Thursday 4th December 2014

Tonight we performed our score to an audience. We began by jamming as the audience arrived, I feel this helped as it allowed us to get comfortable in the movement before our score began. I feel once the score began it went fairly well, I think it helped that I was only given the number four by an audience member so I wasn’t worrying about dancing with enough people before leaving the space. Although at one point I felt I was waiting a long time to see two lifts so I could re-enter. I also felt the corridors went better tonight with us staying in lines. I also feel like I gave weight more than I normally would and worked with more people. However, one other dancer kept coming to dance with me which was good, but she had missed a number of classes which I felt may have limited the movements we did. Overall, the performance went well, although we could still possibly be a little more daring when it comes to playing with gravity.

Monday 1st December 2014

Resources:

dancetechtv (2013) An Emergent Underscore: a conversation with Nancy Stark Smith, London. [online video] Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzG609NWp1Y [Accessed November 2014].

• Underscore = structure/framework for improvisation
• Difference between descriptive and prescriptive
• A research tool – Change physical and mental state
• Prescriptive- helps to focus the improvisation and go through stages without interruption
• Underscore protects and challenges
• Experience reveals knowledge
• Body time – register sensations
• Permeable solidity
• Play research – testing and challenging
• Observing while doing
• When people get too overwhelmed they shut down
• Is the underscore a somatic technique?
• Needs to be a balance of the known and unknown

Koteen, D. (2008) Caught Falling: the confluence of contact improvisation, Nancy Stark Smith, and other moving ideas. Northampton: MA Contact Editions. Pp.90-

We began this lesson by completing a spiral exercise. I this exercise we stood back to back and spiralled away and towards each other. We then developed this by mobilising our feet and moving through levels whilst remaining in contact through the spiralling action. This exercise proved extremely useful. I found it helped in connecting the movements where I would normally loose contact and also aloud changing between levels to be more creative.

Our score:

• Start with Jam
• Randomly dancers ask an audience member for a number between 1 and 10
• If the numbers even they start on the floor, if its odd they start standing
• They can leave the space once they have danced with that amount of dancers
• They can enter once they have seen two lifts
• If a couple is left in the space the other dancers will form a corridor
• At the end dancers will leave randomly to join the audience

Monday 24th November 2014

Resources:

Stover,   J. (1989). Some considerations when structuring an Improvisation (to be seen   by an audience). Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II, Vol.14. pp185

• Structure in terms of spacial rhythm
• Mechanistic Newtonian framework/compressional structure or relative structure
• Formal structure allowing the audience to see action better
• Programme of interrelated parts
• Movement event with no particular purpose
• Visual markers that act as stabilizing markers
• ‘Game rules’ seen or not
• Reliance on rules
• To fulfil or not

Today’s class aloud us to create our own scores. We were given requirements such as filling and emptying the space.

Our Score:

• If you are on a low level make the movement slower and more controlled
• If you are on a high level make the movement faster
• Always look for the most complicated way to move between levels
• Leave the space once you have danced with two people
• Enter the space after leaving when three lifts have been used
• Before the score starts ask the audience for a number between 1 and 10 to determine what level you will start at (odd=high, even= low)

Monday 17th November 2014

Resources:

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. Pp.229-238

In our research lab today, my group decided to investigate the use of space and speed. Within space we looked at using high and low levels, and within speed we looked at tone. We used eleven tasks to do this asking and answering questions in each, ending with four main questions for further investigation. Below is our original outline of the questions and tasks to be carried out in our investigation.

Our first task was to pair up with one pair improvising on a low level only and one on a high level only. We found that being confined to one level restricted the movement produced, with both pairs becoming quite repetitive and resorting back to habitual movements. The movement also seemed to be confined to one spot spatially, but more so in the standing pair, who lacked mobilisation in their feet. After discussing this we proceeded to repeat the same to dues, this time both duos used a lot more surfaces of the body in keeping contact and travelled more around the space whilst remaining on their given level. Following this one pair improvised using both a low and a high level. This wasn’t as fluid as it could of been, which we put down to trying to avoid habitual movements and bring concious of using various levels. The pair then continued but focused on travelling across the space which increased the fluidity.

The second part of our research lab we experimented with speed and tone. The pairs improvised at a fast pace and a slow pace, with both a soft and hard tone. In this we discovered that it was easier to vary the tone at a slower pace. We also discovered that tone is felt more between the dancers, with the audience seeing little difference. We finished with an improvisation combining different speeds, noticing if and where the tone varied. This gave some really interesting results as the tone seemed to vary more with the weight being given rather than the speed of the movement.

Our four questions that arose from this research lab are:

1, How can fluidity be found when changing between upper and lower levels?

2, Can you create fluidity and connection from starting at a fast pace, or does it have to come from a slower pace?

3, Is it possible to travel as far with a slower pace as it is a fast?

4, Can you break habitual movements through the variation of pace and speed?

Monday 10th November 2014

Resources:

Curtis,   B. (1988). Exposed to Gravity. Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation   Sourcebook I, Vol. 13. Pp.156-162.

• Anyone can learn contact improvisation
• Dance was within
• Gravity is constant and dependable
• Ride gravity
• There’s a relationship between movement and gravity, changing points of balance
• All movement becomes acceptable without fences
• Instinct and wisdom
• Body awareness

Today’s class we started with different ways to role. These were quite painful to start with but became useful in the later improvisation. We then moved onto lifting each other while standing, for this I was paired with Naomi who I don’t know very well, our lifts were not successful. We were both to reluctant to give each other our weight. However we changed partners and did some different lifts which I was still a bit reluctant with, but I do feel like I’m getting better at them and I am getting a lot stronger as the under dancer. After this we moved into an improvisation, I think this was the best piece of improvisation I have ever done. I managed to let go of everything, I wasn’t thinking and planning what was coming next, we were just moving. It felt so good, we only lost complete contact a couple of times and were changing levels using different surfaces and body parts. I never thought I could achieve that and have no idea how I did. Hopefully it wasn’t a one off and I can recreate in all our classes from now on.