Uncategorized

Our final contact improvisation session felt summative and reflective, as we experienced Nancy Stark Smith’s Underscore in front of an audience (12 photography students). Nancy Stark Smith’s Underscore “is a score that guides dancers through a series of “changing states”, from solo deepening/ releasing and sensitizing to gravity and support” (Stark Smith, 2008, 90) which sums up my contact experience, I have been through a vast array of states, emotions and reactions and the final session felt as though it encapsulated all of the knowledge and skills that I have experienced throughout my practice so far.

The main issues that I faced at the start of my practice were confidence, entering the space, flow, breath, release and weight bearing. I felt less fear during the final session and I felt more comfortable working with different bodies. I allowed my movement to flow instead of resisting and not feeling proud of it. I felt less tense or anxious, which aided my release technique and the trust that we have acquired as a group helped me to weight bear.

Word bank:

• Activating the eyes and head
• Releasing the head
• Counter balance
• Weight bearing
• Non touching
• Skinesphere
• Interchangeable role of under and over dancer
• Rolling points
• Small Dance – Steve Paxton
• Momentum
• Surfing
• Inwards and outward gaze
• Being present
• Eye contact
• Release
• Proprioception
• Breathing
• Guiding
• Safe practice
• Habitual movements
• Kinesphere
• Letting go
• Exploration
• Aikido
• Going down to go up
• Anchors and leavers
• Resistance
• Collaboration
• Imagery
• Trust
• Touch
• Dialogue, communication
• Sensory knowledge
• Connection
• Equal forces of weight
• Frames
• Pendulum
• Scores
• front to front connection, side to side, back to back, pelvis, head
• Internalizing

The score provided a supportive container, it informs you about the mind of the body and arriving into body time creates awareness and safe practice. I have learnt that information provided goes somewhere, it may not make sense right away, but at some point it will. I feel that I am now more prepared for surprise, so whatever my partner throws at me it will not throw me off track.

Nancy Stark Smith highlights the following (Stark Smith, 2013):

• Not set pedalogy of training, improvise the way we work with people
• Stark smith felt trapped by her own materials, wanted to open up the space again, generate a state of movement
• Score identifies ‘different parts of class’
• Score is a combination of prescriptive and descriptive, helping you talk about what you’ve experienced
• Research tool
• Prescriptive form – container for the improvisation, coherence
• Attentive to what is happening right now, sensitive, the score protects and challenges us
• Experience and practice – builds dimensional knowledge, curiosity, physicalizing what we don’t understand, learn about the mind of the body through experiencing it
• Experience revealing knowledge
• Term body time – arriving into body time, enough time to register senses, sense of space to the mind/body, practice is safe because of this awareness
• Information given by others goes somewhere, into the minds and bodies of others
• Preparing each other for surprise
• Permeable solidity
• Co-presence

Overall, I have learnt that the skin is an extension of the brain, the brain runs through the body to the extremities. I can now internalize and immerse myself into the zone/bubble surrounding a partnership, in which there is a constant flow and communication. At the start I limited myself to the role of the under dancer, but throughout my practice I have explored the interchangeable role of the under and over dancer and how this can be seamless, fluid and mutual. The term proprioception is key, as having this awareness creates a more balanced body, which I found even more important as we started to go up. I have become aware of my own body and mind, noticing the fine details, such as Steve Paxton’s small dance, which allows me to perform more intricate and innovative movement. Before I made eye contact but with glazed eyes, I now feel that I communicate with my eyes, the eyes can initiate and invite. Similarly releasing the head causes the head to lead movement, it can extent the line of the body and if the head is not released there will be tension through the body. Contact Improvisation’s political power provides a person the change to experience personal decision making and power, at times the body can be led by others, but your interior techniques are always coming from your personal identity. I feel more aware of my own centre of gravity and how it can change. The physics should be considered, to aid safe practice, but contact is fundamentally about humans and communication. Our life experience comes into play with contact improvisation, our everyday lives can be used positively, in terms of pedestrian movement, authenticity and commitment and negatively, in terms of brining stress into the body or tension. The skills that I have acquired from contact improvisation, including creativity, risks taking, mind and body awareness, endurance, flexibility, partner work and communication will transcend into the rest of my dance practice. I have learnt to twist, tangle, push, and pull my body and mind.

Bibliography:

Stark Smith, N. (2008) Caught Falling, The Confluence of Contact Improvisation, Nancy Stark Smith, and Other Moving Ideas.

An Emergent Underscore: a conversation with Nancy Stark Smith, London. (2013) Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzG609NWp1Y (accessed 08/12/16)

Whilst watching the first video of Roehampton students I could identify components that I have explored, including surfing, balances, using the shoulder as a platform, a back to back connection and a pelvis to pelvis connection. The dancers used their breath to facilitate the movement and it appeared as if different parts of their body became hands, searching for contact and movement possibilities, most notably the side of the body and under the arm. The searching essence created a slower pace, whereas the second video was faster and more daring, the dancers did not pre-empt what they were doing, instead they went with what was being offered with trust. A few weeks ago we explored the lower back being a platform, I had forgotten about this until I noticed it in the video and it has given me another option for working on a higher kinesphere, which I find more challenging than a lower kinesphere. At one point, two pairs, both using the lower back as a platform, came together and inspired me to work with more bodies. The two videos both highlight the importance of momentum in order to prevent isolation; my main aim is to create a fluid dialogue so I will refer back to this in future jams.

Following on from this we looked at the Global Underscore with Nancy Stark Smith. Nancy Stark Smith’s underscore was created in 1990 using “symbols to represent the particular nature of states” (Stark Smith, 2014) and a language to talk to each other about contact improvisation. The first component is Arriving energetically – bringing your attention into the present moment, you are not somewhere else, you are here, it could be looking out the window, having conversation, changing clothes, writing; then there is Arriving physically – bringing your attention into your body possibly through yoga, sitting here, feeling your body as it is right now; Pow wow – checking in with each other; Preambulation – taking the body through the space; Skinesphere – the imaginary surface around the skin; Bonding with the earth – feeling grounded, released and massaging the body against the floor; Mobilising/agitating the mass – warming up the body and bringing energy to the body; Kinespheres – the high kinesphere is connected to the low kinesphere; Expanding/travelling kinesphere and Overlapping kinesphere. The connections include Attraction – a magnetic quality, being drawn to person or place in room; Repulsion; Coincidence – noticing the same thing at same time, it could be the same coloured clothing, it is when paths cross; Touch; Difference/contrast–tension, creates options; Confluence; Divergence – together and split; Influence – it could be the dancers, music or room to actively change your state; Collision – sub set of touch, collision of touch or ideas; Empathy/resonance and Tangent. These combine as Grazing – a series of short connections, in which one feels on their way and stimulated. This is followed by Engagement – which requires commitment and being engaged until it is over, Development, Resolution, Disengagement from whole pattern; Development; Resolution; Recirculation; Open score; Final resolution of the room; Disengagement from the whole pattern; Reflection and Sharing. Nancy Stark Smith says that it is “not just the body moving through space, there are things moving through the body, such as compression, fluids, the air or ground and that the body itself changes state”. The different states and connections enabled me to be in the space for longer and move with different bodies without getting stuck. At times one does not know what is happening, for some this evokes feelings of panic, others liberation, during this score I felt liberation and freedom. “As one passes other bodies more energy is circulated and absorbed”, overall this created a relaxed and open space with a connecting atmosphere and focus between bodies and the space (Stark Smith, 2014).

During the jam I noticed that at times my movement did not continually link, I need to become more connected and controlled, as Nancy Stark Smith explains that “the forces at play – gravity, momentum and mass – were all operating in their natural order and if my mind was with me I could gently guide that fall towards a smooth landing” (Stark Smith in Albright, A. C., & Gere, D. 2003, 157) Thte point of darkens where you do not know where you or your partner isn when practice, dare and the mind – body connection is crucial. I also need to trust my own body and the movement I create, because “Contact Improvisation is not the beginning or the final stage in the opus that relates the body and its movement to the earth and the other movers on it. It is possible to forget that the bodies moving in contact are not new, It is, however, the continued focus on the elements involved in that contact, techniques for it, applications of it, that is specific to Contact Improvisation.” (Stark Smith in Albright, A. C., & Gere, D. 2003, 156) with each weekly jam I often focus on what we have explored that week, but in order to advance, I need to have a log of previous experiences, terms and techniques in my mind and body.

Finally, the reading Some considerations when structuring an Improvisation addresses the following questions: What sort of structure do I want in terms of spatial rhythm? Do I want my ‘game rules’ to be clearly seen, only indicated, or deeply hidden? How much do I want to rely on the actual rules I set or on the formalistic and other wise significant sensibilities of the dancers? How much does my dance fulfil or not fulfil existing contextual aesthetic expectations and parameters for dance, for performance, for improvisation, for art? (Stover, 1989, 185). The tools and terms in which we are motivated by when contacting will not be obvious to an outside eye, but they are helpful in maintaining the dialogue, bringing something new and always being able to offer something. I find the last question interesting, as I constantly focus upon the aesthetic value of dance, whereas contact and other somatic practices have taught me to focus internally, I have found that focussing on touch, sensation, and being present allows for more fluid and constant communication in which you feel encapsulated in the moment. However, will this change when performing? I have not yet experienced this, but possibly next week with a second marker I will feel a difference.

Bibliography

Stover, J. (1989). Some considerations when structuring an Improvisation (to be seen by an audience). Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II, Vol.14

Contact Improvisation Jam. (2011) Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdKZlryJ4HY (accessed 01/12/16)

Global Underscore with Nancy Stark Smith. (2014). Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOGLMZdm2uA (accessed 01/12/16)

Keefe, M. What’s the score? Improvisation in Everyday Life. In Albright, A. C., & Gere, D. (2003). Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader. Middletown, Conneticut: Wesleyan University Press.

Stark Smith, N. A subjective history of contact improvisation. In Albright, A. C., & Gere, D. (2003). Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader. Middletown, Conneticut: Wesleyan University Press.

This week there was a focus on the pelvis, boundaries, limitations, the idea of play and how much improvisation is present in our everyday lives.

The class began with warming up the pelvis with the hands to bring an awareness to it, as we went down to the floor. It is important to keep the pelvis aligned, use it to lead movement and for stability. We continued with a focus on the pelvis and the front to front connection, in which the under dancer creates a platform for the over dancer to explore. The body needs to be stacked to create a solid platform and the joints need to be aligned. It created more freedom and opportunities to play with exchanges of weight and it prevented people from reverting back to surfing. Instead, new levels were found, new twisting shapes and a connection was maintained for longer, so couples moved as one, in a fluid mutual way, as apposed previous classes where the dialogue was interrupted.

The concept of frames was then explored, person A created a stable frame for person B to find points to balance against. It provided new possibilities for weight bearing and once it had been exhausted another could be tried. Overall our class needs to work on entering and exiting these positions, so that when partner A exits partner B goes with them. To create a fluid motion and transition a connection needs to be maintained, at times it can be lost between the torsos, so this needs to be worked on by focusing on being released and aware.

The class then moved into a score, the only restrictions were that a minimum of two people had to be in the space and a maximum of four. It was important to pick up the energy in the space as a collective and not to rely on the same people to do so. Scores can often have more limitations; this  inspires creativity by  breaking the mould that we are comfortable with, as Keefe says that “the boundaries we set for ourselves, limiting space, time, sequence, or body parts provide challenges that inspire invention. Outside of the improvisation, those limits fall away” (Keefe, 2003, 234). Although this score had only a few limitations, I noticed that it created a sense of freedom and play, as there was a vaster skill set, we have learnt to maintain a flow and there was more space so couples could travel, expand and perform. I noticed some couples laughing and bringing in pedestrian movement. “Improvisation happens everywhere” (Keefe, 2003, 234) and it is interesting to consider how your everyday life affects your mood and movement choices. Each person moves differently and this week more worked with new people, which created new dynamics. The idea of working as a three still poses a challenge, as there are so many different personalities and ideas sparking.

Keefe draws connections between Baseball and Contact Improvisation, highlighting “an infinite variety of ways to travel from the beginning to the end of the game” (Keefe, 2003, 233) much like there is from the beginning to the end of a score. The idea of ‘play’ aids innovation and prevents reverting to habitual patterns. Keefe “sees the play as invoking a sense of freedom to dance” (Keefe, 2003, 234) and this helps dance and contact improvisation to move forward and to be true and present within the curernt social, political and cultural frame.

Keefe, M. What’s the score? Improvisation in Everyday Life. In Albright, A. C., & Gere, D. (2003). Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader. Middletown, Conneticut: Wesleyan University Press.

Our research lab question: How can we explore our centre of gravity?

We began by focusing the mind on the centre of the body, the class said that the imagery of standing in sand made them feel grounded and the coloured beam of light through their plumb line helped to work out if their weight was too far forwards or backwards. 3/17 benefited from this component the most and 15/17 felt safe during the warm up. We then experimented with the Flying Angel, Woodhull states that “sometimes our instinctive changes of centre of gravity do not compensate correctly” (Woodhull, 1978-79, 46) instinctively putting your arms down will cause you to fall, you need to find balance and a connection with your partner. Cutis comments that “on top of Alan’s shoulders I could feel the ground through his body solidly supporting me against gravity” (Curtis, 1988, 158) so it should feel as though the bodies are stacking on one another with minimum muscular effort. The idea of going down to go up is a consistent theme with all weight bearing exercises, it provides a steady anchor and platform, provides momentum and the correct positioning of the body. 7/17 benefited from this the most. We then worked on the idea of having a shared centre of gravity by turning and pulling, trying to find a shared motion, however everybody said that this did not work enough, as they did not feel grounded. Conversely, the wheelbarrow exercises and playing with the weight in the arms was fairly successful, as 7/17 enjoyed this the most. Overall, 16/17 said that they felt their centre of gravity change throughout the different exercises; 10/17 felt more grounded on the floor; 5/17 felt grounded and safe in the air and 17/17 felt that they will now be aware of their centre of gravity and use it to enhance safe practice and exploration. The point of our research lab was to bring balance to the bodies in the space individually and as couples; to find stability exploring new angles and developing a bond and connection, as though there is a supportive substance around you and your partner that you mould shapes into, as Curtis explains that “learning where and how one’s contact partner senses and carries their centre of gravity is essential to the development of trust and rapport” ” (Curtis, 1988, 160).

During class we revisited the repertory that we learnt at the workshop with the company Feet of the ground at Dance4. Many discovered that they are not afraid of contacting, but improvising, however our technique is better during improvisation as we lost some of the fundamental skills. Over the next few weeks I would like to revisit it and find more release, fluidity and flow, using the concepts of going down to go up, anchors and leavers and centre of gravity, whilst considering safe practice. I feel that the workshop has made our body more open and receptive to new ideas, because “when we don’t make fences around our bodies, all movement becomes acceptable” ” (Curtis, 1988, 159), however during today’s class it felt as though both people in the partnership were trying to be the dominant role and we were fighting against each other, or both were being submissive and the follower; therefore a balance needs to be found.

I have started to enjoy the jams more, I have more energy and I am more active, as I have a vaster vocabulary, however sometimes I just stick to these specific moves and my creativity is limited, I would like to be more innovative. Many of us got stuck whilst surfing, bit we discovered that the front to front connection can be used as a way to lead to any movement and stay connected, you can go anywhere, roll, take weight, come to table top or standing. I did not think of this connection, but thinking of the body as a vast space with many possibilities is important as Curtis states that one should “maintain an active and attentive relationship to all areas of the body […] there are no “dead” or unfeeling parts” ” (Curtis, 1988, 162).

I find disability and contact improvisation interesting and it can be translated into our practice. Bruce Curtis, who is in a wheelchair and has a spinal cord injury, focuses on “the dance within us” and to him “the micro movement is just as much dancing as what everyone else does with their whole body” (Curtis, 1988, 156), which links to the small dance; he highlights that we can work with a limited range of movement or injury, sometimes this “limitation” can create a block in our minds but Curtis says to that you should “keep your eyes open and don’t get lost inside your head” (Curtis, 1988, 158). At the start of the practice I over thought which made me more anxious, but over the weeks this has improved.

Overall, if both “maintain this bodily-felt relationship to weight exchange and shared movement and stay open to sudden impulses and influences upon either of our bodies, a playful, energetic and innovative dance is created” (Curtis, 1988, 160).

Curtis, B. (1988). Exposed to Gravity. Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook I, Vol. 13

Woodhull, A. (1978-79). Center of Gravity. Contact Quarterly/Contact Improvisation Sourcebook I Vol. 4.

The first video, The play of weight with martin Keogh and Neige Christenson had a consistent under and over dancer, they did not have interchangeable roles, the man mostly supported the woman in what appeared to be a choreographed piece, possibly resorting to habitual movements as if they had worked together for a long time. Whereas the second video, Contact improvisation with Mirva Mäkinen & Otto Akkanen, had equal and interchangeable roles, it was more explorative and took risks. The dancers also used the rolling points differently as they pushed off from one another with more force to create momentum to find something new and there was a giving and receiving quality along with weight exchange, shifting weight, the use of anchors and leavers and fluidity. Conversely, in the first video the rolling points had gliding qualities, it was calm with clear sections. Both videos demonstrated that “shifts in the centre of gravity of the person supported and shifts in the support by the bearer lead naturally to mutual shared motion” (Woodhull, 1978-79, 47) however they used the rolling points differently and the interchangeable roles of the under and over dancer was more evident in the second video. The play of weight was gentle, like a wave, whereas the second video showed grabbing and things going wrong. Woodhull describes that the “thrill of contact comes from support and movement that is non-grabby, non-invasive” (Woodhull, 1978-79, 47) so this is something to strive towards, but taking risk is an important part of the process and sometimes it can be clunky and disjointed, but our practice feels as though it is becoming more fluid and explorative. Last week marked a turning point as we have acquired new skills and mentality, which made the jams more vibrant. In the video with Mirva Mäkinen & Otto Akkanen, Mirva Mäkinen dropped to the floor at one point, if that happened in a jam I would leave the space, so it has taught me to carry on, as Mirva continued and knew how to facilitate and control her body to ensure safe practice, for example taking the impact through a roll. If something goes “wrong” it should not be used as a negative.

Continuing with the theme of the center of gravity, since we have started to explore going up I have noticed that it can be outside of your body, it changes as the body moves, we automatically change it, it creates a balanced body and “the further your center is above your base of support the less stable you are” (Woodhull, 1978-79, 47). It also links to Ideokinesis in which you find balance by having an internal awareness of of your skeletal system for support and the muscular pathways for stabilization and release. For example as we developed surfing by creating platforms, such as coming up to table top and standing at times I felt unstable if my head was below my body, but by slowing it down and focusing on the details enabled us to move beyond set positions and lifts we have been taught and be creative.

I enjoyed having more of a vocabulary to explore in the jam, such as holding your partners wrists and rolling on your back, jumping and being supported under the scapulae to propel you and using the leavers in the knees and the shoulders as an anchor to push your partner around, using the hip. This enabled me to enter the space more than I usually do and I worked with different people. As a warm up, we knelt and rocked onto our hands, we did this for a long time and once we stopped I could still feel the rocking motion, I tried to use this idea and sensation in the jam and it enabled me to stay in the space for longer, as I could not escape the flow. Woodhull explains that she does not “want to contribute to making contact form that is only about physics and not about humans. Contact is about communication and one element we share is playing with the consequences of physical laws” (Woodhull, 1978-79, 48). This week felt as though we were not just using what we had learnt but we twisted, expanded, pulled out the details, embellished and expanded to create a conversation with our partner. We had a vaster skill set and mentality.

The Play of Weight, the male is constantly the under dancer.

Contact Improvisation, they switch showing the interchangeable role of the under and over dancer.

On the 13^th November we went to Dance4 in Nottingham to take part in a workshop with the company Feet off the ground. I really enjoyed the energy of the class, there was always an active space and it was important for us to contact in a different space. Along with forming a routine, which I had not done before and it developed our ability to link together things together, maintain a flow and keep the energy up. It was such a positive class and we can go back to the phrase to keep it on our bodies and incorporate the new weight bearing exercises and techniques that we learnt.

Woodhull, A. (1978-79). Center of Gravity. Contact Quarterly/Contact

Improvisation Sourcebook I Vol. 4.

Keogh, M and Christenson, N. (2009) The Play of Weight. Available from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltq6y06E8ew (accessed 09/11/2016)

Mäkinen, M and Akkanen, O. (2011) Contact Improvisation. Available from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMLbWxujoGw (accessed 09/11/2016)