Isabelle
I had a couple of thoughts that are related to questions that I had during my stay at Gangplank (I have been there for the last 4 days only) and they are mostly about:
1. homogeneity / heterogeneity of the group
2. wishes / desires
3. organisational / structural thoughts for the next opportunity of Gangplank to meet
1. At first I thought that it might be nice that the Gangplank group could be a bit more mixed preferably from the beginning of the residency and not only towards the end. Of course the circumstances that just in the moment when people 'from the other side' were joining in (Judith and I coming from theatre / choreography), the rest of the gang was into:
- realizing ideas that have been coming from the period before
- needing the time to solve problems or dive into the softwares / computers
so that exchange on other ideas or dramaturgical strategies couldn't really take place.
As there was some kind of deadline for the presentation as well things needed to advance on all levels and this was very good so, too. At this moment, I realized that I found myself pretty much in the reversed situation of a 'usual' creative process, where the people 'on stage' (choreographers, theater makers, performers etc) are involved in ideas and needing time to realize them / practice, and when the creative person dealing with light / sound / music / technology comes into the process is trying to understand what the others are busy with
- trying to find tools and concepts that are adaquate to serve / destabilize / etc. those ideas. Mostly the 'onstage people' are the kind of majority of the group and the people dealing with the stage apparatus the minority (It is rarely black and white like that but there are tendencies).
Now everything was exactly the reverse: I was spending time trying to understand what you are working on and how it functions (i.e. learn about your practice and tools) and I have been in the minority. Which has been a real great experience for me.
2. As at first I thought it would be nice to be more heterogenious within the group and that we could share our practices more (between getting to understand soft- / hadwares and body / voice practices), lateron I was doubting if this is such a good idea. It is not about me trying to learn all the softwares in a crashcourse and other people practicing dance, I mean... it would be a bit of a childish approach to think that everyone has to do everything - instead it is just about understanding the principles of the discipline that is less familiar to you. And I thought that it is so great that for once you have time (that is usually missing) to develop your tools in order to be more flexible / efficient / creative with them afterwards in the context of the 'usual' setting when we make pieces (which rarely offer the conditions that are needed for what you are trying to develop within Gangplank) And also that you are many people, with commun interests sharing their knowledge. So then I started to think that it is maybe good to have Gangplank rather homogeneous (how it has been in the beginning of the residency) and that you don't really need choregraphers or theater directors around (as you are developing the tools necessary to develop ideas, that can eventually just perfectly create e.g. a piece without any necessity of performers etc - working on the absence of things rather then presence, triggering lots of associations / imagination, offering a lot space to a spectator). On the other hand it was great for me to be there, learning, observing... and of course allowing for lots of reflections that trigger ideas again etc... again reversing processes...
Rut (who has only been there the first few days): (hope it´s ok. to write in here) That´s a great thing/ or a great experiment: to reverse the normal process/amount of people working on what - we can leave the question open if it happened by instinct or accident 
3. So I m not really sure if there is one way better than another to what concerns the organisation / planning of another Gangplank. RESTART: At first I thought, it would be good to start altogether (whoever would be involved) with the process, so that everyone has the same information and a chance to give input, propose, raise questions etc... but even there I m not so sure anymore, as things develop in relation to how people respond and adapt to the flow of things. For sure one can always be more efficient or plan things better, but who knows if this is working better then. The reality always shows (in present time) what and how things go and from there we can work. Sorry for all this blabla to finally come up with not so many clear proposals... I needed to write all this down to follow my thoughts chronologically ...yes. Nevertheless... to conclude those thoughts a bit, I think it is very healthy to keep Gangplank a flexible structure that is able to adapt to the circumstances at play, that is able to bring people from different working fields together, yet a priority is clearly the brainstorm, learning process, communication around the tools that are related to technology within theatre work.