Yes, Jonathan and I did survive our 24-hour performance. We performed each hour without fail - and we only had one hour where we had no audience, but, yes, we still performed. The whole arch of the 24-hours is still fuzzy and hard to get a handle on - it is SO much information! I, and I think Jonathan, can talk about and analyze certain hours, but the whole is still hard to talk about. So, here are some impressions - even though exactly what hour things happened is not clear either...:
During one of the first hours we got into this counting game - "1, 2, 3....9) - that turned into a little "bit" that was funny. We're not usually funny - we're pretty straight up abstract post-modern dance/music guys - but, this turned into a pretty delightful performance - I mocked tap dancing and rolled my eyes at Jonathan - ever the straight man.
We had a couple stay with us from 9pm on Friday until 5am Saturday - yep, 8 straight shows. And another guy stayed from midnight until 6am. It was pretty amazing - for a number of hours they were the only 3 people present -thank goodness they were there! After a while we offered them some cookies.
Some time in the early morning - say 6am - we had a really wonderful, quiet performance. We didn't even break a sweat, but it felt really present, soft, careful (in a really good way).
At our "commissioning club brunch" we completely killed it, and ourselves. I was sweating so hard that I had to blink to keep the sweat out of my eyes. Very intense - felt ancient, deep, cathartic. And it completely whipped our butts - the next couple of hours were really hard.
In the middle of the afternoon - after some rough shows - we re dedicated ourselves to being present, to not try too hard, to fully accept that we were completely exhausted. To perform there, not from somewhere where we aren't.
Last hour was great. Of course we stepped up the energy and used every bit we had left. Used up every bit of awareness and presence that we had left. Going off stage it felt done. I certainly had nothing left to give. I can't image doing one more hour, but then again at hour 8 and hour 12 and hour 20 I felt that way as well...
In the next couple of days we'll be posting the journal that we kept during the performance - after each show one of us wrote a short blurb about the hour - should be interesting.
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Last Chance
Last night Jonathan and I had our final rehearsal for "unmapped". It wasn't a very long, nor late rehearsal, but it felt good to push alittle bit more before we head into technical rehearsal and the show.
We began by revisiting some of the duet improvisational structures to remind us of keeping that connection, of deepening that communication and continually expanding our possibilities together. The first exercise that we did was a simple finger-to-finger following game - both people touch index fingers (ala "E.T"), close their eyes, and then follow what the other person is doing. Now, I know it sounds like nothing would happen if both people follow and no one leads, but, actually, alot happens when you can be sensitive enough to your partner's movement. It is almost impossible to be still - certainly impossible to be still for more than a couple of seconds. As soon as one person shifts their weight alittle bit, or lets their arm relax slightly, or takes a breath, there is movement and something to follow. And then the following becomes the leading and you're off. It is an exercise we've done a number of times because it really helps you focus and center. The next exercise we did I recently learned from Carol Swann in California - it consist of one person making contact with their partner in a very specific way - squeezing, or lots of fast little taps all over the body, or long brushing movements - then the person who was just touched moves in reaction to the touch. This tactile input is a great way to get out of habitual ways of moving - to shift the quality of your movement. The final exercise we did had one person moving and the other person pushing into their partner with different amounts of force. When the moving person felt the force they had options to push back, resist or to yield to the push. Again, another way of getting out of habitual ways of moving because you are getting this constant tactile input that changes what you're doing. It is also another way to connect between dancers - it is almost like an experiment, 'if I push this hard, how will he respond?'
I think taking some time with these small exercises was really good for us, I think it set us up for a really wonderful run of the piece. During the run it felt like both Jonathan and I really made some clear, direct choices that seemed to flow directly from what we were doing. At one point we were on opposites side of the stage, just after we had been passing the guitar back and forth between us, and as I turned to face Jonathan he was bending over playing the guitar - at that moment it just seemed clear that he was going to have a solo so I went back to the stool and sat down and watched him play for alittle while. Later in the piece Jonathan really saved me as I went into my solo - I was playing the guitar as it was lying on the stool and I just made some not-so-great choices with the sound, but he was at the control box and was able to manipulate what I was playing into this really lovely loop that felt very supportive as I went into my dancing solo - thank goodness he was there or I would have been stuck with some junk to dance with! The run ended with Jonathan dancing and I playing the guitar - I think the warm up exercises really helped because he seemed to be dancing very fully and intentionally. And, afterwards he said that what I played was really good as well - that was nice to hear. : )
Tomorrow morning we go into the technical rehearsal, then I come home and take a nap and then head back the theater and start this crazy thing. If you're around it would be great to see you there, if you're not, wish us luck...
We began by revisiting some of the duet improvisational structures to remind us of keeping that connection, of deepening that communication and continually expanding our possibilities together. The first exercise that we did was a simple finger-to-finger following game - both people touch index fingers (ala "E.T"), close their eyes, and then follow what the other person is doing. Now, I know it sounds like nothing would happen if both people follow and no one leads, but, actually, alot happens when you can be sensitive enough to your partner's movement. It is almost impossible to be still - certainly impossible to be still for more than a couple of seconds. As soon as one person shifts their weight alittle bit, or lets their arm relax slightly, or takes a breath, there is movement and something to follow. And then the following becomes the leading and you're off. It is an exercise we've done a number of times because it really helps you focus and center. The next exercise we did I recently learned from Carol Swann in California - it consist of one person making contact with their partner in a very specific way - squeezing, or lots of fast little taps all over the body, or long brushing movements - then the person who was just touched moves in reaction to the touch. This tactile input is a great way to get out of habitual ways of moving - to shift the quality of your movement. The final exercise we did had one person moving and the other person pushing into their partner with different amounts of force. When the moving person felt the force they had options to push back, resist or to yield to the push. Again, another way of getting out of habitual ways of moving because you are getting this constant tactile input that changes what you're doing. It is also another way to connect between dancers - it is almost like an experiment, 'if I push this hard, how will he respond?'
I think taking some time with these small exercises was really good for us, I think it set us up for a really wonderful run of the piece. During the run it felt like both Jonathan and I really made some clear, direct choices that seemed to flow directly from what we were doing. At one point we were on opposites side of the stage, just after we had been passing the guitar back and forth between us, and as I turned to face Jonathan he was bending over playing the guitar - at that moment it just seemed clear that he was going to have a solo so I went back to the stool and sat down and watched him play for alittle while. Later in the piece Jonathan really saved me as I went into my solo - I was playing the guitar as it was lying on the stool and I just made some not-so-great choices with the sound, but he was at the control box and was able to manipulate what I was playing into this really lovely loop that felt very supportive as I went into my dancing solo - thank goodness he was there or I would have been stuck with some junk to dance with! The run ended with Jonathan dancing and I playing the guitar - I think the warm up exercises really helped because he seemed to be dancing very fully and intentionally. And, afterwards he said that what I played was really good as well - that was nice to hear. : )
Tomorrow morning we go into the technical rehearsal, then I come home and take a nap and then head back the theater and start this crazy thing. If you're around it would be great to see you there, if you're not, wish us luck...
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
But a Ticket!
As you know, Jonathan Matis and I are putting on a big show this weekend. we'll be getting down and performing improvised dance and music for 24 hours. Crazy.
It's part of the Fringe Festival and it's going to be a wild time. If you haven't been keeping up please read the posts below or you click-thru to our spiffy web page that has loads of info about the show – including an interview with the two of us, photos, and more.
http://improvarts.alkem.org/unmapped
The schedule and ticketing is a little confusing – so here's how it's going to work:
The show starts at 9pm on Friday night. Each performance will last between 30 and 45 minutes. Then we get a little break. Then we do it again – starting at the top of every hour. So there's another show at 10pm., another one at 11pm, and so on – you get the idea. That means there's a show at 6am on Saturday, and at 7am, and so on – all day long! So I'm SURE there's a time when you can come see the show. Come see us late-night when the bars close on Friday night. Come see us at sunrise on Saturday morning. See us at lunchtime Saturday. See us at tea time Saturday. Whenever. There's a show time that's right for you!
If you want to see any show during hours 1 through 23 – just buy one ticket and come back as often as you'd like – to any show during the 1st 23 hours. If you want to see the final show, when we're delirious and insane, you have to buy a special ticket for 8pm on Saturday night.
The performance is on the main stage at the Warehouse Theater. 1021 7th Street, NW, Washington DC. Easy to get to by metro: Mt. Vernon Square / Convention Center stop is a block away. Gallery Place is a short walk.
Now about the tickets… You can buy tickets at the door before each performance. Or, you can buy tickets in advance at the Fringe Festival Box office (conveniently located at Warehouse Theater), or you can be totally high-tech and buy tickets online.
The Fringe festival is doing all the ticketing and our 24 hour performance doesn't fit their system too well… so here's what you do to buy them online:
click here to get to our page in the online ticketing system:
http://www.theatermania.com/content/show.cfm/show/122042
then click the big red button that says "buy tickets online"
then – for any shows starting between 9pm on Friday and 7pm on Saturday, choose "9pm on Friday, July 21." That ticket is good for any shows during hours 1 through 23.
If you want to buy advance tickets for the final show, click on the "8pm on Saturday, July 22."
It's strange that the ticketing website only shows two shows… but we don't have any control over how that's set up. So we hope that's not too confusing… and please help spread the word. The Fringe Guide also doesn't really list our show clearly as every hour, on the hour – but now that you understand you can help eradicate confusion and send lots of people our way (please). We really gotta sell a lot of tickets to break even on this show…
Thanks so much for reading all this – we can't wait to see you at the show!
Daniel Burkholder
Director, The PlayGround
Co-Director, Improv Arts
Blog: http://improvarts.blogspot.com/
http://improvarts.alkem.org
www.myspace.com/improvarts
http://people.tribe.net/improvarts
Friday, July 14, 2006
Late Nights
On Wednesday night Jonathan and I had a late night rehearsal - not as late as it will be when we perform, but certainly later than we normally rehearse. Our first run of the work started at 10:30pm and we were in the studio until almost 1:30am. It was good to feel what it is like to start a run of the work that late. The effort to get the energy up, focused, and to stay present throughout the work is different than it is at 4 o'clock in the afternoon. There is only you to keep your energy up, the rest of the city is going to sleep and there aren't other people in the studio, or alot of traffic on the street, it is just you and studio. In some ways that creates a nice spaciousness - no competition - but, also a certain aloneness.
We ran the work 3 times and each time was very different. The first time there were other people rehearsing in the studio next door - some hip hoppers - so, that was alittle strange competing with hip hop music. It brought out alittle breakin' in my dancing - very strange, odd breakin' - which I think was fine. Our work is alittle out there and anything that makes it alittle more out there works. Since we're really going into each run of the work with all possibilities possible, there is really nothing off limits. Of course, we need to make sure whatever we do fits in with the development of the work. But, alittle odd breakin' works just fine... if it works just fine, that is...
We have a couple of more rehearsals over the next week to get ready for the performance next Friday (July 21-22, 2006), including a 5 hour rehearsal on Sunday. Hopefully having a longer rehearsal will give us some more insights for the upcoming performance.
We're in the home stretch now....
We ran the work 3 times and each time was very different. The first time there were other people rehearsing in the studio next door - some hip hoppers - so, that was alittle strange competing with hip hop music. It brought out alittle breakin' in my dancing - very strange, odd breakin' - which I think was fine. Our work is alittle out there and anything that makes it alittle more out there works. Since we're really going into each run of the work with all possibilities possible, there is really nothing off limits. Of course, we need to make sure whatever we do fits in with the development of the work. But, alittle odd breakin' works just fine... if it works just fine, that is...
We have a couple of more rehearsals over the next week to get ready for the performance next Friday (July 21-22, 2006), including a 5 hour rehearsal on Sunday. Hopefully having a longer rehearsal will give us some more insights for the upcoming performance.
We're in the home stretch now....
Monday, July 10, 2006
unmapping unmapped
Since my last post regarding "unmapped" I've spent a week in the Bay Area attending and teaching at the West Coast Contact Improvisation Festival (www.wccif.com), which was wonderful! I was doing Contact Improvisation from 9:30am until almost 1am every day. Exhilarating and exhausting!
But, now I've gotten back and Jonathan and I have had two rehearsals and are moving along. On one of my many hour-ed flights across the country I realized that what Jonathan and I have been doing is mapping our territory. What I mean is, that in our exploration to expand out existing roles, to break down our assumptions about who we are as performers, we've been creating another kind of map. Yes, an expanded map, but a map, never the less. And it seems to me that now is the time to throw that aside and truly step into the unknown with each run of the work. It is as if we have been exploring the territory that we will inhibit and creating a map of possibilities - now we know the territory enough so we can throw away the map and deepen our exploration. Additionally, Jonathan that the idea that we should start each performance in our traditional roles (he playing guitar and me dancing), to give the audience a reference point for when we venture out into the new possibilities. He agreed with me, I agreed with him. So, now we are starting in our new roles and then.... we'll see what happens each time.
The one thing that we haven't changed is that we are still going to have a word, or phrase, or photo to serve as a starting point for each performance. Since it will point our way through the performance - influencing our movement, sound and interaction choices - we are calling it our "compass". That then means that we are starting each performance only knowing what our compass is and that we start in our traditional roles. The rest is left to the improvisational moment.
But, now I've gotten back and Jonathan and I have had two rehearsals and are moving along. On one of my many hour-ed flights across the country I realized that what Jonathan and I have been doing is mapping our territory. What I mean is, that in our exploration to expand out existing roles, to break down our assumptions about who we are as performers, we've been creating another kind of map. Yes, an expanded map, but a map, never the less. And it seems to me that now is the time to throw that aside and truly step into the unknown with each run of the work. It is as if we have been exploring the territory that we will inhibit and creating a map of possibilities - now we know the territory enough so we can throw away the map and deepen our exploration. Additionally, Jonathan that the idea that we should start each performance in our traditional roles (he playing guitar and me dancing), to give the audience a reference point for when we venture out into the new possibilities. He agreed with me, I agreed with him. So, now we are starting in our new roles and then.... we'll see what happens each time.
The one thing that we haven't changed is that we are still going to have a word, or phrase, or photo to serve as a starting point for each performance. Since it will point our way through the performance - influencing our movement, sound and interaction choices - we are calling it our "compass". That then means that we are starting each performance only knowing what our compass is and that we start in our traditional roles. The rest is left to the improvisational moment.
Saturday, July 08, 2006
Podcast about unmapped
Jonathan and I have recorded a podcast about our upcoming 24-hour performance - "unmapped" - that will happen as part of the Capital Fringe Festival.
If you want to find out more about this performance you can listen to the podcast at
http://improvarts.alkem.org/unmapped .
If you want to find out more about this performance you can listen to the podcast at
http://improvarts.alkem.org/unmapped .
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Good Questions
Recently, after reading some of my previous blog entries, I was asked some great questions by "Shems" about this work. So, I'm going to take a moment to respond to them. Here is part of her response,
"It sounds like a fairly demanding project you are working on. As an artist, I can't help but ask, how do you keep from getting lost in the abstactness of the practice of making your art? Also do you ever have moments when you suddenly can't take yourself seriously? and not to be too inquisitive, although it seems too late for that, do you ever feel obligated to include some kind of hook to sell the project to the public? I ask this last question, because if I understood the description correctly, you will be performing your piece, every hour on the hour for 24 hours and I'm wondering why you would want to do that? What does it add in value to the artistic merit of the project?"
Yea, she certainly goes right to the heart of the matter. I'm not going to answer them in the order she asked, but will jump around alittle bit.
Firstly, I don't really think of a "hook" to sell the project to the public when beginning a new work. The idea for doing the work for 24 hours came directly out of the exploration of what this work is exploring - pushing ourselves in new direction, to new edges, to new discoveries. For a couple of years I've been interested in doing a 24 hour performance as an exploration in endurance and how that can lead to transformation. This seemed like the perfect opportunity to go for the 24 hours because the work seems to welcome it as does the venue and context - being in the Capital Fringe Festival. It feels like a good fit. Now, saying that, yea, it is a good "hook" and it is the one that pops out at everyone. Most people respond by saying something to the effect like, "are you nuts?" It gets them thinking, and wondering why the hell we'd want to do that. Hopefully at that point it will bring them into the performance and see that the 24 hours is not the main focus of our exploration, but a by-product, if you will, of this journey. I do think we could do this work without doing it so many times in a row, but it does add a sense of commitment to being in this performance/world in a significant way.
In regard to the abstractness of the work, I would say that that is a concern, but not a major concern. When Jonathan and I take the time to focus on what we are doing - and this includes the structure - the inner life of the work is present. We do work with different source material (words, phrases, photos) to cultivate connection between us and a larger context outside the parameters of the piece. I think both Jonathan and I work from structure alot of time, so it feels very natural. For many people this seems too abstract and they want to focus on the "personal" or "emotional" connection in the work. I experience structure as both personal and emotional. By establishing a clear structure I am more able to let go into my emotional/intuitive self without going into an indulgent or self-centered performance mode. At the same time we have been working with asking ourselves the question, "What's next?", as a way to keep pushing ourselves further and deeper into the work. I think this is an acknowledgement of our desire to stay, or even increase, that connection to the emotional/intuitive, maybe even, spiritual self. I would say that structure and discussions about structure are not a means to abstract the work, but a way to find the space for the personal selves to have more room, to be safe to expose oneself, to be vulnerable.
And, I would say, that Jonathan and I rarely take ourselves very seriously. But, we do take our work seriously. It is the way we make sense of the world, the way we communicate with our community, the way we delve into ourselves and our potential. And, we have a pretty good sense of humor regarding just how odd most people find what we do.
"It sounds like a fairly demanding project you are working on. As an artist, I can't help but ask, how do you keep from getting lost in the abstactness of the practice of making your art? Also do you ever have moments when you suddenly can't take yourself seriously? and not to be too inquisitive, although it seems too late for that, do you ever feel obligated to include some kind of hook to sell the project to the public? I ask this last question, because if I understood the description correctly, you will be performing your piece, every hour on the hour for 24 hours and I'm wondering why you would want to do that? What does it add in value to the artistic merit of the project?"
Yea, she certainly goes right to the heart of the matter. I'm not going to answer them in the order she asked, but will jump around alittle bit.
Firstly, I don't really think of a "hook" to sell the project to the public when beginning a new work. The idea for doing the work for 24 hours came directly out of the exploration of what this work is exploring - pushing ourselves in new direction, to new edges, to new discoveries. For a couple of years I've been interested in doing a 24 hour performance as an exploration in endurance and how that can lead to transformation. This seemed like the perfect opportunity to go for the 24 hours because the work seems to welcome it as does the venue and context - being in the Capital Fringe Festival. It feels like a good fit. Now, saying that, yea, it is a good "hook" and it is the one that pops out at everyone. Most people respond by saying something to the effect like, "are you nuts?" It gets them thinking, and wondering why the hell we'd want to do that. Hopefully at that point it will bring them into the performance and see that the 24 hours is not the main focus of our exploration, but a by-product, if you will, of this journey. I do think we could do this work without doing it so many times in a row, but it does add a sense of commitment to being in this performance/world in a significant way.
In regard to the abstractness of the work, I would say that that is a concern, but not a major concern. When Jonathan and I take the time to focus on what we are doing - and this includes the structure - the inner life of the work is present. We do work with different source material (words, phrases, photos) to cultivate connection between us and a larger context outside the parameters of the piece. I think both Jonathan and I work from structure alot of time, so it feels very natural. For many people this seems too abstract and they want to focus on the "personal" or "emotional" connection in the work. I experience structure as both personal and emotional. By establishing a clear structure I am more able to let go into my emotional/intuitive self without going into an indulgent or self-centered performance mode. At the same time we have been working with asking ourselves the question, "What's next?", as a way to keep pushing ourselves further and deeper into the work. I think this is an acknowledgement of our desire to stay, or even increase, that connection to the emotional/intuitive, maybe even, spiritual self. I would say that structure and discussions about structure are not a means to abstract the work, but a way to find the space for the personal selves to have more room, to be safe to expose oneself, to be vulnerable.
And, I would say, that Jonathan and I rarely take ourselves very seriously. But, we do take our work seriously. It is the way we make sense of the world, the way we communicate with our community, the way we delve into ourselves and our potential. And, we have a pretty good sense of humor regarding just how odd most people find what we do.
Saturday, June 17, 2006
A Light Grasp
It was a couple of days ago that Jonathan and I last rehearsed. We rehearsed in a much smaller dance studio than we had been and I think that's good since our stage isn't going to be very big. Jonathan said he liked it because there was less pressure to move around the space as much - he was somewhat able to let go of worrying about using space because there was less of it. If you've been reading this blog at all you'll know that we've been working on linking structure to content. We've been curious as to the role of structure in defining meaning and how content (in the form of ideas, images, word phrases) can support structure. This week we also began to layer, what we're calling, characteristics on top of our structure/content. Meaning, we're pre-deciding some facet of a certain section - for example, before we begin a run of the work we know that when we get to Jonathan's solo it will be very minimal, or when we are both playing the guitar it will be a call & response form. Some of the characteristics we worked with are:
- call & response
- minimal
- shifting intensities
- soft dynamics (sustained, light, indirect)
- high density
- simultaneous independence
This creates a certain problem, as it limits the ongoing flow of development that we are working with. The challenge of it is that in a certain run of the work we establish a specific rhythm or relationship; when we then come to a section that has a pre-decided characteristic that is not congruent with what we are doing, what do we do? How do we keep what we've set up and been working on, but also shift into this new landscape? I think this goes a lot to intention and awareness. If we hold that our intention is to stay with what we are doing, without holding on too tight, we can open to the possibility of the new characteristic. It is as if we have a light grasp on what we are doing - not holding so tight it can't change, mutate, or evolve, but not so loose that we just drop it as soon as we're distracted. If is almost a cliche�© of improvisational performance that it is almost distractingly a stream of conscious type of performing. While this is ok in some/many instances, I think it is actually quite lazy in many cases. It is difficult to remember the past, be clear with your inspiration (meaning/content), stay within the boundaries of the structure and fully be awake in the present moment of performing. Obviously, sometimes you can't be in all of that at once, sometimes you're more in one or the other, but, overall, you need to have access to all those elements to create focused, provocative performances. This is our challenge, and even more so with this piece I think because Jonathan and I are breaking apart our normal roles and learning what each other does as well. So, in some ways I think these pre-determined characteristics are helpful in jolting us into the present moment, to remind us to keep coming back, again and again, to exploring this new territory that we're climbing through.
- call & response
- minimal
- shifting intensities
- soft dynamics (sustained, light, indirect)
- high density
- simultaneous independence
This creates a certain problem, as it limits the ongoing flow of development that we are working with. The challenge of it is that in a certain run of the work we establish a specific rhythm or relationship; when we then come to a section that has a pre-decided characteristic that is not congruent with what we are doing, what do we do? How do we keep what we've set up and been working on, but also shift into this new landscape? I think this goes a lot to intention and awareness. If we hold that our intention is to stay with what we are doing, without holding on too tight, we can open to the possibility of the new characteristic. It is as if we have a light grasp on what we are doing - not holding so tight it can't change, mutate, or evolve, but not so loose that we just drop it as soon as we're distracted. If is almost a cliche�© of improvisational performance that it is almost distractingly a stream of conscious type of performing. While this is ok in some/many instances, I think it is actually quite lazy in many cases. It is difficult to remember the past, be clear with your inspiration (meaning/content), stay within the boundaries of the structure and fully be awake in the present moment of performing. Obviously, sometimes you can't be in all of that at once, sometimes you're more in one or the other, but, overall, you need to have access to all those elements to create focused, provocative performances. This is our challenge, and even more so with this piece I think because Jonathan and I are breaking apart our normal roles and learning what each other does as well. So, in some ways I think these pre-determined characteristics are helpful in jolting us into the present moment, to remind us to keep coming back, again and again, to exploring this new territory that we're climbing through.
Friday, June 09, 2006
Structure finding content
Today Jonathan and I started with some movement improvisation structures that I learned earlier this week in a workshop with Chris Aiken (he was in town working with the Dance Exchange and I got an opportunity to join for part of it). The structure is very much like the game "statue" - where one person moves the other person into a position. But, in this exercise the person being moved reacts to the movement initiations on a scale from 0 - 10. Responding at level 0 would mean that when the person is moved they stop when the manipulation stops. And, at the other end of the scale, the person takes the initiation and lets that lead them into a longer phrase of movement. The exercise is really a practice of different ways to respond to someone touching and moving you. I think it was very useful for Jonathan and I as it gave us another way to be in contact with one another. Hence, extending our range of partner dancing.
We then returned to our exploration of form/structure for "unmapped". The first random order of sections was very challenging and was not really fulfilling. We started in the space passing the guitar back and forth and that proved to be difficult. Starting that way didn't really supply a reason why we were passing the guitar - it seemed completely out of the blue, unconnected. As we went on through the improvisation we found more material and the improv felt stronger, but it still wasn't fully satisfying. The second run we did - with a different random order of sections - we added a starting point, an initiation. I have a book of photography of the body, from medical photos to athletes to erotica - and we used a photo from that book. It was a picture of two hands kind of wrapped around each other - I believe they were an older woman's hands - very wrinkled, almost narled. The photo is intimate, intense, somewhat disturbing. The improv we created from that image was, I think, also very intense. It also seemed intimate - lots of close dancing, kind of rough with one another at times. We ended up doing lots of hand gestures, repetition and in contact a fair amount - including some partnering similar to our earlier exercise. It was so much more satisfying, as it felt like there was depth and an inner life to the work.
In our first run of the work being in each section was challenging, but transitions between sections was also challenging. During the second run the sections made more sense since we had a context that they all related to. Just having that simple image to keep coming back to was a very powerful organizing point. In the past we had used words or phrases, so it was also nice that we did it without words. It, again, feels like it pushed us into new territory, into new discoveries.
We then returned to our exploration of form/structure for "unmapped". The first random order of sections was very challenging and was not really fulfilling. We started in the space passing the guitar back and forth and that proved to be difficult. Starting that way didn't really supply a reason why we were passing the guitar - it seemed completely out of the blue, unconnected. As we went on through the improvisation we found more material and the improv felt stronger, but it still wasn't fully satisfying. The second run we did - with a different random order of sections - we added a starting point, an initiation. I have a book of photography of the body, from medical photos to athletes to erotica - and we used a photo from that book. It was a picture of two hands kind of wrapped around each other - I believe they were an older woman's hands - very wrinkled, almost narled. The photo is intimate, intense, somewhat disturbing. The improv we created from that image was, I think, also very intense. It also seemed intimate - lots of close dancing, kind of rough with one another at times. We ended up doing lots of hand gestures, repetition and in contact a fair amount - including some partnering similar to our earlier exercise. It was so much more satisfying, as it felt like there was depth and an inner life to the work.
In our first run of the work being in each section was challenging, but transitions between sections was also challenging. During the second run the sections made more sense since we had a context that they all related to. Just having that simple image to keep coming back to was a very powerful organizing point. In the past we had used words or phrases, so it was also nice that we did it without words. It, again, feels like it pushed us into new territory, into new discoveries.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Structure, Structure, Structure
Yesterday in rehearsal Jonathan and I discussed how to structure our duet. I think this gets to a central question in creating art - especially, maybe mostly, improvisational work. How do you decide on a structure? What does "structure" even mean? Is it important? There is certainly a case to be made to have a set structure for every work. This would mean that even though we are not setting particulars there is a place where we always begin, move through and end. For example, we could set that we always start at the back of the stage with both of us playing the guitar, this slowly transitions into both of us moving around the stage and then ends with Jonathan playing the guitar and me dancing. The other extreme of this is to set nothing - really just both choose where to start as we're walking on stage and then begin and see what happens. Yesterday we discussed something in between - that for each performance we would randomly choose the order of the sections, but we would go through those sections in a particular order for that performance. The next question that comes up out of this discussion is, how does the order of the section effect the meaning of the performance - for both us as performers and, certainly, the audience. If you set the structure than you can be sure of a certain flow of the piece, but if you leave it open, or change it each time, that changes the arc. In fact it calls into question the whole idea of the dramatic arc.
Most times when seeing a performance - especially dance or theater - we are use to following a dramatic arc. Usually something happens, something changes from the beginning to the end. We have conflict, or development, or some kind of progression. We also know, either consciously or intuitively, that that arc was chosen and set by the creator of the work. We can trust that the structure was intentional and specific. But, if there is no predetermined structure, or the structure is determined for each performance by chance, what does that imply to meaning? This is an age-old post-modern question, but we're in the mix of it right now and trying to wrestle with these options. During this last rehearsal we randomly created a structure (using a computer) and tried it and was quite satisfied with the structure. But, what happens if the computer creates a structure that we don't "like", or feels "inorganic"? We will continue to explore random generated structure for the next couple of rehearsals and see what happens.
Most times when seeing a performance - especially dance or theater - we are use to following a dramatic arc. Usually something happens, something changes from the beginning to the end. We have conflict, or development, or some kind of progression. We also know, either consciously or intuitively, that that arc was chosen and set by the creator of the work. We can trust that the structure was intentional and specific. But, if there is no predetermined structure, or the structure is determined for each performance by chance, what does that imply to meaning? This is an age-old post-modern question, but we're in the mix of it right now and trying to wrestle with these options. During this last rehearsal we randomly created a structure (using a computer) and tried it and was quite satisfied with the structure. But, what happens if the computer creates a structure that we don't "like", or feels "inorganic"? We will continue to explore random generated structure for the next couple of rehearsals and see what happens.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Rehearsal 5/24
Yesterday Jonathan and I had rehearsal for "unmapped" in the afternoon. Once we had all the equipment set up we began with a long improv session. We started in our, what you might call, traditional roles - he playing the guitar, me dancing. We had not been starting this way for a while - we've both been playing the guitar to start. It was very interesting starting that way again, almost a relief in a way. I really enjoyed just "dancing" by myself for a while. I did alot of big movement, moving through space, kind of complicated gestural stuff. I also think that Jonathan really enjoyed playing the guitar without me - he didn't have to deal with my limitations as a musician, or the choice I make when we're playing together (I may be wrong about this - I may be projecting...).
We also began to notice and record some of our habitual choices. For example, when we are both moving together we tend to imitate each other's movement choices. When we are passing the guitar back and forth, as Jonathan noted, we tend to do this fake-out move where we almost take/give the guitar, but then we don't. By naming these habits I hope we can notice when we are doing them as we're improvising and then find different choices. I don't mean to totally throw out the habits we recognize, but to increase the number of options we have available to us as we're improvising.
We also made a list of the number of possible groupings between Jonathan, I and the guitar. They were:
1. Jonathan playing the guitar, Daniel dancing
2. Both playing the guitar
3. Both dancing
4. Daniel playing the guitar, Jonathan dancing
5. creating a repetitive sequence on the guitar (using an echo/looping devise) that gradually fades to silence
There were a number of sub-options for each of these, but that is the general gist of it. We then practiced just doing one of these options - instead of switching back and forth. I think we both thought this was a great practice to deepen each one of these possibilities. We have been worried, or working on, the whole length of the piece (40 minutes) and have set aside the details alittle bit. I think we need to go back and dig alittle deeper.
When making a work - whether it is set or improvised - I think you are constantly going back and forth between pushing the edges wider, and digging deeper. You want to make sure it is encompassing the whole of what it is, though it can't encompass everything. You don't want to be too narrow, yet you don't want to be so shallow that it has no meaning. So, you go back and forth between exploring the work's width and depth.
We also began to notice and record some of our habitual choices. For example, when we are both moving together we tend to imitate each other's movement choices. When we are passing the guitar back and forth, as Jonathan noted, we tend to do this fake-out move where we almost take/give the guitar, but then we don't. By naming these habits I hope we can notice when we are doing them as we're improvising and then find different choices. I don't mean to totally throw out the habits we recognize, but to increase the number of options we have available to us as we're improvising.
We also made a list of the number of possible groupings between Jonathan, I and the guitar. They were:
1. Jonathan playing the guitar, Daniel dancing
2. Both playing the guitar
3. Both dancing
4. Daniel playing the guitar, Jonathan dancing
5. creating a repetitive sequence on the guitar (using an echo/looping devise) that gradually fades to silence
There were a number of sub-options for each of these, but that is the general gist of it. We then practiced just doing one of these options - instead of switching back and forth. I think we both thought this was a great practice to deepen each one of these possibilities. We have been worried, or working on, the whole length of the piece (40 minutes) and have set aside the details alittle bit. I think we need to go back and dig alittle deeper.
When making a work - whether it is set or improvised - I think you are constantly going back and forth between pushing the edges wider, and digging deeper. You want to make sure it is encompassing the whole of what it is, though it can't encompass everything. You don't want to be too narrow, yet you don't want to be so shallow that it has no meaning. So, you go back and forth between exploring the work's width and depth.
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Newest Work - unmapped
I have been developing a new improvisational based work with a musician - Jonathan Matis - to be performed as part of the first Capital Fringe Festival this July - and we will be performing the work on the hour, every hour, for 24 hours - (yikes!). The work - "unmapped" - is an exploration of blurring the lines between dance and music and dancer and musician. Jonathan and I begin both playing a prepared guitar that is running through a computer. We begin by creating a sound score with the computer repeating what we play and then layering over those sounds. We play the guitar with an assortment of low tech objects - chop sticks, paint brush, metal slide, vibrator - to create a very percussive dense sound. From this beginning we begin to add movement by responding to each other, moving out into space, using the guitar as a prop - passing it back and forth - so that sometimes we are both moving, sometimes one is moving and the other is playing, and sometimes we are both playing. All of the music and movement is improvised, but we do have some structures and some sourcing material. We know we start out playing the guitar together, then we take it into movement, then we go into our more traditional roles - Jonathan playing and I'm moving. We've also been working with word phrases as a beginning place to improvise from. Most of the phrases have been randomly chosen from books - the idea being to get us out of our habitual patterns. It has been interesting and challenging as many of the phrases have not been places we would have normally started from. Phrases such as "blades of fire", or "side of the wealthy", or "globe men" are a challenge to find music and movement from. We've also been surprising ourselves with what comes out of working with these phrases. This is going to continue to be a very interesting work to explore - in rehearsal, and certainly once we get to performance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)