Blog Four: 24/03

The class started with us being stood in two horizontal lines using our peripheral vision to try and create movement in unison. I found this fairly difficult as I was only able to see the person stood at the side of me and had to wait till she moved so I could start movement. As we had little perception of the movements from further down the line, I imagine that there were several different variations that happened as we weren’t able to see movement in the full body.

“Time is a fundamental element of both human life and human improvisation.” (Spain, 2014). All dancers were lay on the floor and had to stand up when two minutes was over, this was fairly easy because we were still and therefore being able to count. However, the group improvisation that had to end after seven minutes, I found this really difficult as I was unable to keep track of the time I’d been dancing for. It was particularly hard when I was leading as I had no concept of duration as I’d been concentrating on movement. I was dancing for eleven minutes which was completely off the intended timing “time is something I’ve got to get right”- Simone Forti (Spain, 2014), this came from my enjoying the exploration and after having missed the movement part of the improvisation lessons I was just enjoying movement and completely dismissed the main intention of the task.

We studied ‘Nina Martin’s Ensemble thinking score which we then had to identify in a video. I didn’t really take well to this score as in the video I found it quite predictable. I was able to easily identify the scores in their movement and I found that the spacing was a big contribution to the predictability as because there were only three dancers, there are only a limited number of variations to have.

When we tried the score as a group, I found that there were a lot of people reluctant to enter the space, and this normally changes as the group gets involved in the improvisation and becomes more comfortable with it, but that wasn’t the case this time as the score was changing each time and therefore the hesitance to join in was renewed. I found myself constantly entering the space to avoid any pace drop as much as I could as one person. “Whether it’s a body minute or whether it’s a clock minute”- Nancy Stark Smith (Spain, 2014) When observing other bodies in the space, I found it very interesting to identify the components of the score and see if I could pre-empt anyone’s movement. I found the second section of the score ‘Hot Spot’ the most difficult as I was unable to find different ways of taking focus and directing is elsewhere. I think that was because I was so interested in the movement and trying to move away from the habitual movement that I could sense myself doing, that I began to struggle. The fourth section of the score, ‘Number Score’ was the section I found most interesting but feel that us dancers as a collective struggled with the most. As I said before, it takes a long time for the dancers to become comfortable in the space and therefore there is a small number of people improvising, but as the group becomes more at ease, then gradually all the dancers enter the space and there is little fluctuation of numbers. It starts off very little and then gradually builds to everyone in the space trying to work with each other, this can be quite interesting to watch but as a dancer in that moment it felt quite hectic and I was focusing more on the space between the dancers rather than the movement “We make space and are made by it.” (Spain, 2014)

Bibliography

Spain, K. D., 2014. Landscape of the Now. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Blog: Week Three 10/2/2016

As normal, the class started with us just checking in with our bodies and us starting to move slowly so that we are able to work out any stiffness we had.  We then went onto an exercise called ‘Flocking’ which meant that we had to be aware of the other bodies in the space and involving each other in the decisions we made. This method linked with the mutual decision making from last week as it held a lot of the same qualities, for example, the movement was very similar as it remained quite slow and they were quite restricted, being mainly just lengthening of arms and slow steps. This pace allowed us to all stay together as a collective and we were all able to highlight the next movement as there was physically very little movement to focus on, however I noticed that as the pace increased the awareness of the bodies around us decreased and it became more frantic as there was more movement to concentrate on. It was clear that the order of the huddle decided on who the leaders were for the movement as it was the people around the edges, leader varied depending on the facing, which meant that it was obvious to the rest of the huddle who the leader was and it became more of a group effort and we were able to work together.

At the start of the pair task there was a lot of energy in the room, which is a common theme in all the methods we have used so far. The pairs were labelled A & B, and they were given words to tell their partner throughout their improvisations, like ‘change’ and ‘develop’. As I am becoming quite familiar with the bodies in the room and I know them all quite well I am able to identify their habitual movement, and in this task, I noticed a lot of new movement in the people who have quite recognisable habitual movement. In order to use the word ‘develop’ that they were given, there was a lot of repetition involved and the development of that material was clear to watch. When the dancers were given the word ‘change’ and then asked to isolate a body part of only move certain limbs, I was very surprised at the type of movement that was being performed by some of the dancers as I have never seen them move in that way and I wasn’t able to identify any habitual movement in what they were creating. Although, when there were elements of habitual movement, the dancers seemed more aware of it this week and were able to recognise when they were doing it and were able to change pathways or dynamic in order to avoid that familiar material. I was able to notice a lot of pauses in the dancer’s movement during ‘develop’ as it appeared that they lacked in confidence and were more hesitant and aware of themselves.

This method was then applied in a group context, all dancers labelled ‘A’ were in the middle of the space, and Kirsty gave directions to the dancers. Originally, there was very little isolation of body parts and the dancers were focusing mainly on the dynamic of their movement. Then they were given directions like:

‘No Arms’- In this direction I noticed a lot of similar movements between the dancers as they were being very careful in not including arms in their movements. There were a lot of pauses in this and the dancers seemed to be looking around at each other for inspiration. Like most of these methods, the dancers became more confident with their bodies and started to experiment more with levels and different ways of moving without their arms.

‘Left Hip’- This direction resulted in the dancers all originating with a similar hip rotation at the start of their movement and then the movement continued from there. This isolation didn’t appear as experimental as the others.

‘Slow Motion’- As the movement for this direction is slowed down, the dancers had more thinking time towards their next movement and it was much more placed and pre-empted. However, as the dancers had longer to think about their next movement, I would’ve thought they’d have reverted back to habitual movement but there was quite a lot of new movement which I was very surprised by as I’d presumed the dancers would’ve returned back to what felt comfortable in their bodies.

‘Fast’- For me, this direction is the most interesting to watch as the dancers find loads of different pathways unlike the tracking from last week. There was a lot of original movement in this direction and it felt very improvised as there is little thinking time for the dancers to pre-empt their next movement.

The second set of dancers, ‘Group B’ were surprisingly very different to the previous group, their movement dynamics between each other varied which was a very interesting quality to have within the group. It was visible within this group that they had thinking time within their movement as that was more apparent than the previous group. This group were also given direction:

‘No Arms’- The movement from this direction was very similar to ‘Group A’, the movement was quite hesitant and there wasn’t that much experimentation within the group as they all seemed to generate their movement from each other.

‘Right Elbow’- This direction surprised me the most as the dancers had very varied movements between each other but they all had the same quality of using opposites. I saw a reoccurring motion of using the left leg with their right elbow in their movement and it was hard to identify where this originated from, or how the dancers could be finding completely different movements with their elbows but they were incorporating their left leg.

‘Leading from the nose’- I found that there was a very similar sequential movement through the body from this direction as there was often a body roll starting from the nose and then there was movement that lead through the body. Although there was different movement as a result of the same starting point, the movement felt quite similar to each other as it held a lot of the same qualities.

‘Slow Motion’- As I expected, this direction had similar results to the previous group as it had the same thinking time for their next movement, although I did notice that some of the dancers who habitually move at a quicker pace, left less thinking time between their movements and perhaps didn’t perform the movement as ‘slow motion’ as possible.

‘Right leg/foot to stay on the floor’- The result of this direction was quite surprising for me as the dancers moved their improvisation to the floor, and I didn’t expect that to be the outcome of this direction. Once the dancers were on the floor, there was little to none level experimentation and most of the movement became about the arms as it was clear that their right leg and foot were on the floor.

Score

After the score was outlined to the dancers, it took a long time for the dancers to become confident in the space and there were a lot of the same dancers in the space each time. There was a lot of new movement from the dancers and they all seemed to be very aware of each other. It also appeared like there was a conscious decision made within the group whether to change the number of dancers in the space and they were able to sense when there needed to be another body in the space and when the movement was interesting enough with the bodies that were there already. I found the duets particularly interesting, especially when they were maybe just walking around the space together, as just from watching I was able to pick up a connection between the dancers that felt very comfortable to watch. I was able to pick up on the different groupings in the space, as I found that whilst there was a duet or trio, and a solo happening at the same time it was very interesting to watch and felt like that dynamic worked most in that space and the dancers were very aware of each other and therefore able to join in on each other’s movement flippantly. There were a lot of arm movements in this improvisation, presumably because they are easier for the others to copy and follow on, and there seemed to be a lot of habitual rolls at first as it appeared clear that others would be able to pick up on that movement fairly quickly in order to keep the same dynamic. The pace also changed a lot throughout the use of the score as there were so many different variations of the same movement from a changing number of people and within this, there was a very interesting development of the material as each person would adapt the same move in a different way. Habitual movement became apparent in the jam when one person had been leading for a long time, perhaps because they felt under pressure and were very aware of the people who were following them and they have confidence in their habitual movement. As expected, the dancers began to warm into the space when the score wasn’t applied and there wasn’t any restriction to the improvisations, dancers even made points of contact with each other and started developing relationships in the space. The whole improvisation became more experimental and explorative than I’d previously seen in the improv jam.

Week Two: 03/02

Observing the class is a different experience to actually participating. There were a lot smaller details of the class that I actually understood and saw the results in the other bodies in the room, which when I’ve previously took part, it didn’t appear as external or visible. It was helpful for me to see the different movement in the room and almost observe the types of things that I can maybe recognise for myself and my own performance. I was able to observe the different reactions to the method in the room and how the bodies that are normally around me, react to the prompting that I also receive and how different we all are as a collective.

The first thing I noticed when they started the class was the energy in the room as everyone was lay on the floor, eyes closed and tuning into their bodies. It was clear to me whilst watching, that the use of breath from everyone in the room was what provided this energy and created a relaxed mood in the studio that everyone could enjoy.

When everyone was directed to start moving in the space and were given different stretches to move between. These were: Downward Dog (with padding through the feet, for an active stretch through the hamstrings and the calves), child’s pose and table top, which like many of the exercises in the previous week, were adaptable in order to adjust to each individual and ensure that they’re stretching for their own bodies.

The next experimental exercise was a mutual exploration of the body in pairs, which included very slow paced gestural movements from each pairing in the studio. It was clear when watching some of the pairings that their synchronicity suggests no definite leader and most, if not all pairs, executed very slow gestural movements that were only made interesting and effective by the use of mirror image. They were directed to look over the shoulder of their partner, therefore needing to use their peripheral vision in order to not copy exactly but figure the basic movement aspect of their partner’s movement. Another thing I noticed from this method, was that the movement became very limited and there was very little imagination in the way the individual moved, presumably because they were sat cross legged on the floor and the movement was only limited to the top half of their body. Personally, I found this very interesting as the dancers appeared to be moving very much in their comfort zones and not really experimenting with direction, levels or pace in this method. Whereas in their solo positions, they worked quite freely and were moving in a way that they thought could be a different way in which they normally move. I also noticed, that when the dancers were directed to increase the speed and create more variations in their movement, most pairings increased speed which resulted in the exercise becoming less of a mutual decision and more of a follow and lead. This method then progressed to a different level and the dancers were directed to try the same exercise but whilst standing, this was very surprising to me as the dancers were repeating a lot of the same exercises that they did whilst they were sat down, despite the range of movement that was now available to them.

“Tracking is a product of consciousness and unconsciousness awareness in the moment.” (Spain, 2014). From observing the class, I noticed that there was a lot of repetition in the method, even though the dancers were thinking about their movement before they executed them. Although I noticed that the dancers were looking around and had inspiration from the other people in the room, I was able to recognise a lot of habitual movement from each of the dancers. I was able to note that there was a connection between the use of internally originated movement and habitual movement, as there was clear identification of the way the dancers originated movement internally and externally. When they would internally create movement, it was less habitual and more free.

It was also easy to identify when the movement was improvised and when it was habitual, simply by the free flow and the thought time before their movement. As well as detecting the dancers who were enjoying this tool and the dancers who seemed to struggle with pre-empting their movement “Part of it is safety. Part of it, more and more is a real deep appreciation for the intelligence of that medium” (Spain, 2014).

Despite the fact that there was still a lot of anticipation within the group in regards to using improvisation, I think that the dancers are become a lot more involved and open minded to the use of improvisation and accepting the different tools that are being offered through our tutor. I am beginning to recognise that there is a lot more to improvisation than being told to just ‘do it’ as I am able to see that dancers often refer back to the material that they already know and there is nothing ‘new’ about that kind of method. By trying these different tools, we are able to open our minds to a lot more of the movement that we didn’t even know was available to us or that our bodies could do.

Bibliography

Spain, K. D., 2014. Landscape of the Now. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stretch Positions

Week One: 27/01

The first lesson was an introduction to Improvisation which meant that we were able to discover the types of movement we’d be exploring and the concepts. The first exercise we did in class enabled me to have a feel for my body and meant I could find my breath and notice any tight muscles in my body or any areas discomfort, “A divine sensation, as breath flows into my bones, the ribs rise up and the diaphragm stretches to accommodate the newly filled lungs, a tiny swell through the torso” (Midgelow, 2012). As I was able to breath into my body, I felt like I was able to identify the areas that I could move into and adapt the movements such as pushing, pulling, twisting and folding into what I felt was the most beneficial for my body and to ease some of the pain and stiffness I felt. This movement process also surprised me as I was recognising movement that felt comfortable in my body and repeating it, but the action was from a constantly-changing starting point so it was never the same. I thought this was really interesting as the action was changed each time and I was discovering different things about the movements and about my body. “I have an excess of memory. Memories of past actions” (Midgelow, 2012) I also realised that habitual movements play a huge part in the ‘improvisation’ I have already done and that there are lots of habits that I need to break in order for me to be able to improvise properly.

The second exercise I was with my partner Emily and we had to react from the different body parts that were touched by our partner. This was also a very surprising method of improvisation for me as I had never imagined that there was so much thought process into movement reaction of that speed. There were challenges with this exercise as it was difficult to think of different movements when the partner touched the same body part as some actions became natural and it was hard to break away from those habits. Similarly, it was difficult to touch different body parts on my partner to spark spontaneity as I was able to look at the movements of my partner and absorb them for when I was going to be experimenting with this method. I found it endearing that this movement had some form of a free flowing element to them and my improvisation was able to move around the space but I had no pathway in mind and I hadn’t thought about travelling my movements “I’m not sure where I’m going. I have no destination.” (Midgelow, 2012). This wasn’t what I expected to happen with this method as I presumed the movements would be more gestural and would be quite static but they moved around the space and I was able to create pathways with my partner that we not pre-considered.

Bibliography

Midgelow, V. L., 2012. Dear Practice … : The experience of improvising. s.l.:Intellect.