W is a research collective that studies action in a performance setting. What does it mean to act as others watch? What characterizes the relation we call theater?

To answer these questions, W simultaneously develops three complementary approaches: a practice, which builds tools and techniques for the actor; a critical method, which suggests reception guidelines for the spectator; and a theory, which works towards defining notions useful to the first two approaches.

In particular, W produces games, a score writing software, a lexicon of operational notions, workshops and practical sessions, critical seminars, as well as articles and conferences.

The Ladder Game presents itself as a succession of performances carried out alternately by two teams, based on a single instruction. Each new execution must repeat the previous one while significantly augmenting it. The Ladder Game thus works to progressively compose a tacit score through a succession of punctual performances; it experiments with how 'one-upmanship' can be a factor of collective writing. Finally, by giving the floor to an audience according to a set procedure, the game simultaneously questions the conditions and criteria of a performance’s reception.*

RULES OF THE GAME

The Ladder Game is played by two teams of 3 to 5 players each, on a field containing a performance area, a microphone, two bases, and a space for the jury.
A Differential Evaluation Committee (DEC), comprising at least 2 rapporteurs and members of the public, intervenes in the event of a dispute between the teams, and a referee ensures the regularity of the game.

  1. At the start of the game, the two teams are at their respective bases. They choose a name and communicate it to the referee, who introduces the game, presents the two teams to the public, and determines by a coin toss which team will open the game. The teams will then take the lead alternately.

  2. A round begins when Team A speaks, i.e., proposes an instruction at the microphone (a statement containing at least one verb in the infinitive). This instruction is written down in full view of the public.

  3. Team B raises a hand and announces: "Here is how to... [text of the instruction]." They then have one minute to confer and gather any necessary props before proposing a performance. This performance (like all those that follow) may be individual or collective, lasts a maximum of two minutes, and concludes with a bow in the center of the playing area.

  4. Team A then announces: "No, no, no, that is not quite how to [text of the instruction]. Here is how to [text of the instruction]." They then propose a reprise, i.e., a new performance that will notably develop, augment, improve, or complexify Team B's performance.

  5. The moment Team A returns to its base, if one of the players from Team B has a hand raised, they may propose:

    • A reprise: see rule 4.
    • An adaptation: i.e., a new instruction capable of better accounting for the performance that was just shown. They then announce: "No, no, no, we are not [text of the instruction], we are [text of the new instruction]." Control is returned to the opposing team, who must perform this new instruction.
    • Reprises and adaptations follow one another in this manner for as long as necessary.

  6. If a team believes that the last reprise does not augment the previous ones in any way, or that the proposed adaptation is inadequate, they are entitled to contest its validity. For a contestation to be admissible, all players on the contesting team must have both hands raised at the moment the previous player returns to their base after bowing. The Differential Evaluation Committee is then summoned and invited to rule on the validity of the contestation, according to the procedure and criteria defined below (see "Rules of the Differential Evaluation Committee").

    Two cases then arise:

    • The contestation is accepted and the last proposal is invalidated. The round is concluded in favor of the second-to-last performance.
    • The contestation is rejected, i.e., the last proposal is validated. The round is concluded in favor of the last performance.

  7. If the performer(s) return to their base without being reprised, adapted, or contested, the score is said to be accomplished, and that team wins the round.

  8. The first team to accumulate 7 points wins the game.

RULES OF THE DIFFERENTIAL EVALUATION COMMITTEE

  1. The Differential Evaluation Committee (DEC) of the Ladder Game is composed of 7 members: five commissioners and two rapporteurs, who moderate the debates. It is called upon to pronounce a verdict whenever a performance or an adaptation is contested by the opposing team.

  2. The contesting team never explains the reasons for the contestation. Generally speaking, players do not have the floor during the deliberation.

  3. If a performance is contested, the DEC’s task is to evaluate whether the substance of the contested performance truly developed, improved, augmented, or complexified the previous performance in a notable way. The DEC is asked to avoid personal opinions and to stick to the tangible elements of the two compared performances. The recommended procedure is as follows:

    • a) The first rapporteur lists the presumed grounds for the contestation:
      • Either that the contested performance does not have enough elements in common with the previous one.
      • Or that the contested performance does not sufficiently improve upon the previous one to justify a new version, or that it manifestly neglects an aspect deemed significant.
    • b) The second rapporteur lists the grounds for rejecting the contestation, i.e., all elements that might justify that the contested performance truly developed, improved, augmented, or notably complexified the previous performance.
    • c) The members of the DEC argue in turn and vote on the validity of the contestation.

  4. If an adaptation is contested, the DEC must evaluate whether the new instruction is genuinely a better description of the last performance presented.

  5. The contestation is accepted or rejected by a majority vote (excluding the rapporteurs). The result is announced by one of the rapporteurs and validated by the referee.