Improvisation and Reflective Practice

Throughout the past nine weeks I have discovered many different things about myself. Improvisation has opened my mind to different styles of dance and unusual ways to move your body. I never knew that improvisation had so much structure and many different ways you can use your movements. From participating in different scores, I have realised how many different structures and forms there is, and the different ways you can play within the scores. I have enjoyed being in the scores as I have become more confident in my dancing especially improvising as I was very shy at the start.

At the beginning of the module I struggled with coming up with new material. Starting was a difficult point as I would freeze and wouldn’t know how to start. In the last couple of weeks I have developed knowledge which allows me to start anyway I wanted too. I have discovered that my dynamics when I dance are slow and fluid. This is because of my previous training, I feel like as a dancer I need to progress and start to attack my movements. I have also found out my movements are all vertical and I don’t seem to use the floor as much. This module has challenged me to think out of my comfort zone.

All of the scores involved improvising with other students. This has allowed me to connect and dance with other people. I have loved being able to create and be a part of different scores with different people. I feel like we have grown as a group and have become more comfortable around each other. This has affected me in the way that I became more confident. In the last few weeks we used contact work for example the impulse and thick skinning. This has allowed me to discover something completely new to me and become more comfortable with my dance partners. Using the different limitations given to me has encouraged me to use different body parts which I don’t normally use, I never knew that improvisation has so much to it.

From performing in the score in the jam, I found it difficult to enter the space. I did not feel like I performed to my best as I had to concentrate on not upstaging the dancer whose solo it was. I think this is why I found it difficult to enter as I didn’t want to either intrude on their solo or try to make a duet when they wasn’t ready too.

Throughout this process, I have learnt to let myself go and not care about what the movement looked like. I feel like I have achieved this more in the last two weeks. I have also have learnt that the audience is just as important as the performers. There are many different ways the audience can be involved for example when watching a ballet they are performed in a proscenium arch meaning they can only see it from one angle. In the round is a different way the audience can be involved and they can also walk through the space whilst the performance is on.

From doing the pop up scores this week I have learnt many different ways to move my body and how to play with dynamics and timing. I have thoroughly enjoyed working with the pop up scores. I enjoy being in the audience as you can see how the score develops. I also enjoy being a performer as you can make it interesting in many different ways. Overall this module has developed me as a dancer in the way that I understand my body, what suits my body and overall confidence.

This week we looked at the score we improvised in last weeks jam, which was Underscore by Nancy Stark-Smith. Throughout  I felt like it was difficult for me to use a range of movements which I haven’t used before without going back to habitual moves. I found two sections of this score useful to me. This was where you only used your lower part of your body and then your upper body. This allowed me to use my bodies full potential, it opened my eyes to use different movements which I haven’t discovered. I found that the score at the end gave me freedom as I was allowed to enter and exit the stage when I liked. I was able to bring in new material meaning I could play with the change in dynamics. I also thought it was very structured too as when I entered the space I always interpreted the movement which was already there. Not many people came into the space with new material. I felt like the attention was the same for the people in the wings and the dancers on the stage, as even if you was not on stage you was till part of the score. This meant that you have to put your full attention where ever you was during the score.

 

Halprin says ‘it’s an exploration. I’m exploring, and my mind is directing me now’. (Halprin in De Spain, 2014, 122). Half way through the score there was a turning point as many dancers came into the space and played with the timings and dynamics this changed the score to make it more interesting and gave it an expression. I feel like everyone in the score started to explore with their bodies and expressions and this made it interesting to watch.

When revisiting our RSVP score we made some changes to our strategies. We changed the duration to five minutes and thirty seconds we feel like this was the right amount of time as nine minutes felt too long. We decided for two people to be the material maker. These two people made up the material and the other four dancers interpreted or manipulated the material. The material makers were also in charge of the stillness in unison. If we had created a unison in stillness we had to sense from the other dancers when to start moving again.  This score was very structured and you did not have much freedom to do your own movement and you have to follow by many different rules. I enjoyed performing this score as you had to work as a group and have lots of contact throughout. I thought I could be creative in the way I interpreted the movements which I found interesting. We thought about our form throughout and we wanted it to have more of a chaotic feel as from previously performing it, the movements was soft and slow meaning it did not have any excitement.

When watching the video I felt like it was clear to see that we was interpreting the material. The stillness and unison in the material was nearly at the same point. This showed that the teamwork and contact between all of us was strong as if it wasn’t we wouldn’t of been able to get it at the right time. Even though our form and structure was correct and it made our initial intention clear, which was how to make a score interesting. I felt like the movement was very static most of us did not move as much as we would have liked. There also was not any contact between us all which is something next time we could look back on and figure it out.

In the improvisation jam we refined our own score. We decided to start in a small group and all of us have to have contact with at least one person. This is something which we haven’t done in a score before so we thought it would be interesting. All five of us decided to have different strategies for example I would explore my lower kinesphere and another member in the group would lead their movements with their elbow. Charlotte would initiate the contact between us all, this could lead into a group contact. We have decided to keep the stillness and unison the same as we thought this was working. As well as the duration being only five and a half minutes and having the limitation of not thick skinning.

De Spain, K.(2014) Landscape of the now: a topography of movement improvisation. New York,USA: Oxford University press.

This week we concentrated on looking at Anna Halprin’s scores and creating our own. When we as given the freedom to create our own open score, I found it easy to enter and exit. I found it easier as it wasn’t structured so I didn’t have to wait for anyone to leave a trio for example so I could go in. Before I entered the space I thought about my intention for what I was going to bring to it, trying to change the dynamics in the space. If the dynamics were slow and fluid I decided to come in with sharp fast and strong dynamics. I think this made the piece more interesting and it caught your attention. Seeing as though we were allowed to bring anything to the score, I brought in a lot of new material. I feel like this is something I felt comfortable and strong with. I was able to show my understanding of improvisation and I enjoyed dancing in this way. I avoided joining a trio as I found it hard to connect with the other dancers. I also noticed that once I was in the space I joined a duet with another dancer we used the impulse task. This is something which stood out to me as it lead me onto new movements.

The question I wanted to know about improvisation was ‘What makes a score interesting?’. We used Anna Haprins RSVP cycle to create this. Getting in groups and creating our own score allowed me to bring my input into what I thought made a score interesting. I feel like when there are more than 5 dancers in the space this makes it interesting for me. As everyone is either doing different or the same but has a different effect as of the number of dancers. The intention of our score was to make sure that the performance is visually interesting for an audience. The resources were that the score would include all six of us, meaning we wasn’t allowed to leave the stage. If we wanted to stop dancing we would freeze until you thought it was the right time to start again, this meant that the stage would always be full and busy. We decided for our score to be nine and a half minutes so that it gave us time to establish our intention. Our strategy was to find unison at different points in the score, however we didn’t choose when to do this. We had to use our focus to see if everyone else was doing the movement and it was our choice whether to copy or avoid it. We wasn’t allowed to use thick skinning in our score. We decided to do this as this is what many dancers use to make duets and trios so we thought to just use impulse and copying as it has more of an effect.

When performing the score I really enjoyed it as it gave me the chance as a dancer to show what I have learnt from improvisation and how I can put it in my own score. I feel like from this task I have learnt a lot from creating our own score as we have put our questions to the test. I noticed that throughout we did solos more than any other groupings. This could be because we feel stronger when dancing alone. It could also because of our limitation which wasn’t too use thick skin, meaning we found it hard to connect. From performing the score we could improve on having some more limitations. I felt like there was a lot of stillness and solos throughout. We could put a limitation on only being still for certain amount of time and to only have your own solo for a limited time.

‘RSVP cycle allows even large groups to retain clarity in what is potentially a chaotic process’ (Poynor and Worth, 2004,113). I feel like this quote clarifies what the cycle is about. From my own experience the RSVP cycle allowed me to create my own score with the intention to understand what makes a score interesting. It made me think about what does make it appealing and how I could do this from working through all the stages. I feel like this cycle can relate to every day activities too. Always assessing the situation then having to resolve it.

Poynor,H and Worth,l.(2004) Anna Halprin. Ablington Oxon, Routledge.110-125

Throughout this lesson we concentrated on duet work and the Thomas Lehmen score. From doing the duet work I learnt a lot about myself as a dancer and working with a partner. I learnt that I have to be aware of my partner so we don’t collide and to make sure we have contact with each other which doesn’t have to be necessarily physical contact but eye contact. When participating in the task impulse we had to visualise being seaweed, wrestling and kittens. My partner Charlotte and I found the seaweed exercise the easiest. We felt like we had more time to see what we were doing, this could make it more interesting for the viewers. As we had to visualise we were seaweed we found our movements very fluid. We realised that the impact was just as important as the impulse. We showed the dynamics of the reaction through our impact. If our impact was fast it wouldn’t have fitted with the task meaning we had to think all of the time.

We found the wresting task more enjoyable. When doing the impulses we had no time to think of what the impact was. Meaning it maybe didn’t look aesthetically pleasing as we had no time to think what it looked like because of the fast pace we were going. I found it hard to not use my hands to do the impulse as this has become habitual for me. I tried to use different body parts to see what the reaction would look like. I used my leg and pushed on Charlotte’s lower back. This didn’t have a strong effect as if I was pushing with my hand. When performing the thick skin task, I found this hard to dance as I struggled with movement material and how to connect with my partner. I felt out of place in this task but feel with more practice I will become more comfortable.

The Thomas Lehmen score, I found very hard to understand when talking about it but once I had watched it I understood it more. There were five main parts and one person had to start as each. These were material, interpretation, manipulation, observation and mediation. When I had watched the score I found that when there was more than one observer. It made the piece boring as not enough material was going on in the space. When more material came in it made the piece more exciting to watch. When I took part in the score I found it very easy to enter and leave the space. Even though the structure was very strict I found it easy to go in and out as there was so much going on in the space I could add and reduce the dancers and material. This could only happen during the second round. In the text it says ‘the fact that openness of the system includes the possibilities of surprise.’ (Husemann,2005, 33). I felt like this was true as in this score it always had an elements of surprise. Whether it could be the quick dynamic changes or even how many dancers were on stage, to how many dancers are doing a certain part. The possibilities of this score are endless and to me this is what makes it interesting as you just don’t know what is going to happen next. The Thomas Lehmen score is something which is new to me. I found it an interesting subject and thoroughly enjoyed working within the score. I feel like it has opened my eyes to new and exciting ways of improvising and the many different structures available.

During the improvisation jam we concentrated on our own life pathways and danced the Thomas Lehmen score again using our own pathways as inspiration. When doing this score I found it interesting to see everyone in the score as there was more going on in the space. I would have like to have seen all of the dancers go into the space at the same time as the different parts and seen what would happen. I imagine that it would be chaos because there is so many parts which people could have been.

When using my own material in the space I found it more personal to me. I felt like every time I went into the space to manipulate someone I was intruding in their lives but also being a part of it. Throughout the score I noticed I was the manipulator more than any other as I felt like I could bounce of their ideas and make the piece more interesting. The dynamic changed from slow to sharp as something which stood out to me when manipulating. The part I tried to avoid was the mediator as I don’t like talking in front of people as I have a slight speech impediment and this would be more on my mind rather than what was happening in the score.

Husemann, P. (2005) The Functioning of Thomas Lehmen’s Funktionen. Dance Theatre Journal, 21 (1) 31-35.

In this week we concentrated on the range of movements and to get rid of habitual movements. When doing the spaghetti and knife task I realised that I don’t use my upper body as much as I can. I only use my arms and legs to dance. It gave me a chance to open my mind and try new movements that I haven’t used before. The next task was that you had to imagine that all of your cells were racing. The range of the movement I used was fast and sharp. I felt like I was out of control. This wasn’t in my pallet of movement as I’m used to working with structured tasks meaning letting go was not an option. To feel like I had completed this task I felt like I had to shake my arms and legs. This was able to wake up all my body parts. When I was completing this task I traveled in a direct pathway .I thought this was the quickest way to get to the destination.

The tasks which were given were challenging as you could not resort to habitual movement as it didn’t fit with the tasks. When I was doing my solo I resulted in trying to move every body part but a slower pace. I also tried to use my torso more as this is something I don’t use and I feel like as a dancer I need to open my knowledge of what my body can do.

From watching the seven dancers do the score, I noticed that it was clear at the start which was a duet and trio. As the piece gradually progressed it wasn’t as obvious. I thought this as the dancers weren’t dancing in synchronisation. When doing a variation of the movements it is not always as clear. The dancers found it hard when exiting and entering. The attention was hard to get correct as if you entered/exited at the wrong point the attention would go onto the dancer entering/exiting not the dancers already on stage. When Kayla said to the dancers to ‘see the space’ this changed the work in a way the dancers started to use all the stage and started looking at the space around them making the piece connecting to the audience.

When I was dancing on the stage with four other dancers I found it hard to enter the stage as I didn’t know when it was the right time. If something changed I had to change my intention. I tried to change the timing, as when a duet was on stage the dynamics were slow. When I entered I did fast dynamics to make the attention be on something else. A limitation we had was not to walk in the space, I found this difficult as it is a habit I need to get out of. I really enjoyed performing in this score as I found my strengths and weaknesses. I felt like I was in control of the score and this is something I never knew about myself. I could be in control of a score without knowing it.

How is it possible to make a shared choice of movements during an improvisation between two or more dancers without previous agreement and without communication through words?

One way you could do this is through focus between you and the other dancers. Watching the dancers you are working with allows you to be able to see what they are doing. By entering the stage and mimicking a dancer you are turning a solo into a duet without communicating with them.

When doing the improvisation jam this week, I realised that doing the impulse task with a partner helped me with a starting point. I imagined that a partner was pushing one part of my body and see where I would go from there. It has also given me more confidence to allow me to feel more comfortable with my fellow dancers. This allowed me to make my movement less static and more fluid. I found this task helpful to my knowledge as a dancer. I felt like I was being more creative with my movements this pushed me to go out of my boundaries and this is something I found satisfying.