My thoughts on attachment have changed. I have always thought thOat bringing a movement or idea back to be a negative. But why does it have to be? It does not have to be the same when we see it again. I realise that it helps to bring things back, its brings an underlying theme of content.
So I put this into play in Nancy Stark Smiths ‘The Underscore’.
We are moving through the score according to its structures.
…Skinesphere —> Bonding with the earth —> Agitating the mass —> Low kinesphere —> High kinesphere…
And then we move into an open score. Its time to play.
I use the movement ideas that we have just played with in the underscore. There is no limitation that says I can’t do this.
I start playing with ‘agitating the mass’ in the same way I did in the beginning, but then I combine it with ‘low kinesphere’, this doesn’t make it the same or an attached movement. It becomes a development of something that already existed, it shows my ability to track movement. It became a manifestation.
I now understand attachment. I have reached the end of my journey. I can generate new movement without attachment and I can create manifestations of existing material. I now realise that I can have the best of both worlds.
Our score Part 2…
In order to overcome ‘it works better on paper than it does in practice’ we changed several aspects of our score but it still tended to our motivation of habitual movements.
- All 5 performers are present in the space, no exists or enters at any point.
- All 5 performers are moving in the space.
- When someone sees a performer repeating a movement or records a pattern in how they move, that performer announces a limitation that prevents the other from becoming habitual.
- The limitation can range from the dynamics, a body part, a place in space or levels.
- Each performer must actively see the performers and the space around them.
We have freedom in our score to move how we like but through structure we must adapt our movement on announcement of a limitation.
I can express all manners of movement without fear of falling into the habitual, as I know as soon as I do, someone is there to stop me.
Last week we focused on an individuals habitual movements and this is where the issue of audience/performer communication was blurred.
So this week in our new, refined score it tends to an individuals habitual movements at that moment in time as opposed to a general habitual movement vocabulary.
I recognise that there is further room for development within our score. It seems that our focus is very much internal, and toward the score. So, to develop this, we should involve the audience.
We as performers perceive things differently to how an audience sees them, they may be able to see different habitual movements in that moment that we cannot.
The audience could announce limitations to the performers.
I want to take time to talk about the relationship between the audience and improviser.
Kent De Spain notes “to the extensive list of complex elements and issues that make up improvisational process, you add the inescapable awareness of being observed.” (De Spain, 2014, 60)
I reiterate that list de Spain talks about is extensive to say the least. To name a few: tracking, attention, intention, space, movement, structure… The list is ongoing.
To face this issue I will take a leap out of Anna Halprin’s book, she notes that she no longer judges herself on looking good. I too am over that. But she in concerned about the audience perception. She will leave the house lights on so that she can see her audience. I need to be able to see my audience. (Halprin, 2014 cited in De Spain, 2014, 62)
Our Score returns in The Jam for Part 3…
Following on from Part 2 our score still attends to habitual movements and its structure is still the same. It is within the limitations where the development has come. Limitations can still be announced but there is also the presence of instruction.
For example:
‘Person A form a duet with Person B using impulse’
or
‘Person A enter the space’.
or
‘All performers must perform on the right hand side of the stage’
This extends the vocabulary of the score, it now deals with formations and space, not just limitations and the habitual in movement.
Our score could be never ending, it could go on, and on, and on, and on , and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on…
So there is 5 pauses that will occur in the score.
They can be dictated by a performer or themselves.
When there is a fifth pause, this signals that all performer must find an ending for the score.This can happen instantly or go on for an undetermined length of time.
This development clearly deals with the ending, but also in finding moments of stillness as up until this point our score had none.
Next week I want to be more conscious of my dynamics and the groups dynamics, at the moment it is all one level it does not change. I also want to play with isolating body parts and focusing on miniature movements. I want to be able to just use a thumb or the wrist. And finally I want to use jumps more, this could help with the dynamics. This is what I aim to work with in Week 9.
De Spain, K. (2014) Landscape of the Now. New York: Oxford University Press.
