Significant Work #5: Methods in Madness

Context & Significance

Methods in Madness was conceived as an interdisciplinary “salon”—a hybrid of performance, installation, and personal excavation that sought to investigate the intersections of mental health, creativity, and artistic legacy. Eventually framed as an “autopsy,” the work questioned the necessity of live presence in theatrical spaces, challenging conventional ideas of liveness and audience agency.

At its core, Methods in Madness explored how artists have historically navigated—and been consumed by—the mythologies of genius and madness. Drawing inspiration from the lives and works of James Baldwin, Beauford Delaney, Nina Simone, and Julius Eastman, the project examined the cost of visibility, the weight of expectation, and the precarious balance between artistic brilliance and personal survival. Rather than a traditional narrative, the experience was assembled as an immersive archive of a life unravelled—an invitation for audiences to step inside the fragmented psyche of “The Artist” and piece together meaning for themselves.

Developed during a period of deep personal and professional reflection, Methods in Madness was also a response to the forced recalibration of theater in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. With performance spaces shuttered and new modes of digital storytelling emerging, I set out to test whether an intimate, site-specific theatrical experience could exist without a live performer at its center—whether absence itself could become a form of presence.

My Role & Artistic Contribution

As the creator, writer, and sole performer I designed Methods in Madness to be both deeply personal and collectively resonant. The work sought push back against the often passive consumption of art, demanding that audiences engage, decode, and interrogate their own relationship to the material. This multidisciplinary installation featured:

     • Over 20 pieces of my original visual artwork—painting, collage, and mixed-media staged in a “crime scene,” a fragmented landscape of memory and identity.

     • Six original short films, crafted to function as both standalone pieces and interconnected elements of the installation’s larger narrative.

      • Extensive original writing, including poetic reflections, monologues, and fragmented letters, allowing audiences to uncover “The Artist’s” story through layered text.

      • Immersive sound design, weaving archival recordings, disembodied voices, and original compositions to guide audiences through the landscape.

Audience engagement was central to the work, with 60+ points of interactive participation inviting visitors to curate their own experiences of the material. QR codes unlocked hidden texts and additional soundscapes, ensuring that no two audience interactions were identical.

Creative Challenges & Process

One of the central tensions of Methods in Madness was its deliberate refusal to provide a singular, coherent narrative. Unlike a conventional play, which offers a clear beginning, middle, and end, the work unfolded as an open-ended investigation (or autopsy). This required a shift in my artistic approach—I was not guiding an audience through a performance but rather constructing an experience that allowed for multiplicity and personal interpretation.

Additionally, crafting a performance that existed solely through mediated forms—recordings, objects, and audience interaction—demanded that I rethink theatrical presence. How much control could I relinquish while still shaping an intentional artistic experience? How could I ensure emotional resonance without live exchange? These questions remain central to my ongoing research into theater’s evolving relationship with space, time, and technology.

Reception & Impact

Though Methods in Madness resisted traditional review structures, its impact was deeply felt:

     • Nearly 4,000 QR code scans tracked audience engagement beyond the installation, demonstrating sustained curiosity and interaction.
     • The work was experienced by an international audience, with visitors returning multiple times to uncover new dimensions with each visit.

     • It ignited conversations about Black artistic survival, audience responsibility, and the ethics of spectatorship—questions that continue to inform my artistic work.

     • Rather than a single fixed experience, the project functioned as a proof of concept for future iterations, with potential for adaptation into new mediums.

Why This Work is Significant in My Portfolio and the Field

Methods in Madness marks a critical turning point in my creative practice—fully integrating all aspects of my artistry, deepening my engagement with immersive storytelling, interdisciplinary performance, and the role of absence as presence in theatrical work. It demonstrates my continued commitment to experimental, research-driven performance that interrogates historical narratives, audience agency, and the evolving boundaries of theatrical form.

This project also reaffirmed my belief in art as a site of communal processing and healing. By positioning audiences as co-creators, Methods in Madness challenged passive spectatorship into active participation, opening new possibilities for how we might engage with performance in the 21st century.

The work is significant to the field as a proof of concept for a new performance/installation model. The visual art, film and immersive audio components demonstrate an innovative approach to storytelling. As the industry grapples with what comes next, I posit that the future of the form is intimate, multidisciplinary and immersive.