On Sunday July 7th, our board member Joan Susie invited us to facilitate a workshop for her birthday. The workshop was a fundraiser for our current project, Say You’re Sorry. Many lovely people attended and donated to our project. After some mingling and snacks, we lead the attendees in a workshop around our Forgivability Scale. 

The activity was similar to the performance experiment we conducted at FORCE in January 2019. Once again, we read a series of wrongs and had participants walk a quilted scale from "Easily Atoned" to "Unforgivable." We adjusted some of the content for our new audience based on what we observed in January. 

​The second iteration of the Forgivability Scale generated some very interesting discussion. This time we added one or two “caveats” to each scenario, in order to clarify/complicate the scenario and give it context. We talked about intention vs. action and the importance of context when wrongdoings are committed. The most compelling part of facilitating this activity for a second time was that the same prompts with small changes often warranted vastly different responses.

One notable moment was a discussion about how people neglect/care for their kids and pets. This brought up how vulnerable it can be to ask for help caring for someone and how certain types of care are inadequate. Is it harder to forgive someone who hurts a loved one than it is to forgive someone who hurts you? This all came from the prompt “They lied about caring for your pet.” Almost everyone found this nearly unforgivable. 

The fundraiser had many cool moments. To name a few: 

• A comment about how our work verges into categories of mental health and psychology
• Another conversation about stealing labeled lunches and food insecurity from a different perspective. This time someone lost their job over it! What role does the informer play in defining punishment? 
• A talk about forgiving people for yelling at your kid. Did the kid deserve it? 

We are so grateful our generous and enthusiastic participants and contributors. The conversations we had gave us much to think about. We are excited to continue pursuing responses to these big questions and developing thought-provoking content around those responses! ​​

Last week, Call Your Mom set out on a weekend retreat to film our newest screen dance, Truce, which is set to premiere at the Janet and Walter Sondheim Semifinalist Exhibition. The piece will show alongside the 17 other semifinalists for the Sondheim Prize at Artscape. 

Over the course of the retreat, we spent time choreographing, writing dialogue, and filming outdoors. We worked with videographer Nate Gregorio to gather shots, which we will edit into a 2-channel visual and auditory installation. The dialogue and accompanying visuals will mimic two people's internal dialogues in conflict. We want it to feel a bit one-sided, as though the participants aren’t truly listening to one another. We are interested in exploring how people and groups of people come to compromises in the face of complex conflict. The installation will invite viewers to sit and listen to the two audio channels through two separate sets of headphones, placed diagonally across from one another. The two speakers will have a few repeated lines between them, but most of the things they say will contradict the other. For example, one person says “They’re putting their feelings before a solution,” while the other says “They’re putting words in my mouth.” Or, “We both made mistakes. We did this together,” vs. “This isn’t bringing out the best in me.” ​

These statements are meant to highlight how difficult it can be to come to a consensus that accounts for all perspectives within a conflict. The show will be open July 18-August 17 (with a reception August 1, 5-9pm) at One Charles Center, located at 100 N. Charles St. We hope to see you there! ​

Call Your Mom's first forgiveness experiment took place in January 2019 at the studios of FORCE: Upsetting Rape Culture in Baltimore, MD. For the first part of the experiment, we performed public apologies by nameless public figures and had participants hold up YES/NO paddles based on whether a given apology warranted forgiveness. For the second part, we read a series of wrongs and had participants walk a quilted Forgivability Scale from "Easily Atoned" to "Unforgivable." Each participant was given 4 slips of fabric to write specific responses to any of the prompts and pin them on the scale.

Some responses to prompts on the Forgivability Scale: ​“I’ve done that + haven’t forgiven myself, but would forgive others” / "Too emotional to be ideological about it” / “Gaslighting!” / “Would take time + healing + an effort to love (after time)” 

After the two activities, the participants sat down with us to discuss the experience. Here are some notes we wrote down from the discussion:

• What does forgiveness mean? Accountability? Moving on?
• Identities affect everything so it’s hard to think of it in the abstract
• There’s so much grey but justice feels black/white
• Easier to forgive your own assailant than your friend’s assailant
• Forgivability props up the carceral state
• Anything is forgivable in theory but would I forgive is a different question
• Time aspect - how long has it been?
• Forgiveness is taught to women / queer folks as necessity
• Forgiveness as a process vs. as a finished whole
• “Understanding” vs. “Forgiveness”
• You can forgive an act without wanting to ever interact with the perpetrator again
• Accountability not included in these experiments
• Brings up questions about the anonymity of public space, crying in the subway
• Forgiveness can’t be passive
  
• Easier to place yourself in the middle of the pack
• Taking someone’s lunch out of the staff fridge → small acts of colonization
• Simple items can be more loaded because layers / identities brought in
• What if the next Forgiveness Scale is a room with 4 corners? Axes to walk versus one plane
• Could be good to throw in some less abstract ones, marked with identities (name whiteness, cisness)
• It’s good that there is no “neutral/no comment” box
• Next time we could have audience members read some of the prompts, encourage them to put whatever intention they want into it