Over the years, there has been much deliberation on what Contact Improvisation actually is, Steve Paxton was asked the question “Just what is Contact Improvisation”. The answer has shifted over time and it has moved away from the definition of

“being an experiment dance phenomenon and towards a physical practice allied with a number of complex new body and mind studies”

Steve Paxton defines the concept of Contact Improvisation as:

“physical event best described negatively: not art, not sport and not most of the things that characterise dancing in this century”

The first session of contact improvisation developed my insight into the different meanings about what contact improvisation evolves around. My only previous knowledge of contact improvisation has been from Steve Paxton’s ‘Drafting Interior Technique’ where he puts into context his own definition of contact improvisation. I feel that contact improvisation is a term for explanatory movements, a way of making unique movements and connecting with other individuals through the communication of the body and in other ways to establish a sense a trust. In comparison with other dance styles, contact improvisation relates to the idea of being experimental and leaving the movement open to the interpretation to the individual so they can create something that is out of the ordinary compared with other dance tasks or styles.

From the reading ‘Moving from the skin A Exploratorium’ Dieter Heitkamp, one of the tasks that we performed in this session made me relate to Heitkamp’s question of

“are there specific qualities of movement associated with the skin? What does skin contribute to communication in dance?”

This task involved rolling around on the floor, having awareness of the skin in contact with the floor, using the idea of pressing and pushing movements. In relation to the skin, the skin creates the idea that it is a protection of our body and allows us to connect and experience with our environment. Therefore, this idea forced me to roll slowly and cautiously around the floor, as well as using elongated movements and rolling around in different directions by trying to feel as much of the environment I was in so I was more aware of my surroundings. After this task, the class got into partners, beginning the idea of contact improvisation. The task consisted of one partner rolling around of the floor with idea of pressing and pushing whilst the other partner followed their partner around the space, touching their partner’s individual body parts as they rolled around. This task enabled me to develop the idea that actually touching your partner whilst they moved around the space enabled communication between the both of you and there was more to contact improvisation than actually being lifted or moving around the space at a standing level. When I was the one who was touching my partner as they rolled on the floor, I felt much more in control than I did when I was moving on the floor. Initially I felt like I was manipulating my partner but then I realised that this sense of touch allowed me to communicate with my partner, listening to their body, allowing them to move freely in the space and enabled me to follow their direction so I could stay in contact with them at all them. However, when I was the partner who was rolling around on the floor, I initially thought that it was my duty to stay with my partner and make it easy for them to follow if we ever lost contact but towards the end I let myself go, as the contact itself gave a clear idea on the direction I was moving and  this enabled effective communication from my partner. This sense of touch was unique because it felt like we had created our own individual communication. Whilst we still had spatial awareness of other partners around us as this was a necessity for safety, there was less awareness of what other individuals were doing in terms of movement because we had created this almost secretive and unique experience in our partnership.

The last exercise of the session involved both partner’s moving around the space at different levels, both touching each other but continuously changing the tone of movements. Firstly, we began with a soft tone which created a sense of slow and cautiousness, as we travelled gracefully through the space but as the tone got faster it was as if we were fighting and pushing each other way. However, a sense of trust was established as we continued to move with each other so my partner’s movements actually became more recognisable to me, which directed to me moving with more confidence and it was more comfortable.

At the start of the module, I was a bit reluctant to what to expect from contact improvisation, especially in a jam session. I didn’t really know what to expect from a jam but I found it helpful to introduce my knowledge of contact improvisation from the previous session into the jam. In relation to Steve Paxton’s ‘Drafting Interior Techniques’ he suggested that it is important to concentrate on sensations of weight, momentum, friction, touch of the partner and sensation of the floor under their body and spatial awareness. To begin with I felt it would be unsafe for myself to be lifted by an individual as I am much taller and at a heavier weight but during the jam I was lifted by a smaller individual, which made realise that I had to experience the trust of my partner and experience the space in a different way around me. As I had no previous knowledge of the jam, I think this enabled me to go in it with an open mind and put into practise the idea of contact improvisation so I can develop my knowledge further.

Bibliography 

Albright, C. A. and Gere, D. (2003) Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader. Middletown: Wesleyan Press.

Heitkamp, D. (2003) Moving from the Skin: An Exploratorium. Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II, 28(2)256-264.