Family Theater presents Margaret O'Brien, Ricardo Montalban, John Howard, and Rita Johnson. Playwood, the mutual broadcasting system in cooperation with Family Theater, brings you Margaret O'Brien, Rita Johnson, and John Howard in the holdout heart. Now, to introduce the drama, your host, Ricardo Montalban. Thank you, Tony Lafana. Just a brief mention first of Family Theater's purpose. To light the lamp of prayer in all our lives. To light the lamp of harmony in all our homes. To light the lamp of peace in our times and in our world. And now, to Margaret O'Brien, John Howard, and Rita Johnson, staring in the holdout heart. The county orphanage looked quite splendid to passing motorists. And they'd always ask, what place is that? Lawns carefully manicured, brave splashes of bright flowers here and there. A tall soldierly boarded of iron pickets guarding it like a big estate. Yes, the exterior was sufficiently beautiful to stimulate the pride of the gardeners and subdue the interest of the taxpayers at large. But Margaret lived here. Beyond the iron margin of the fence. Beyond the flowers you mustn't pick. Beyond the smooth lawns you mustn't walk on. And so did Tommy. Both fragments of the compressed heartache that every orphanage is, no matter how modern its buildings and writing tension its attendants. But this was Tommy's last day. Margaret and he'd had such good times together. And out by the fence. Gee, Margaret, I've never seen you like this. Don't you want me to go?  Then stop sniffling. You're making me wish that Betsy I didn't get adopted. Oh, don't be silly. Well, then? Miss Waller says folks hardly ever adopt children as old as we are. They want babies. Yeah. But someday you'll be leaving too. Do you really think so? After all these years? Of course. Who's a silly now? Hey, maybe I can talk the cameras into adopting you too, huh? Oh, don't bother, Tommy. They don't look like my parents. Oh, there you go again. Pretending you know what your parents look like. I'm not pretending. And don't say I am. Okay, okay, if you want it that way. But Maggie, that pride's okay for the others. But I'm your pal. Until the cameras decided to adopt me, I was in the same fix, wasn't I? There's no need to pretend with me. I'm not pretending. Stop saying so. And stop calling me Maggie too. I thought you wanted me to. Well, I don't. My mother says it's Margaret.  You ain't even seen her. I have so. My father too. Now look, Maggie, we're both the same, except that I was a month before you. I was left in an empty water pail on the police station steps. In December, you was in January. I was in the clothes basket on a church pew. Skinny Waller's telling a big fib, because I made her mad. She heard me call her skinny once, that's why. Then why'd they say the pink blanket you came wrapped in, just in case? Tell me that, go ahead. Well, I don't want to talk about it. Oh, gee, I'm sorry as heck we did then. Now I don't like leaving at all. Not like this? Oh, gee, Willikers and old shoes. I thought we understood each other. Oh, hey, Maggie, now look at what's coming. Thomas, look here, Thomas. Yes, Miss Waller? Where have you been? The Camerans are here already, and they've been waiting in the reception room for 15 minutes. I've been telling Margaret goodbye. Thomas, please go directly to the reception room and join your new parents before they start looking for somebody else. Now hurry. Yes, Miss Waller. Bye, Maggie. I'm sorry, it's all get out. See you later, I hope. Goodbye, Tommy, and right, huh? That's a promise. Margaret, you will go to your dormitory and remain there until the dinner bell. Yes, Miss Waller. And before you go, hand over that flower. The gardener doesn't like to have his flower beds robbed. I won't, it's mine. Hand it over, I say. Tommy gave it to me, it's a keepsake. Neither Thomas nor any other often has a right to break the rules. Now give it to me. Next thing you'll be wearing it in your hair. My parents come for me, they'll buy me lots of flowers, roses, and I'll wear them in my hair every day. Here, keep your old flower. Oh, you snip. Throw it at me, will you?  Now you go to your dormitory before I show you a thing or two you won't forget.  A bit, not much. I was upstairs dusting. I'll start dinner right away. Go along and read the paper in the living room. Darling, all I want's a quick sandwich.  It won't take long. I'll put the potatoes on right now.  I promised to meet the boys at the club. Again? I came home early, so you wouldn't have dinner all cooked. I didn't want to disturb. You didn't want to have dinner with me. Is that it?  You're no sooner home than you're off again.  Ann, please. Please, quiet down. You know what the doctor says about you're getting excited. Oh, well, who wouldn't get excited with a neglectful husband like you? Ann? Ann, what were you doing upstairs when I came in? I told you. Dusting. Was it in Lucy's room? Was it, darling? Well, tell me. Was it? Well, what if it was? Oh, I tell you, Doc, I'm at my wit's end.  You must be patient, John. This calls for the utmost impatience. Easy to say. Not so easy to do. Emily's a nervous wreck, and she's making one out of me. Coming home is bad. Staying away is worse. Look, John, it's quite a shock for a woman to lose her baby, particularly when she wanted her baby so much. But the additional shock of learning that she could never have another, well, it's been a pretty heavy load to bear. But, Doc, that was 14 years ago. You'd think she'd have grown out of it. Other women have? Yes, other women have. But other women are not Emily. Some of the very things that make Emily the fine woman she is, gentle, generous, proud. Doc, I went along when Emily pretended that Lucy wasn't dead, just away, when she kept a doll in the nursery cradle, even when she set aside a room in our new home. She got over the doll stage. Perhaps she couldn't keep getting dolls big enough. But she makes that room a sort of shrine, pretending that Lucy will come home from school someday. Hmm. I wish I'd known the complete story before. Now that Emily, nor you, ever told me all the facts. Well, I suppose I've been ashamed. I thought she'd grow out of it. John, how about adopting a full grown child, say, of Lucy's age? Well, Emily'd never accept her. She's built up a model Lucy out of her dreams. No kid could fit it. Besides, the adoption authorities, would they consent? Knowing the conditions? Well, I think I can be of some influence on both sides. With Emily, well, I think she trusts me. I know the authorities do. Yes, but isn't there a risk? I mean about Emily. Suppose she- Risk? Why, of course there is. Might a little gained in this world without it. Every time I lift a scalpel to make a first incision, it's there, sitting on my shoulder. Every time I write a prescription, it's the unwritten word on my pad. A big if, if. And you still want me to go through with it? John, I've been a general practitioner nearly 30 years. You've known me hardly half that time. Long, long ago, I learned that man gives the medicine, but it's God who heals. You want to save your marriage? Save Emily? That's why I'm here. Then I have a bit more advice, and you can take it or ignore it. It's not strictly clinical. What is it, Doc? John, there are some medicines that work a high percentage of the time. Others only rarely. But there are two I've never known to fail. Yes. The same bottle holds them both. The human heart. One's love, the other's prayer. Both alone are mighty strong. When you mix them, oh, get along with you and see that Emily comes down to visit me real soon. I'll make her think adoption's her own idea. Is that child spending all her time in the dormitory? Oh, Margaret. Margaret, answer me, child. Come here. What, Miss Waller? Go to the reception room. What for? Because I tell you there's someone to see you. My parents? Silly child, you have no parents. I do, too. Then why haven't I met them? Because I never introduced them to you. Oh, really, Margaret? I pity you, always imagining your parents. I don't. It's probably they've come for me now. And you won't tell them I'm here. Where you get such imaginings, I just don't know. You've been so sad-faced since he went away that I wanted to keep it a surprise. It's Thomas. Tommy? Honest, Miss Waller? Is he back for good? Of course not. Just a visit. Now go down and see him. He came especially to see you. Gee, I'm talking a blue streak. See, I forgot to ask what you've been doing. Why didn't you answer my letter? Got it, didn't you? I've been too busy. Yeah? Doing what? Well, for one thing, my parents come to call on me every day. I went to the circus eight or nine times. And to the movies 10 times, I've got six new bikes. And every day, my dad sends me a gallon of vanilla ice cream. And- Ah, you're kidding. Honest, what's your father look like?  He's nearly seven feet tall. Oh, oh, Maggie. And my mother's the most beautiful woman I've ever seen. And she rides bareback in the circus. And she does a toe dance on six white horses. Oh, Maggie, quit your kidding. You don't have to pretend with me. It's the truth. Oh, I'll prove it's not. I'm going to ask Miss Waller. Hey, Miss Waller. Hey, hey, wait a minute, Maggie. What is it, Tommy? Where's Margaret gone?  Brandis. Hello, John. This is Dr. Turnbull. Hello, Doc. I thought I was never going to hear from you. I wanted to wait and light good news. At least I've cleared the preliminaries away. Good. What now? Not so fast. There's complications. Well, not Emily. No, not Emily. Easier there than I thought. The other side, the orphanage. What do you mean? It seems there's only one little girl there that fits the picture. The orphanage is quite frank about it. They say that she's a problem child. It seems that she's invented a set of blueprints as to what her parents are like. Is that bad? It sounds spunky to me. Well, we'll see. The orphanage suggests that for the first few weeks you take the little girl for weekends only. Is that agreeable? Sure thing. Then you and Emily are to be out at the orphanage next Friday afternoon at 2. Can you make it? You couldn't keep me away. Oh, and say, Doc. Yeah? I'm going to keep a bottle of that medicine handy. I've been thinking about what you said. Turnbull's special mixture, I've been calling it. They're crying. They're here. My parents? Mr. and Mrs. Prentice. Oh, now don't pretend that I didn't tell you you were going with them this weekend. I'm not either. Yes, you are. Is Mr. Prentice tall? Well, medium height, I'd say. Is she dressing spangles, carrying a gold whip, and? She is wearing a tailored suit, dark blue. Then they're not my parents, and I'm not going. I'm going to wait here until my real parents come for me. Oh, honestly, Margaret. Oh, excuse me, Miss Water. My wife was getting anxious. I'm afraid I'm breaking rules coming up here, but. Oh, is this my little girl? I'm not your little girl. Margaret, how dare you. Please, Miss Waller, leave us alone for a minute. I think Margaret and I'll get along famously. It's against the rules, Mr. Prentice. I'm not permitted. Just this once, Miss Waller? Well, I'll be back in five minutes. Well, may I sit here beside you, Margaret? I don't care. If you want. Don't turn away like that. I just don't know what to say. For a starter, I think I'll say please to meet you. That's how grown-ups usually start conversations when they meet for the first time.   You are, you know. You're not my father. He's taller than you, lots taller. No, Margaret, I'm not your father, but I'd like to be. I wish I were that lucky.  What?  We'd like to choose you, but first, you've got to choose us. Would you kind of take us on trial, Margaret? Give us a fair chance? Here, sport, take my big handkerchief. We can use it for a towel, the end of the first round. Oh, you'll get a chuckle out of this, a fishing rod for Margaret. Look, isn't it a beauty? Did you save the sail slip? Yeah, I guess so. Now, here it is, why? So you can get your money back when you caught all this stuff back, the bike, the badminton set. Lucy's closet will hardly hold all that stuff. I'd like to clean it out, get it out of the house. Oh, Emily, are you really giving the kid a chance? Oh, John, I wish you'd call the orphanage and say we won't be out this weekend or again. But why, Emily? Because I don't feel we're making any headway with the child. She just sits at the window in Lucy's room all weekend and moons. I'd hope she'd be like Lucy. I've tried, John, but I just can't reach her. I can't make any identification with her, not the slightest. Hem, look, Hem, I don't know how to say this gently enough. But phantoms have no problems. Phant, how can you speak of your own flesh and blood that way, your own daughter? Lucy died at birth, Hem. That was God's will, wiser than ours, I'm sure. Lucy's problems are over. But ours aren't, and neither are Margaret's. As hard as you try, you'll never fit her into the form and face of Lucy. Am I doing that by expecting this child to be polite, refined, manly, even just a little bit? Hem, I wish you'd try a new attack. Try a reverse feel. Try to fit the lovely image of Lucy into Margaret's problems. Ugly problems, if I do say so.  So now I'm an escapist. Sometimes we all are. Oh, I'm not saying this to you, darling. I'm sort of addressing myself, too, thinking out loud. Yet it takes guts to face reality, to adjust to the facts, to struggle against them, like any marine or soldier in Korea. We can't begin by saying that facts don't exist. Problems are never wished away. We've got to meet them full face. But if I could only reach Margaret, John, if I could only feel she needs me. She does need you, both of us. That's why I brought home this fishing rod. I'm going to take Margaret on a fishing trip. She's never been in the woods before, fishing or anything, the poor little take. How would a fishing trip help? And what's being in the woods got to do with it? Well, I figure it this way, Em. There's a spell in the woods that touches all of us. At least it does me. Well, it does you, too. I noticed it on those fishing trips we used to take before. When we were younger. Let's not cheat Margaret of this chance. If it doesn't work, then I'll give in. Are you game, Em? Do I have to say please? You win, John. Sometimes I think you'd have been just as good a lawyer as you are an architect. Look at those trees. Aren't they beautiful?  Yes, Mr. Prentice. They're done. Em, give Margaret another sandwich. Here, Margaret. Oh, no, Mrs. Prentice. I'm full. I've had three already. Well, I'll split one with you, Margaret. Em, divvy one up with you. Are you game, Maggie? I'm game. Well, you study up the wheel while I get into this. Woods always give me a false hunger. I'm famished. What did you say was the name of the camp? I don't think it has any name. I've never been there before. They call the lake Kachanta Cog. That's an old Indian name, I think, Margaret. Funny name. Kachanta Cog. How much further is it? Your guess. An hour from now and we'll have our lines in the water. Sure glad we gave ourselves plenty of time to make camp. This is going to be fun. There, I guess the pan's ready for a good fish fry. A little salt in the bottom of the pan now. Not too much, Em. We'll have a roaring good meal before dark. Which fish gets pan on us? Well, Margaret's, of course. That's that little trout over there. I thought her eyes would bulge right out of her head when I helped her reel a rascal in. You know something, Em. What? This trip is working. She hasn't mentioned her imaginary parents all day. She's been having a lot of fun. Oh, she'll hear you.  Now, where did I leave that knife? I'll clean up some of the others. Hey, Maggie. Maggie. Where is she, Em? Margaret. Only a moment ago, she was playing near that big rock, picking a few flowers while I was helping at the fire. Well, she couldn't have run away. Oh, Em. Em, don't faint at a time like this. Now, Em, hold tight. I've got to find the kid. Night's coming. There's no time for hysterics. Oh, I'm OK. I'm sorry, John. Go find her. Go find her. God help us if she's lost.  There, that's better.  And pray. Margaret. No, I'll never forgive myself.  Margaret. She couldn't have strayed this far. Margaret. Why didn't I brief her? Hey, what's that?  Yes, it is. She must have been here. Margaret. I mustn't get lost myself. I could easily. I can always follow the margin of the lake back through. I can spot Em's fire if she keeps it going. Margaret. Margaret. What was that? Margaret. Mind playing, please. I'll stuff my hands and shout as loud as I can. Margaret. Great scotchy, somewhere near here. Margaret, I'm coming. Daddy. Maggie. Maggie, what are you? Here. Over here. Oh, daddy. Oh, Maggie. Maggie, darling, I thought we'd lost you forever. Are you all right? Oh, I didn't mean to get lost. I'm so ashamed. Oh, there, that's all right. Let's hear no more about it. I was picking flowers for you and Mrs. Prendison. And you lost your way. I know, Maggie. It's so easy. In the woods, I should have warned you. Are you all right? Can you get up? I think I twisted my ankle, and I dropped my flowers. Well, when we get home, we'll get you lots of flowers. You can wear them in your hair and everything. Here, put your arms around my neck. There, that's it. I'll carry you back to Emily before she dies of fright. Daddy. Daddy, darling.  She was all worn out. Was the doctor here again? Yes. He says the ankle's better. Just a little more rest. What did he say about you, darling? I'm fine. To quote him, a mother's heart is the most sensitive and the most shockproof instrument in the world. Don't worry about me, honey. Let's take a peek at Margaret.  What, darling? She spent the afternoon writing a letter to a little boy she used to know at the orphanage, Tommy Cameron. It dropped on the floor when she fell asleep. Here, read it. Dear Tommy, my mother and father are just like I always dream they'd be. They're the- Go on, John. Look how she finishes. The ink smudged it. Not very plain. It's my fault. I cried when I read it. Here, I'll finish it for you. They're the kindest, dearest, most wonderful father and mother in the whole world. And she signed it. Margaret Lucy Prentice.  She's still asleep. No. No, she heard us. She's stirring.  Just taking a goodnight look at our precious new daughter. Goodnight, mommy. Goodnight, kiddo. Pleasant dreams. Goodnight, mommy. Goodnight, daddy. Ricardo Moncalvan again. Some folks just love a symphony. Others, a Dixieland band.  Me? Well, as a matter of fact, I enjoy all kinds of music. In a sense, though, I'm an extremist, too. For me, there is a whole wonderful symphony in the jingle-jangle of a bunch of keys. Let's see. This shiny one, the passkey to my home, lets me into the shouts of my kids.  The key to my car, a passport, so to speak, to the mountains, the seashore, and all sorts of pleasant places. This little one now, my mailbox key, much more important than its size.  I mean, beyond the gas bill and the phone bill, and the letter from Aunt Mamie. Well, I won't bore you with the whole catalog, but here's the key to an old trunk I haven't used in years. And this, I forget what this one is, but I've kept it on my ring for years. Are you like me afraid to throw away an old key, thinking sometime, maybe tomorrow, you'll need it, perhaps to open an old treasure chest somewhere or a castle, perhaps in Spain? I bet you are.  I never think of keys as locking things up. It's always more pleasant to think what they'll open up.  But I'm afraid for all too many of us, it's like the old key on my ring. Oh, it's there, but we've forgotten its particular use. But it's a tremendously important key, prayers. For it opens the gates of heaven, unlocks nature's greatest harmonies, and lets us into the boundless treasures of God's mercy. Now, here's a closing reminder. The family that prays together stays together.  Family Theater has brought you Margaret O'Brien, John Howard, and Rita Johnson in the holdout heart. Ricardo Montalban was your host. Others in our cast were Eleanor Oddly, Herb Rawlinson, and Michael Edwards. The script was written by James D. Roach, from a story idea suggested by Peggy Chandler, with music composed and conducted by Harry Zimmerman, and was directed for Family Theater by Joseph F. Mansfield. This series of Family Theater broadcasts is made possible by the thousands of you who feel the need for this type of program, by the mutual network which responds to this need, and by the hundreds of stars of stage screen and radio who give so unselfishly of their time and talent to appear on our Family Theater stage.  This is Tony LaFranco expressing the wish of Family Theater that the blessing of God may be upon you and your home, and inviting you to join us next week at the same time when Family Theater will present Robert Young and McDonald-Carrie in Stopwatch Finale. Join us, won't you? Family Theater has broadcasted the world and origination of Hollywood Studios of the world's largest network, the mutual broadcasting system.


I remember hitting the ground and that's it until my friends came running up. I was sitting in a field Increasingly in pain the hospital actually turned me away. I don't think I've told you guys that before but by the time I got back home my eyes were like completely bloodshot I was in so much pain and my mom took me back to the hospital That's when they learned that my ankle was totally shattered the end of it had like broken up and then shoved An inch of my ankle bone up into my leg because of that break I had to have a surgery and another surgery and then another surgery and then I fused my ankle when I was 15 I was always in pain and so if you follow my channel, you know this I made the decision to go ahead and remove the problem as it were and actually cut my ankle off and Become an amputee to stop the pain. This is where it's all happened and I haven't come back to this place since It's actually kind of a peaceful feel and it's a good place to have your life changed forever You have to be somewhere, but it's definitely Weird to be back here


We have finished this Rankine's earth pressure theories, now Coulomb's active earth pressure, so Coulomb's theory was developed in 1776, so in this case what will happen, the failure surface is assumed to be a planner and they have considered the friction between friction angle between soil and the wall, if you look at here this Rankine's case this wall is assumed to be a smooth wall, so the friction angle between this wall and the soil is not taken into consideration, in Coulomb's theory they have considered this friction angle between soil and wall and which is taken as delta, the active earth pressure is calculated based on the equilibrium they have taken a planner failure surface and based on the equilibrium means they consider the weight of the in that planner failure surface weight of the soil as well as PA active earth pressure resultant and they make the force polygon so that it has to satisfy this equilibrium conditions, so what will happen different failure surfaces are attempted, so this is your number one failure surface like this you can attempt number two, number three, number four until the largest PA is obtained until this largest active earth pressure is obtained from there coefficient of earth pressure active earth pressure kA is found out to be sin square beta plus phi, if you look at here beta, beta is your angle wall angle, wall angle it makes with this vertical that is your beta plus phi, phi is your angle of internal friction of the soil and sin square beta plus sin into sin beta minus delta into 1 plus sin phi plus delta into sin phi minus alpha, alpha is your, if you look at here alpha is coming out to be alpha is your searcher's angle this is your alpha, this is your alpha, this failure failure surface planner failure surface makes an angle with this, this is your theta 1 and theta 2 and from there you can find it out PA, PA is equal to half gamma h square into kA, now passive earth pressure in case of granular soil initially soils is in k0 condition, if this is your retaining wall, if this is your retaining wall, if you consider this is your retaining wall and this is your soil mass, initially the soil mass is in rest condition that means this is your sigma v prime and sigma h prime, then as the soil moves towards the soil as the wall sorry as the wall moves towards the soil that means this is your wall it moves towards the soil what will happen, the sigma v prime that means your searcher's it remains same, sigma v prime remains same, sigma h increases till the failure occurs this is the difference where in case of active state, active state sigma h decreases till the failure occurs, in case of passive state sigma h increases till the failure occurs, now this is called your passive state that means sigma h increases increases till the failure occurs, now if I come back to in terms of Mohr's circle diagram, if you look at here initially this is your k0 that means earth pressure at rest condition where is your sigma v prime and sigma h prime, what will happen as the wall moves towards the soil, so passive earth pressure in granular soil if you look at this in terms of Mohr coulomb, so Mohr coulomb failure and Mohr coulomb circles initially it is in a k0 state that means it is at rest then wall moves towards the soil, so what will happen it will go it will increasing the sigma h initially the sigma h value, initially sigma h value is here that means if you look at this value here sigma h is increasing from here to here, so till it touches your failure envelope touches the failure envelope that means at this point your failure occurs it touches this Mohr's circle failure envelope, so this is called a passive state or passive earth pressure this is your passive earth pressure, now sigma h prime of this passive is equal to k p into sigma v prime, so Rankine's coefficient of passive earth pressure, so k p is equal to 1 plus sin phi by 1 minus sin phi this is Rankine's earth pressure, so where k p is your 1 in terms of phi there is no delta as I said Rankine's theory assume that this wall is a smooth, so in case of coulomb's theory the friction angle between the soil and wall delta has been taken into consideration, so k p is equal to 1 plus sin phi by 1 minus sin phi where are in case of active case k a is equal to 1 minus sin phi by 1 plus sin phi, so this will be tan square 45 degree plus phi by 2, now passive earth pressure in granular soil, so failure plane is at 45 degree minus phi by 2 to the horizontal, so this is your sigma v prime this is sigma v prime, sigma v prime and sigma h prime passive state passive earth pressure, now if you take at this as wall moves towards the soil that means sigma h, this sigma h, sigma h increases, sigma h is increases this wall is moving towards that means wall is generating pressure towards this field till the failure that means this is your k 0 condition that means earth pressure are traced it will increase, increase, increase and it will reach here this is called your passive state in terms of graphical representation and as well as your wall movement for cohesive soil the steps are same for cohesive soil for calculation of your passive earth pressure the steps are same like your granular soil only difference is that c is not equal to 0, c is not equal to 0 that means cohesion force is not equal to 0, c is not equal to 0, so sigma x prime passive is equal to k p into sigma v prime plus 2 c root over of k p, now coulomb's passive pressure the k p this things I said earlier also p a is equal to half gamma h square into k a, suppose for example if you take the value of phi is equal to 40 degree, suppose this is a back field soil of interfictional angle of the soil phi is equal to 40 degree delta that means coefficient of friction between soil and wall is equal to 20 degree, so k p value comes out to be 11.77, so passive earth pressure that means what are the limitation the fundamental assumption of plane failure surface does not hold in practice, if you look at this assumption by coulomb's theory the fundamental assumption of plane failure surface does not hold in practice in practice it is not possible to be a plane failure surface the actual passive earth pressure is smaller than that coulomb's theory which is not safe whatever the actual passive earth pressure observe it is much smaller than your coulomb's theory, therefore passive earth pressure is estimated using either Rankine's theory or the result of ultimate equilibrium based on non-planar failure surface, generally it is recommended either you go for passive earth pressure calculations by using Rankine's theory or ultimate equilibrium based on non-planar failure surface, now if you look at case of non-planar failure surface that means logarithmic spiral if I take into considerations of a granular soil gamma and phi prime and c prime the chart has been given for different friction angle of phi, phi varying from 20 degree to 45 degree and k p value is given and delta by phi also varying from 0 to when delta by phi is equal to 0 it will be same as like Rankine's theory, so it is varying from 0 to delta by phi is equal to 1 delta by phi is equal to 1 that means the frictional angle between soil and wall and interfictional angle of soil is equal to same means is equal to 1 that means it is same that means soil and soil with wall act as a rigid body so with this chart once you know the once you know the value of phi then you can find it out what is the value of k p depending upon suppose this is the value of phi is equal to 40 degree and delta is suppose phi is equal to 40 degree for delta by phi suppose delta by phi is equal to 0.4 from this chart we can get it directly k p that means it is a non planner of failure surface, so k p is coming about to be 8.2 if I go by Coulomb's theory for phi is equal to 40 degree delta is equal to 20 degree k p is coming about to be 11.77 if you look at here by Coulomb's theory it is coming 11.77 and for by means of non planner theory it is coming about 8.2 and for Rankine's theory k p is coming about 4.6 that means actual value of k p is lying between Rankine as well as in between this Coulomb's theory so nature of active and passive earth pressure suppose you consider a 6 meter of wall 6 meter of wall so this is your this is your value of k 0 state at rest so you can say that active state it comes about to be 25 mm then passive state it comes about to be 250 mm how this nature of active and passive earth pressure is varying from active to passive state this is the variation then where it has been applied this active state and passive state we have discussed lot about design of retaining walls and design of reinforced earth walls these are the applications look at the few applications retaining wall applications now this is a highway there is a retaining wall already existing a building so first case is your if you look at this case one this is this one part is your retaining wall that means retaining wall suppose to retain the soil mass this soil mass has been retained soil mass has been retained so this soil mass will tend pressure on this wall it will be in the active so above the soil mass you can go for a construction also and nearby also here there is a highway this also exert pressure so this is one example where the active and passive state come into picture now second one is your gravity retaining wall cement motor and cobbles it is there one one way so it will act they rely on their self weight to support the backfill particularly gravity retaining wall they rely on the self weight they rely on the self weight self weight to support or to support the backfill because the backfill will exert some pressure by means of gravity retaining wall as I said also earlier in the beginning this will the stability analysis will be done based on its self weight so generally the self weight by means of self weight it will counter this pressure coming from the backfill to the wall now reinforced earth wall reinforced earth walls reinforced earth walls generally it is smaller than your gravity walls if you look at they act like a vertical cantilever this is just repetition this this I have already explained in the beginning of this beginning of this lecture what are the different types of retaining walls so in case of reinforced cantilever retaining walls what will happen cantilever retaining walls there they will support this earth pressure by means of cantilever actions this is this will be your by means of cantilever action they will support this earth pressure and it will be fixed to your ground surface now proportioning this retaining walls also I have discussed earlier so proper placement of concrete at the top and adequate with beam shear resistance adequate with beam shear resistance then adequate slide resistance then different failure failure of your retaining wall or stability analysis of retaining wall we have already also discussed overturning about toe sliding along its base this is overturning about the toe sliding along the base loss of bearing capacity deep seated shear failure so the design of retaining wall generally done in two phases that means check for slide stability as a whole and check each component for strength and steel reinforcement so this things has been covered also earlier this has been I have covered earlier so no need to discuss so bearing capacity failure it should be greater than one at this bearing capacity also we can calculate the stability analysis of bearing capacities so wall friction angle if coulomb's active earth pressure theory is used this is required generally this is required suppose if you are using by means of coulomb's theory active earth pressure theory then backfill material if you are taking gravel this range of delta is should be bearing between 27 to 30 degree for coarse sand it should be bearing 20 degree to 28 degree fine sand it is varying 15 degree to 25 degree steep clay it is varying 15 degree to 20 degree and silt clay it is varying 12 degree to 16 degree generally the delta value has been provided one half or two-third of phi half or two-third of this phi generally delta value has been taken this is all about this course of retaining wall means earth pressure theories and discussions


The legacy government has announced 10 weeks partial closure of Echo Bridge from Costain to Alaka Inbound National Stadium for emergency repairs by the federal government from June 4th to August 13. The State Commissioner for Transportation Frederick Ola Dende said that the repair was necessary to complete the rehabilitation works at the opposite side of the bridge earlier embarked upon by the federal government, hence the need for a notice of a route diversion. He said that pending the commencement of the rehabilitation works alternative routes have been made available for the awareness of motorists to manage traffic during the period of repairs. He however advised road users to comply with directives from the state's traffic management personnel. So you get notified about fresh news updates.


Angle 4 co-curators are very pleased to have you guys back. Many familiar faces. Welcome to the ongoing conversation that is allowing us to figure out how to think of theater, transcend theater, do everything that comes from the roots that we all know as community into this great unrehearsed future. And today's talk is led by Moenya Kapoi. So I will leave it with her. Welcome on and all. Just quickly, if you go to the Drama School Mumbai's website and you look at unrehearsed futures there, you will see that every single talk is put up, the video recordings of, and Falguni who runs these and holds space for us writes these beautiful reported pieces, which are about three or four pages that kind of summarize but with mindfulness and meaningfulness the conversation in case you don't have time to listen to the whole one hour conversation, you can read the reported pieces. And there's a whole season of talks from last season and the season of talks from this season is now building up and becoming quite the body of knowledge. So Moenya, all yours. Awesome, thank you. Thank you. Thanks so much for being here, everybody. Particularly in light of everybody's COVID pandemic contexts, I know that many of us are taking immense strain under the demands of the pandemic in our homes and communities and with our students and colleagues. So I really want to just say that up front and thank you for making the time to be in community with us today. Those of you who have been to these sessions before know that the four curators are questing in some kind of way. And through this questing, we have the honor and privilege of inviting our friends and colleagues and networks to be in conversation about a range of things under how we respond to these new and evolved and old circumstances we find ourselves in as practitioners, educators, artists, thinkers, all of it. And so the conversation today has come out of a particular quest of mine that is similar to Jehan's, I think, in that I'm interested in how the skills and tools and techniques of theater and performance get leveraged and adapted into a range of different settings. And one step back from that, I find myself asking how to train, who to train, what kinds of legacies of training to think with and through. And then one step back from that, I think about how these legacies are identified, how they're adapted when they migrate from one context to another, how they're practiced, of course. And then a step back from there leads me to ask questions like what exactly are we talking about when we put terms like decolonial and fusion performance and pedagogy together. So out of all of that musing, I have invited two very dear friends of mine, Kyla and Manola, to be in conversation with us around this stuff and to help us think about decoloniality in our context by example, if you will. And this is through Kyla's work as one of the founders of a brand new, beautiful school called the Johannesburg School of Mask and Movement. And many of the other co-founders are here as well. And also through Manola's work as a somatic practitioner who works through a range of different feminist and decolonial pedagogic tools. And how we're thinking this is going to go is that they will introduce each other. And then I will open with the question to each of them. And then we'll open it out to the floor soon after that. And then come back together and they will ask each other a question. And then we'll open it back out to the floor. And that's the kind of loose format, but we'll also see how this goes. Again, those of you who have been know that it's like, the idea is that we are thinking in community and together. So at any point you have a contribution to make a question, a comment, put it in the chat, raise your hand, and we will put it in the mix. So that format is really very loose. Yeah, that's my preamble. So I'm going to ask Kyla Manola to introduce each other and maybe starting with Manola. OK, so the topic is serious play. So we've started with a bit of play here. And we've got each other to write little knots, which I'm going to read to you. I'm reading Kyla's knot. I'm a theater creator and a homemaker caring deeply about the earth and the interconnected relationships between people and ecosystems. I believe in a just transition to a more sustainable future where life, human and non-human, is valued about profit. I am moved by the potential for theatrical processes to inspire hearts, radicalize minds, and mobilize hands towards a more empathetic and caring world. I am powerfully drawn to choral work. I enjoy experimenting with the endless possibilities for play within an ensemble where there are no leaders and no followers, but rather a hive mind of hyper-present performers. I also love to make masks and puppets to take outside and cause a ruckus. Thank you, Kyla. Thank you, Manola. I wouldn't have anyone else introduce me. It was beautiful. And I will introduce Manola. Manola is currently spending her time writing poetry, a play, an article on breath and trauma, teaching, analyzing dreams, whale watching, seed dipping as much as humanly possible, as well as co-holding the matrixia spaces for being amidst the pandemic these days. She likes talking to experimental traditional healers who enjoy working through performance in different ways and collaborating with visual artists and musicians and historians. She is inspired to continue to find new ways for our hybrid subjectivities to emerge and she thinks it's important for questions of decolonial interest and transformation to speak together. Lovely. Welcome, both of you, Devane. Thank you. Thank you. Great. So I want to start by asking Manola if you could just open by sharing some of the particular questions that you work with and through. And this is by way of setting up some loose guideposts and framing within which this conversation can occur because, of course, there are a range of different ways we can come to this. So that's my opening question to you. If you could just tell us what some of the key questions are that you have churning at the moment in your work and in your practice. OK. So I'm going to speak from what I... from the work that's happened over the last few years, but that's kind of coming together in a particular way this morning today here. And since we were talking about physical theater and then embodiment and then pedagogies and then thinking around the serious play, one of the questions linked deeply with the question of decolonization is the question of what happened as dehumanization and also then the dehumanizing of the body and the dehumanizing of the mind in various ways. And being extremely mindful of what and Lovogad Shani talks about, that the question of decoloniality outside of thinking about the politics of it needs to come in terms of the freedom of our epistemologies and the freedom of our thinking and the freedom of our knowledges. And this so epistemic freedom almost necessarily involves new forms of knowledge and new ways of approaching that knowledge. And it's my sort of strong, and I think a lot of us who believe that these knowledge forms have already sit in the bodies of performers and performance traditions, especially in the South, in the global South, there are also philosophies tied in with those knowledges. And somehow this epistemic freedom that's sought as part of the decolonial question is deeply linked with this relationship to practice in the body and finding a way to open up that cellular wisdom that belongs within tradition but is also present in memory. And finding practices that unlock that to say that just in the context of questions of decoloniality, I like Eve Tuck and Wen Yang's work that decolonization is not a metaphor. They say that we cannot talk about it in terms of academics only, it is a question also of land, which for me comes back to bodies and how we see them. It comes back to Wen Yang, your work Afro cartographies for me is deeply feminist, queer, decolonial in ways that I think it should work for me. That's another example of practice of the work, which I really love. I think that the question, I mean, there are different inspirations including practitioners that I learned from, Binapami, who said, who in theater research and the laboratory is like we can't go back to a past imagining it's pristine. We can't only look to the West which is another move that happens. So kind of trying to look at a mix.  I was informed by both Kanaylals coming back to the Manipuri body and Manipuri tradition in terms of kind of finding a practice which also linked him back to theater of the earth. I'd like to kind of, yeah. And so I think these different things including just practices and healing wisdoms that also had performance sort of informed where I was trying to find space in theater and performance scholarship and drama training. I was like, how do I hold all these kinds of questions and come in? And over the last two years, I think the question for me that sits very strongly is that one has to look at trauma and loss. And this for me again has resonances for us in the pandemic and what happens with that loss of control. It's such an epic huge scale. It's epistemology is lost. It's connections to that that is lost. And that's in terms of colonization, but in terms of also just immediate memory and loss that the question of decolonization is type has to look at the relationship of trauma and loss. And therefore the practices need to hold how we work through trauma and loss. And that's part of what my work does which moves into both embodied knowledges which moves into spaces like the matrixia to try and believing that creativity and pleasure open up both the knowledges and allows for this new subjectivity to emerge. So that's in a sense some of my background with that. And to say that when we say physical theater we've discussed this in our preambles a lot the nomenclature and the naming of both traditions and people. And Amy also talked about, I think she mentioned Susan as coming up with certain of the practices. I mean, she can say more about that but kind of revealing some of those histories which is one part of one kind of scholarships work. But the other for me is also about just naming and where does a practice sit in the practice and how important our names. The whole first conversation happened without me mentioning any of my teachers. But connected to that in terms of saying physical theater is this other interest within academia which is with taxonomies and classifications and how the cultures of the global South really escaped those. So you have scholars from each from the continent saying but Sanskrit theater is actually dance drama and African theater is not just storytelling. And we have huge articles and scholarship work that where the lengths of even drama and theater is inadequate for these forms that are already mixing. So to just, I think if we're speaking about the language I wonder, would we call this really when you're making space for Manola to be curious about Kyla's relationship to LeCocque? You know, like how do we name the talk? Which for me is about making space coming from all our multiple histories for me comes back to the relational. And which was why I was really excited when Kyla took me through like a LeCocque exercise on our first meeting. And that went into my body and opened up my spaces to listen. And which is what I did a little bit this morning again before I came to sit here. And to say that just as an offering that I do keep coming back to my breath and to my table and things outside the screen. As I registered that everything that we hold in our heads and talk if we're not paying attention to what's happening to our body creates a stress. So I keep trying to come back to it as well. So I'm just doing that right now and I'm going to pick up a brush and paint and catch my breath while I listen to the next bit. Thank you so much Manola. I feel like the invitation to get your paintbrush and paint and your coloring pencils and your yoga mat out while this talk is happening is very wide open. It is anyway, but it might be worth it to have that said upfront and explicitly. Beautiful, thank you. There's so many things there that we must circle back to as we proceed. Kyla, I want to ask you a similar question actually, which is about what some of the questions are that you and your co-founders have been asking yourselves in these early stages of developing your new school. Thanks, Mwanya. I'd like to also just start my little section with a couple of acknowledgements if I may because I think they're important. I first of all want to acknowledge my co-collaborators in the room, Daniel Buttend and Mlindeli Zondi and Roberto Pombo, who's not in the room, sadly. He wishes he could be here. I'd also like to acknowledge my elders and teachers, some of whom are in the room, some of whom are not, in physical and movement theater, some even who I have not been taught by, but I still consider elders and that I have learned this practice from. It has come through them. And then the last acknowledgement I want to make is that I am not a scholar in either decoloniality or anything, really. I'm not of the academic world. I'm a maker and a doer. And this is how we come to the school, really, is that my collaborators and I, led by, guided by Roberto, who trained with Giovanni, who's also in the room, I see him. We, the school has been born out of a need to develop an ongoing physical theater practice. So all of us have become really frustrated. We've been collectively teaching for many decades now in various contexts. And all of those contexts have been quite bitty. So just to give you an example, at WITS, I think the physical theater module is three weeks and it'll be situated depending where and maybe when you could talk more to this, but I don't have intimate knowledge of the curriculum, but my experience of teaching there and of having peers that have taught there and at other institutions is that it's very sporadic and it's very bitty and it is very much an add-on to the curriculum.  And then coming from this training, we know that this work is not bitty or sporadic or surface. It really is a physical and emotional spiritual even. Some might say possibly even therapeutic journey towards yourself and towards the ensemble as well. And so we really, Daniel and I had tried to institute a kind of weekly training session for theater professionals to come and move together and make things together. And we did that over several years. It was called La Club and a performance came out of it called Swarm Theory, which we can talk a little bit about if there's time, but still there was this thing of it being very much like in between stuff and as and when. And I think the school has been born out of a desire and a need to go deeper, to commit real time and real space and real thinking towards what a long-term pedagogy looks like in the South African context in terms of movement and mask theater. So I guess it has been born out of a dissatisfaction of just skimming the surface of this work. So I mean, in terms of how the school came together, Roberto attended the Helikos and also did the postgraduate pedagogical program. And with the intention of coming back to Johannesburg and beginning some sort of training program. And because Roberto and Daniel and I have worked frequently together on mask projects and other projects, we were sort of his first, his go-to people. And because Dan and I have worked a lot together in trying to gather an ensemble, a physical theater ensemble. So we were sort of his first stop. And Lindele and I have worked together a lot as well over the years. And so all of us were like, we need to bring this person in as well. So the school was formed thus. And how it is going is that we are, we spent the COVID year meeting every week and going through the pedagogy and trying to bring ourselves onto the same page in terms of what it is we're actually speaking about. And we've really started with fundamentals like the 20 movements, for example. This is, we began at the beginning. And of course, it was slightly dissatisfying, not that fun to work on a physical theater pedagogy online. But the, what's the word? The circumstances dictated that we had to do that. And now the idea is that we're moving into offering in-person workshops in small groups. And those workshops will get longer and longer until we can offer a full year program. And I feel like I'm getting away a little bit from the question. So what questions are arising during this process? Sorry. What questions are arising for us is, I mean, the biggest question and why I was very excited to be invited by Wenya to talk about this is our context is where we are. We started off by calling it the South African School of Mask and Movement Theater. And then we felt that that was extremely precocious and presumptuous as well. And so we narrowed it down to the Johannesburg School of Mask and Movement Theater. But even that is sounded to us quite presumptuous. So we really are in a process of acknowledging who we are and where we are. And where Manole has a lovely word for it, the lineage of this work is coming from. I also have, personally speaking, a vested interest in the feminism of this work as well. I mean, if we can just name it and say that this work as much as I love it and value it and it has formed me as both a human being and a maker, a theater maker, it is a predominantly white male European led practice with these almost guru-like teachers historically. Or at least that's what it looks like from the outside to anyone who is approaching this work. So we are definitely tackling those kinds of perceptions that come up and acknowledging where we sit and what questions it's going to raise to start a school of this nature called the Johannesburg School of Mask and Movement Theater run by these particular people. Yeah, I think I will leave it there. That is the biggest question. It's like we have to acknowledge where we sit. We are not starting a school in New York or Paris or London or Berlin, which is a sort of more of a crucible of international. I mean, we just think about the kinds of students that these schools traditionally draw to themselves. It's very international, you know? Whereas in Johannesburg, that's not going to be the case. Maybe one day we'll become world famous and everyone will say, oh, I wanna go to the Johannesburg School of Mask and Movement Theater rather than Le Coq or Lisba or any of the other wonderful institutions that share so much knowledge, but they'll wanna come to us specifically for our flavor. And so I guess we're asking ourselves, what is that flavor? How do we plait these pedagogies together along with our context, along with who we are and what our bodies as South Africans bring? Let me leave it there. Thank you. Thank you. I love these metaphors on the table already, flavors and platting and makes me think of ice cream and getting my hair done. It's nice. Let's open it here. Let's open it to the room. And I want to ask if there are any general questions, comments to the space, to each other, to Manola and Kyla, other questions that are being thought through from the other co-founders of the new school? Yeah, does anyone have any contributions to make at this point? Things that are bubbling for them that they want to put on the table? I had a question, I mean, both an observation and a question because in the genesis of the drama school Mumbai, I don't think we were nearly as mindful and thoughtful about who we are and what we're trying to do the way that you went from South Africa to Johannesburg. A big question, and this is kind of an observation because even from what Manola said, I'd been to Adi Shakti, done the source of performance energy work. We'd had worked with Thomba and Kanhai Lal from Manipur. A lot, they'd come to Bombay to do some of our sort of precursor workshops. And there was always this question about what is the flavor? What is the blacks? What is the thread? And honestly, I didn't have an answer. I just, at that point in time, it was just a very immediate need for formal, solid theater training and some kind of pedagogical rigor of training and understanding that theater is deep practice. And so we literally jumped into it and we bought all the ingredients to the table and then decided what would, what the, we didn't decide what the stew would become. We just knew that we needed to be sustained and fed from it. So we threw everything into the pot. It's come to bite us in the bum later on because for example, at the beginning of the, but it's also, it's a double edged sword. It both acknowledges every single pedagogical, the lineage and the elders that have come and contributed to who we are. But at the same time, it's not allowing us to, I'm very comfortable with the fact that we don't know who we are and we find out based on what has come out of it. And I don't know if that feels blasphemous in some way to be so deliberately unconcerned by it. But I think that that's the observation and I'm more interested now actually because I think of Mumbai as a crucible space like New York and London, et cetera. But I also realized that like in our school we've got all of these European theater pedagogies. We've got a lot of the physical theater work. It's all happening on bodies that are cosmopolitan bodies in India, in Mumbai, I guess. But I lament the fact that we don't have some kind of a strand going back anymore to say Kanhai Laal's work or the work in say Kudi Atom from Venuji, for example. And these were things we were playing with in our prototype courses. How can we mix the tradition into the contemporary? How can we bring this in there? But that has gone for sure. It's not there anymore. And I don't quite know how I feel about that. Thank you. Thanks, Jihal. Any responses to that? I have a response to that. And it's also tying into our conversation yesterday, Amy, when we were talking about why Lakok, why, and you mentioned it in your intro as well, like why do we have to name it thus? And I said yesterday that it's useful. It has been useful for us. That's why. Not to worship at the shrine of Lakok or his lineage, but to say this is a useful framework. It's also a useful code for us as practitioners in that we can gather around this pedagogy. So I hear what you're saying, Jahan. I understand. I guess what I would want for the future of the school is the best of both of those worlds. I would like to be able to say, here is our journey that has already been tried and tested. And we as practitioners and as teachers have seen the universality of it, how we can teach it in various contexts and also how powerful it is as a teaching tool. But at the same time, we cannot keep it in a pristine, we can't treat it as the Bible. It has to move with us and work with us and we have to pull it apart. When we met with Giovanni, we talked and Lindele had a question for him about African masks and where they fit in the pedagogy. And Giovanni was like, well, you're crazy not to put them in there, you know? And we absolutely intend to because again, where we are and who we are. So yeah, I hear exactly what you're saying. And I just want to say that, I guess our hope is to take what we need and use it as a scaffold from which to grow. I think my associative response to that, Giovanni, and it strikes an extremely deep chord for me because in a sense, I suppose, any of us from the global South really grapple with the complexity of the lineage and how to visualize it. And the visibilizing of a lineage that, also coming which we're not quite surely sure how much of it we actually inherit or really know to speak of. I mean, there's that question too, right? Like when are you blessed by the guru to speak? Cause you're not sometimes, but you have been informed by this. And I think the kind of deft move of the drama school to just claim the name of, this is the drama school of Bombay or Mumbai and start and then sit seven years later with this, be in a space where you can sit with the complexity of the question in terms of the pedagogy is, it sounds to me exactly what needs to happen and what needs to be done. For me, that's a decolonial pedagogy question. It's not to answer it and then create a homogenous lineages, but it is to say, but it is to sit maybe sometimes with what will stay as a discomfort because it's, you cannot solve the problem of caste in a day, but we, it's impossible to not think about what's happening to the dehumanized body in practice. And if we're doing this as the drama school of Mumbai, you know, like how do we hold it even if we cannot solve everything, but how do we keep the space open? And how does that show? And I think always in practice, it does this. I mean, it shows in work, which is what keeps transforming us in our lives and the city itself. And to also say that when you spoke about this need that was felt, I also just think about Mumbai and the Bombay industry and about like the milling population of everyone in India that's there. And I think about how necessary it is to have this lab that is becomes at least like your practice becomes a space of connection and of sanity and of making sense and not just feeling precarity and not just feeling, you know, the existential crisis or what am I doing? Am I performing brilliantly? Am I the best actor in Bombay now, you know? But to have a community that's just kind of holding in a sense the emerging subjectivity of the contemporary performance practitioner. And I think to sit with some of that weight and that depth, including figuring out when can we call Tomba next for a sound thing or how do we speak back to what Veena Pani has said or where somebody else said or if an actor has come having done tal work for so much, you know, where does that pedagogy that's already in their body, how does it find a language in? And of course, through exercises it does but for it to not just be personally dismissive but to take on the epistemic weight of a lineage and legacy and how to, in a sense, create inside people the permission to do that. And that is, I think, the epistemic freedom that Glovo Guccini talks about. Where do you give yourself permission to visualize and own your lineages and your legacies in the creative way that doesn't tie you to them but allows you to be present to the becoming future? You know? So, yeah. Manola, can I ask you to share if you have a ready link or something to pop in the chat reference to Guccini and the work that you've been referencing? I can just put his name down. It's a book. Perfect, yeah. But I'll do that. Yeah, I can do that. Thank you. Does anyone else want to come in at this point? Thoughts, questions, things that are percolating for you? Resonances with your own teaching work? Mli, please. Yeah, welcome, welcome, everyone. For me, most of all, to respond to the question that has been asked is that I'm looking at how chocolate cork looks at the world as a poet, as performers become a poet and very being observant to your own world. And that's where your first point of finding your own poetry to create work. And I realize that also coming from your surroundings at South Africa is the question as we always had between my colleagues. We've been asking that, yes, as much as chocolate cork is like very European kind of centered guy. But in these factories, we find a language and a universal kind of language that speaks the world. Because somehow these factories came after the World War II came into the place. And I can imagine how they were grappling of reconstructing themselves as a community through the landscape of politics and economy and all that. I find that also in South Africa, in the state that after post-apartheid, we still finding ourselves in that sense. And for me, the language is encoded that the body speaks and how you see the world come as a coded form that is within a unique performer. I cannot move like Kyla, I cannot move like Roberto, I can only move by myself. And somehow that is influenced by my surrounding and how I relate to the world. So we find like the coding, like we find lines into how we can express that. But now we have to find our own color and dimension into that through that is informed from our surroundings. So I'm actually looking at actually the ideas of rituals, you know, like ritual, as I practice ritual, the world is coming from like a close like that, you know. And I was looking at how we look at the mask that can come into Africa that is like their very ritualistic. And how can we bring that as our own flavor? So we're constantly asking ourselves from our past, our present, and how we look at the world, the perspective and try to find the universal link within that. And I think I was always drawn to the people who were practicing chocolate cox pedagogy and physical theater in the sense of like the work kind of draws you in and you start asking yourself, what is it in a sense? And then how it draws you in as a practitioner. And that's how I got to the club and to finding and exploring those ideas. So but the initial thing is that the coding of who you are and how you move uniquely brings, it gives you like a certain base of some sort. Then you start finding the code within that. I don't know whether that makes sense if I can answer to that question. So I'm thinking the answer to the driver is that also people who are coming to practice in that school, it's which is good that in the moment that they didn't try and decide this is who we are. But also looking at the product that they practice and can give you a little glimpse within that because as teachers also coming with your own code, we cannot teach the same even if you're teaching something at the same course but the way we devise is the way we deliver it to people is different. And I think that can be another code of looking at it. Okay, this is it. I think I'll leave it there, I don't know what the answer is. Beautiful, thank you. Karla, were you gonna come in? Yeah, there's so much. I mean in what Manola and Jahan and Lee have now said first of all, I love this thing of just starting, just go. That is exactly what I was trying to say with my acknowledgement that I'm not a scholar, I'm a maker and a doer and I absolutely believe that these are things that cannot be figured out purely theoretically or intellectually, they've gotta be on the floor in collaboration with your body in that moment. So I love what you were saying there. And I just wanted to share a little story that maybe also can highlight the kinds of things that we've been talking about or that have come up rather in our conversations which is about mask and the neutral mask and the idea of neutrality which is kind of central to the Lacoc pedagogy. And we're really having to confront that as a concept, this idea of neutrality. I mean, for hundreds of years neutral ballet shoes were pink and nobody ever thought about that until suddenly there were brown ballet shoes. And then it was like, well, who's neutral? And I know that there's that's a little bit of an oversimplification of the idea of neutral. It goes much deeper than that. And there are people in the room, I see Giovanni and Norman John like incredible teachers who can speak much more about neutrality and maybe they want to, but we've been talking about this in terms of, do we even call it the neutral mask? And Roberto was like, no, I think we should call it the silent mask because just the term neutral mask is enough to be quite triggering, I think, in our context. Or the quest, I mean, Mlee was talking, I guess I'm thinking of this because Mlee was talking about how nobody moves like anybody else, you only move as yourself. And what we are doing here is not trying to sculpt little homogenized chorus of drones. We are trying to make space for performers to emerge with their own poetic voice or their own theatrical voice as their own makers of their own things. And so we have to look very carefully at the idea of neutrality in that. And I mean, just we've had a long discussion recently about the mask itself. Is it a very Eurocentric mask? And we don't have answers, it's an ongoing conversation. I wish Roberto was here to talk a little bit to that, but I think that probably, and please correct me if I'm wrong, I wonder if those kinds of conversations are that have been had in more global North classrooms, Lakop classrooms, or we're needing to have those conversations now because we are on the move. We are on the move with this thing and these questions are coming up. We are being confronted with them and so we must delve in. Can I say something? Yes, go ahead. It's great there. The neutral masks, that's what we say. The 20 movements, that's what we say. The question I have is, do we each have our 20 movements? Do we each have our own neutral mask? And then coming back, the silent mask. Neutral is a very unfortunate term, right? And I tried to call it a few years, a few years ago, yes. Here I am, I get into RP English occasionally because I know where we come from. I know where I come from. I come from the lower classes in England, right? I know, and it just batches back to me occasionally. See that, I tried to call it the mask of reference once and then people said, what the, is that, you see? I said, neutral mask, oh, neutral mask, okay. So I tried to get towards, like you say, the silent mask. Yes, but it's a silence that really resonates, resonates. You can be silent if you have nothing to say, right? You know, someone who doesn't say anything either has everything to say or nothing to say, you know that? So even the word silent, it has a resonance if it's referential. So it's a very potent term for that mask. The neutral mask, is it European? But I guess the ones we use, very European, you know what? I had a great conflict because I was asked to go to Beijing and do a neutral mask class. And they said to me, can you bring neutral masks? And I said, no, yeah, but there's no point, is there? You see, because you will, and the discussion, this discussion is absolutely essential, vital and phenomenal. And, you know, I'm not trying to say anything gets what they say, or what is being said because it is very important to say it. And, you know, if you are worth what you do, I'm not necessarily what you are, if you work what you do, then it is inevitably universal. So I'm trying to get back to this, the idea of neutrality. I love that term. The idea of neutrality, because it is only an idea, it is only a reference, we can never be neutral, is that? We can't. And if you do one of these exercises, or Le Coq exercise, you know, if Giovanni Fusetti leads a class, you know, and we do the exercise, I prefer to think of it as a Fusetti exercise, right? Because I remember Le Coq saying in a class, don't move like I move, move like you move, right? So he was within this universality. I'm not saying anything against this discussion because it is absolutely vital, right? And what do you call in your school? Well, why not African school, South African school, Johannesburg, you know? Everything has to be situated somewhere. Now I'm going, I had a clear line of thought through neutrality.  So the silent mask, the neutral mask, I called it the referential, the mask of reference. How do we call it? And do we each have our own neutral mask? That's the question in my head at the moment, you see? Now there would be how many billions of neutral masks? And it wouldn't be the neutral mask. I tend to talk about neutral masks, masks. Each mask maker has their own way of viewing the world, viewing neutrality. And who said, how do we see the world? Where do we see the world? I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. I'll read it down. How do we see, oh yeah, how do we see the world, right? We look at it, but can we see it? And the neutral mask, the silent mask, the mask of reference, or calm and harmony can help us or give us methods of seeing the world, of being able to look at it anyway. I'm going around the houses now, but it is absolutely vital in this discussion. And it resonates deeply within me, because I was always against this decodalization. Because in a sense I say, well, why bother? But I surely and sincerely understand why we bother. Because there's these two things. You do your own thing, yes, there is the pedagogy, that method gives us, can give us a way of exploring the world and ourselves. Life can be pedagogical, life can teach us about ourselves and about the world, you see, and, oh dear. I've had a sign of, another thing, you see, a Western European, white Western European, yes, that's what it was, but one of the 20 movements, I'm a little bit against the 20 movements, right, you see, I'm a bit against that. I am totally against gurus. And you talked about gurus, you know, why and gurus have nothing to say, in fact. So I was brought up partly in May, 68 in Paris, see where there is no gods and no masters. There are no gods, there are no masters. If you need a master, well, that's your problem. What some of us do, and I need one, you know, and perhaps he still is, but see, and the movements, the movement in Massique is the French word for that. And I have heard it called the Indian clubs, we, it's the Indian clubs for us, if you're British, you see, right? Hello.   Are you doing a demonstration for us, Momin? And in French, it's called the Massique club. And in my generation, we've got the Indian club, so that, you know, it is universal. I'd better stop, otherwise, once I start talking. So, Michael, sorry. Thank you, Naa, saying thank you so much. But since you have paused, let's, John has got a question and there's some lovely things in the chat. Please respond, also this conversation can happen there. And I also want to pull it back to the question that Kyla and Manola have for each other. Can we take John's question? And then there's also something in the chat that Amy has put in about trauma and loss and violence, this director to Manola. So I'd love to not lose that thread either. John, come on in. Thank you. Thanks. I'm interested in, so I'm coming from a perspective of Western European in London. London's been mentioned, very interesting the perspectives that some of the contributors were bringing to that. The idea of London, Kyla, you're talking about the naming of your school and so on. And we had this thing about the naming of our school, London Clown School and the symbolism around it and who might be in that school at the time of pre-COVID. Basically, people who are passing through the metropolis and I'm very diverse. But I'm really interested to know more about what seems to be very positive takes on Lukok coming from the global south. And I have to admit I'm really surprised in a very positive way because I'm got used to out here where I am, our kind of thoughts on decolonizing our practices are pretty negative about that legacy because what we see, and this is from a white male European perspective, is an ideology of individualism, uniqueness, everyone is different, yet universal, blah, blah, blah, which is kind of the ideal ideology that underpins colonialism in the first place. And in my field, which is clowning, which is a little subsection of all of this, particularly the emphasis on vulnerability and the personal, which we, I say we because talking with a lot of colleagues here in the north and in North America as well, as well as Europe, our concerns are, as a pedagogy, which works fine for the white European, well-armored actor, but as vulnerability as understood as something which you reveal, something of yourself in the workshop, in the studio and then you go out back into the real world and you're fine, you have nothing to fear because you're in a very privileged position. And this is very exclusionary assumption that we can all come into the studio and be vulnerable with each other and be ourselves and be unique and show our true selves and then somehow go back into the world and everything's fine and that just isn't true. So that's our kind of struggle at the moment to grapple with dismantling that privilege. So my question is, does that make any sense to some of your contributors or is that purely a very, perhaps a very, that we're stuck in there as we're trying to examine our history? Here, there's one of the sources of colonialism. Is that resonate or is that just our little battle? And also I'd like very much to hear more positive outlooks on taking Le Corp legacy forward. Manola, Kyla, either of you want to respond? Do you want to, shall I respond to John specifically and then we can go to Manola, the question for Manola in the chat. Is that OK with you, Manola? Great. Because I do have a lot to say about that. And in fact, I always found in my training, which was in London and touches a little bit on what Nono's saying now, this idea of the individual. Yeah, this is something that I personally really would like to pick apart. And in answer to your question, you're surprised that the positive response to the Le Corp pedagogy in the global South, all I can say to that is, I feel like it's our turn to be given an opportunity to pick it apart. I feel like there has not been, I mean, with and I want to make reference to this a little bit later, but I'll say her name now, Jenny Resnick and Magnet Theatre in Cape Town, with the exception of those guys who've been going for decades now. And I think it's the closest to the kind of school that we wish to build, with the exception of that and possibly the lab in some respects. There hasn't been anything like this that I'm aware of, certainly not in Johannesburg. So I really feel like it's our, we want to have a go at it, you know, and then let's see how we end up. But at the moment, it's still this thing that draws us together and that we find value in. So I think that's part of an answer to your question. And the second part is there's absolutely, I always felt a huge gap in terms of a choral work and ensemble work in the Lakuk pedagogy. It always seemed to me to be maybe it was just my training, but I feel like at our school, we will be focusing a lot because I think that is a real difference between Western societies and, let me say, South African society is this idea of the individual versus the community or the collective or the idea that I am because you are, you know. So I think that this is very much something that we will be looking at in depth in our pedagogy. Dan and I have a particular interest in choral work, having worked on a piece called Swarm Theory. And I feel like this is somewhere where the pedagogy does fall a bit flat. And I would like to look at that in more depth with much interest. Lovely, thank you, Carla. Manola, did you want to come in? Yes, I think to respond back again, associatively to the mix of questions as well as what I just saw. Just being kind of giggling about, you know, the flavor because it's like what the South African flavor was a London flavor because there was I mean, just the idea of the flavor. And of course, in Rasa that it's got and, you know, that it's actually a lot more than flavor. There's because the flavor is in the gut and that's the intestine.  Actually, it's just this sort of ethereal thing that's in your nose and in your mouth. It's it's intense. It's and literally there's a lot of it. That's quite shitty in the mix as well. Or that's processing what one keeps and what one processing essence in multiple ways. And wondering about because I think something that emerged also was that how does one go look at something as an entry point rather than even as a flavor. So where where is this common relational meeting point of LeCocque for the four founders and entry point into into this question of pedagogy, you know, rather than deciding what is that legacy. So that it's just a question around. And I like the entry point as flavor, because it still sits on your tongue. But then it goes down. It enters more than the tongue. It goes back into the body. It goes back into everything else that must be rigorously dealt with and worked with through the body and the neutral body. I wanted to to respond back to that and to this question of neutrality, because when I started my research work on breath is because I thought that would be the most neutral thing to work with bodies anywhere. I mean, that was my they want what apart from wanting to look at the connection of body and mind. The other thing was like, it doesn't matter where I go in the world. Everybody's going to have breath. You know, so it was there was definitely an interest in that. And can I also wanted to was interested in the earth and the neutral body. And he said, well, you know, whatever we say about everything else, we are flesh, we have a relationship to the earth and that can't change and those things, except to say that actually the breath is contextual. It depends if you're sick. It depends if you're on the mountain.  There's four for any for any body. And I think coming back to the two these relationships in some elemental fundamental ways is is I suppose a part of the work and part of the practice. And it connects me to. It connects me when I'm thinking about the collective to Heisman Sabitri, who was who's can I last partner and performer and actress and trainer. And can I have developed also a pedagogy and a training method? You know, there's movement, there's breath work, there's eye work. There's all of that. And so there's the collection of training style. And then there's Iman, I went to look at how they worked with breath. And I think in my third visit there and I and I was spending weeks and weeks and weeks living there. And I think in one of my final things, she sat with me and she could just see me trying to find what I was calling the creative autonomy. And she said. Gayatri, sans kaha kaha akele dundo, which is to say, she said, Gayatri, look for your breath alone. Look where it is. Look where it goes. You know, look for it on your own. And I mentioned can I last training because can I last and told me Sabitri doesn't attend any of the training. She's not any of the seconds. She's constantly playing. She's in the bedroom on the back, on her back, trying this, trying that. There's a lot. There's a constancy of play. And this connects me to decolonial pedagogies around both intuition and solitude and developing, as Jihan said, that the permission of the internal voice to cohere and that one does that and it can be a lonely practice. And that's part of the work. It's part of it's part of the work to do that. And yeah, and then I suppose, come back to how does that come back to some chronicity and other things. And Amy, yes, absolutely the rhizomatic. I think when when this when the idea of the matrixia is co-developing, you know, when Delos speaks about the rhizome, it's in terms of it's in terms of a structure. And yes, that's true. There is that sense of the rhizomatic, which is to say it's like a ginger formation, you know, it's not just a tree going up. It's going in multiple directions. And that's what that's what we're structurally saying when we say rhizomatic. But but I guess in embodied practice and this what's also happening is that's one's aware that the rhizome is also sensual. It's relational to the other bodies and the other thoughts and the things coming up inside. So perhaps that's and I love the word that you use their radiance because it is connected to that that the livingness of the rhizome in them in this kind of work is I think what opens up the possibility for the radiance and to touch back to Jihan not knowing whether we name or not. And it's still difficult to know how and when we name what or if we just sit sometimes in the radiance of that performative utterance at that time, which actually has multiple things activating in the present body. So that's sort of my response to that, I think. And I'm hoping it's touched on the things, yeah, yeah. Beautiful, thank you. Yes, go. I think very specifically to what John was saying and this again I spoke about, I think in one of the pre-questions with Amy is that I think, so I said that a lot of us practitioners are actually not even interested in the word decolonial so much because it keeps us in a dialectical lock with the colonial. And at the same time, discursively and in other ways it's being informed by that, but the practice is another paradigm. I mean, but we're also many of us artistic researchers or performances researchers. And also that the global South performance practitioner scholars work that could be seen as decolonial is a different kind of work of opening up the third space. Whereas maybe in the global North, part of the decolonial work is to go and re-examine practice and scholarship. For me, it makes no sense to do that.  I mean, that's not the interest. I'm interested again in Kyla's relationship to Lococ and how it's opening up something in South Africa right now, that's exciting for me. And I value the legacy and the work and Susan as Amy mentioned and all the other contributors and the unpacking that's rich, that's feminist, that must happen. But that may be that given context, given political histories, the work of decoloniality is different for different scholars and for the different contexts as well. Thank you. Thank you, Manola. Beautiful. Jen, let's just put in the chat that isn't the global North and a dialectic relationship with the global South. Can I quickly make a response back to that by just evoking EFTAC and Wayne Young here when they say that decolonization is not a metaphor? And I think this connects back to land, it connects back to resources, it connects back to how global economics work. And that's an important thing that you cannot decontextualize either. And so the fact that I'm okay with when you are introducing me as a decolonist and introducing me as a decolonial scholar is also to kind of recognize the nuance but not be limited by that. A lot of my co-thinkers and practitioners emerge from everywhere, but there is something specific about the global North, there is something specific about the global South, what's available, what's not available, what's available in terms of legacy to a white South African, what's available in legacy to a Cosa South African. And I think these are, it, so for me the university cannot come with the dismissal of the context and the rest, including that, yeah. So we have just over five minutes left of the formal session and then as you know, if you've been here before, there's an after party. So this conversation can must and can continue once the recording has stopped, but while we're still going in this formal time, I really want to give Kyla, Manola, an opportunity to ask each other their questions and maybe it'll come with a brief response before we close formally and then we can go into a bit more detail after quarter past. Can we go there? Kyla, do you want to start? Sure. Oh, I've got so much going on in my head. I know. And so there's so much going on in the chat and it's so, and I just, I just want to talk to Melissa, I want to talk to Manola anyway. Let me not waste time. So I guess not a question of provocation or a point of departure, just like this conversation I think has been, which is that I think wherever we diverge in our thinking or which I don't think is actually very much, but certainly somewhere where we meet very strongly in my experience with you so far is at the body. And I love how you've spoken about beginning with something simple but complex like the breath, this idea that everybody breathes. And I have the same feeling with the spine. This is where I begin. When the first scan that I had of my pregnancy, of my child, this is the thing that struck me the most was this little spine inside me. And when you asked me to share some of my practice instantly for me what came to me was the undulation that we did together. And even this conversation in a sense, the poeticism of the undulation, this idea of an unfolding that one thing has to come after the next and it's consequential, you know. It seems jarring to start with the head if the action has started in the knees. And I guess I, my provocation or my, I would love to discuss that. And I think it does touch on the body as a site of healing as well. Mlie mentioned that Lacocque has come from, came from after the Second World War, bodies in trauma. Jenny Resnick who will put her MA thesis in the chat, but she also talks about this idea of, if I can just read it quickly, very quickly. I don't wanna paraphrase it. I argue that my own practice influenced by my two years of study at Jacques Lacocque continued this tradition by responding to what I propose existed as a culture of violence in South Africa from the period of colonialism through the apartheid era. So she was also coming to this work as a response to a culture of violence on the body. So I would love for you to speak to that and to speak to how we can meet at the body as a potential site of healing and understanding ourselves better. To say that I think we did meet and we're sort of still in the meeting. And I guess my response is to say that the, is that there is a hope of the meeting and the moving away and coming back that continues, that it does continue that things that opened up both in the conversation, even in this last hour, things that were dropped into my body, things that went into my mind but are now sitting in different parts of my body. This will inform my practice. It'll inform the language that emerges from me. And if there's a moment when we meet again, in terms of, I'm not going to respond to this in terms of the larger question of, what is the framework of witnessing the body in trauma? Because that's really a second talk and we can go there. But thinking about the time we have now, I think this is what I'm saying that in trauma work, I think what we really know is the question of boundaries and openness. So it's like, when do we open and irrigate whom I love a lot, things of space as not what's contained, but space is actually what happens when one opens up, when actually boundaries open up. And yet we know in trauma work that containment and the skin in the body is a certain kind of container. And how do we listen to the internal? This is the amount of provocation I can take. This is the amount of stimulation I can take. This is the work I can do now in this minute. When do I pause? When is enough? When is enough for this? I will not complete it. We're not going to solve this, but is it enough for this hour, for this minute, that this body can do this much now? And sit in some peace with that. For me, the question of decolonial, both erotics and desire is around also the question of, when is it enough? This is a perfect place to pause so that we can formally say deep thanks and then continue as soon as the recording has ended. So I just want to say that to both of you. All of you, thank you so much for this incredibly rich beginning of an undulating conversation. And yes, as you say, it feels like it could be the first of a whole series alone. There's lots of stuff in the chat to continue to respond to. Maybe we can quickly talk about what is coming up next week's unrehearsed futures in a week after that. I don't know who's next on the line. I don't know if it's Bong-Eni or Amy or Jae-Hun. Go for it. Do you want to introduce your topic for next week? No, thank you. Embarrassingly, I've actually forgotten the precise title for next week. But it's going to be, in some ways, a continuation of today's conversation. We've been talking about Le Coq today and that kind of inheritance. We're interested in thinking about what it means to conceive of something that we might begin calling a classical African drama. So on the one hand, we're looking at how emerging forms are engaging with these legacies and histories of Western form and Western stories and fascinations with what we get, with the West and the global North, but also how we can kind of crack apart those kind of embedded structures and fascinations within the dramatic form to imagine what we might call a decolonial drama, what we might think of perhaps as a decolonial aesthetics of the dramatic. And I'm using a lot of rising inflections because I'm trying to kind of reflect the insights with the use of even those terms, right? Yeah, so thank you for this beautiful conversation today and it's certainly wet my appetite for the continuation, I guess, of this thread in next week's conversation. So I'll be with Manjam Bortre and with Mark Fleischner, I mean, it's going to be my two key interlocutors. I look forward to seeing all of you. That's perfect. And I'm going to, and I'm going to take that thread even further and I'm really going to solidly request if Manola and Kyla could rejoin us for that for sure. And Tushar, who's an alumna of the drama school Mumbai and has experienced the training of the people of the teacher involved, Shankar Venkateshwaran. And the reason is that one of my quests is exactly, this is like, how do we negotiate between like the universal and the individual? How does Kanhaela's work coexist in the same space as Benjamin Samuel who was right here? And I think I will start that talk with a small story two weeks from now of what gave us the internal permission to go ahead and say, okay, we're going to start a drama school Mumbai without even knowing who's going to teach what at it. And it was a moment, it was a Eureka moment where Shankar was present, then Samuel was present. Tushar was present at a previous question of it. And it came around the idea of the Lakak Otakor. And so Shankar has moved on in his deep intercultural practice to almost say there are no universal truths anymore.  And I'm hoping that everyone over here will be part of that conversation because this for me is part of a quest to see if we can have a rhizomatic drama school, a planetary drama school, a school that has, and Amy and I have spoken about this, but this idea of a banyan tree canopy with roots coming down at different places. So there is this ethereal in the sky thing, but then there are these rooted things as well. And how can this coexist so that there are 20 sites across the planet looking at neutrality, but each one is unique, but yet it's a quest for the same thing? Or is it? I don't know. So that really is the conversation that I'm going to very, very pursue very hard with Shankar two weeks from now. And I think I'm so looking forward to adding to the thread that Nguyen is going to take forward right now. So really let's have an ongoing conversation and see you guys both next week and week after next. And one more thing, I don't know if Moenya was going to say that, but we're happy to have you guys come in and body curate with us. And if there are people you want to speak to, if there are people you want to throw into conversation with each other and think that it would add to this ongoing conversation, just email any one of us. I'm going to put my email in the box, but I'm sure everyone else is going to as well. And