. Though ego here is defined as the concept of self, identity, or the “I,” the concept may still remain ambiguous. What exactly is “I” and “self?” Everyone’s definition may vary. Some may want to destroy ego, but because there is ego in desire, there is ego in desiring to destroy ego. So instead of getting lost in the terminology or judgement, humility is preferred. Availability for learning and receiving is the most important aspect, whether or not an elusive ego is in the background or not.
Unlike other movement forms that make great use of the physical mirror, its use in butoh is downplayed. The mirror (like any tool) can be used for assisting body conditioning, e.g. learning neck isolations, but outside of this, it is best to not use it. Outside of being associated with the ego, the mirror can be too distracting. We might get too easily stuck in a particular form and forget about the subbody.
Kate Parsons further notes:
The mirror seduces the dancer’s focus outside of him/her, leaving the ability to focus inwardly untapped. Watching one’s body in the mirror relies on vision, the sense we tend to exercise most, thereby failing to exercise the dancer’s ability to invoke the perceptual capabilities of other senses, such as the olfactory and auditory capabilities, and especially the tactile.6
Exercise 1: No “I,” Two Weeks
This is an Aleister Crowley exercise that lasts two weeks. To the best of one’s ability, one is to omit the first person–”I,” “me,” or “myself” from communication. For instance, if somebody asks you how you are, you have to answer without using the first person. In my past of doing this exercise, I have answered the question of “How are you?” with “It’s a beautiful day outside.” If you accidentally slip and say the first person, you should negatively reinforce yourself in some way like snapping a rubber band on your wrist. You can also make use of positive reinforcement. If you go a whole day without slipping, treat yourself in some way.
A further form of this exercise involves not even thinking the first person for two weeks.
Exercise 2: Vow of Silence
For however long, take a vow of silence. This is excellent for focusing in on the subbody.
Thought appears to be closely related to ego and words, e.g. “I think therefore I am.” With thought, there is generally judgement and dualistic logic such as good/bad, subject/object, etc. Unless thought is engaging in poetry or imagery, it is best to quiet the mind by cultivating humility in order to focus more on the feeling and moving body.
Exercise: No Opinions, Two Weeks
This is another Aleister Crowley exercise and involves not having any opinions for two weeks. You will have no judgements and have nothing to say about much other than whatever it is certainly exists. Negatively reinforce yourself upon making mistakes.