Applying what we have learnt in previous lessons, we formulated a question in groups as part of a research lab to see if we could move away from habitual movement and make any new discoveries. We decided on the question ‘Can you apply the same trust and relationship with a new partner that you do with a regular partner?’ We wanted to discover if the movement noticeably changed when working with someone that you don’t know too well or rarely work with in comparison to working with someone that you work with regularly. Additionally, we would to investigate whether their was any differences in trust, such as when you are working with a non-regular partner, are you less reluctant to give them your weight than you are with a regular partner? Or when working with a non-regular partner, do you tend to stick with more safe, habitual movement than you do with a regular partner?

As part of our research lab, we devised a series of tasks to explore this question. We began with the pebble exercise, alternating moving over a known and an unknown partner. In our group there were people I had regularly worked with and people I have rarely worked with before, which made the investigation easier in terms of seeing if there was any difference of I how I gave my weight to different people when moving over them. Each person in the group took turns to roll over each individual in the group. As a collective group, we discovered their was no dramatic difference in how people moved over each different person, which implied there was no trust issue in working with people you haven’t worked with much before. However, the only slight differences that we noticed were that Robyn gave more weight when moving over each person, which suggested that she was more comfortable in carrying out the exercise. Furthermore, Kelly is an individual that I work with regularly but when I was performing the pebble exercise, I found it difficult to decide where to place my weight on her and when working with Toni, who is a partner I less regularly work with, I found it much easier to move over her back, which may because she provided a different physical structure that was easier to move over. Therefore, we decided it may not be the partnership and trust of working with different partners that make movement different but it is up to the how the individual moves and how they place themselves. However, we agreed that we couldn’t formulate a definite answer based on this exercise because the pebble exercise is performed at a low level and it’s not difficult to be trusting in giving someone your weight at a low level because there isn’t a great amount that could go wrong.

We therefore performed the pebble exercise at a higher level, as the person would provide the base on all fours rather than on their knees. However, we carried out this exercise differently, as the person providing the base would close their eyes and try and guess who was moving over them. Our initial prediction was that as the supporter had their eyes closed and the fact that they were at a higher level meant there would be a more hesitant trust. It appeared that each person was quite distinctive in how they moved as the supporter mainly guessed who was moving over them correctly and once again there didn’t appear to be any issue with trust. We then came to the conclusion that trust wasn’t an issue but it appeared to be the way people move and their body shape in which people came distinctive or other’s not so distinctive but everyone seemed quite comfortable moving over each different person. However, we decided that difference in trust may show when more movement appears and the exercises that were performed so far are quite stationary, therefore it’s easier to trust someone.

The next exercise was to explore the cat exercise in regular partners and non regular partners. Firstly, Kelly and Robyn began the exercise as they are quite regular partners. Watching their performance from the outside I could see that they were quite comfortable performing with each other and Kelly closed her eyes when she was dancing, which shows their was trust involved. We developed this exercise by Kelly closing her eyes and me putting my weight in her hands whilst she supported my head as I moved around the space. The feedback we received was that when Kelly was holding my head she was less relaxed and I came across as quite nervous, as I was conscious of where I was moving because Kelly couldn’t see where she was going. However, it was apparent then when our heads connected we both became much more relaxed in our movement. The fact I was quite nervous when Kelly had her eyes closed and was moving my head was particularly  strange as I worked with her regularly in contact improvisation. Therefore, we established that trust may not be due to who you are working with but the confidence of the individual and the way they move. This was discovered when Toni and Stacie performed interchanging cat roles and then when Toni and Robyn performed the same exercise. It was noticed that as normal partners Toni and Stacie were quite confident and comfortable performing with each other but Robyn and Toni, unusual partners looked less comfortable. Even though Toni and Robyn are non-regular partners, we began to discover that they became more comfortable in their movement as they went along. We came to the conclusion that it was initially uncomfortable as this was the first time Robyn had performed the exercise, which meant therefore meant she didn’t have a great amount of background knowledge of the exercise so this may have impacted her movement.

To end our investigation, we all participated in a general improvisation taking into account our research question. With reference to Daniel Lepkoff’s: A Question? “If Contact Improvisation is the physical act of posing a question about ones own present circumstance, then the work is ever expansive and has applications to dance well beyond the manifestation of the duet interaction” this statement indicates that there is so much scope to experiment with when relating your movement to a question as it allows you to move away from more habitual movement and explore to your full potential.

In the improvisation task I felt very comfortable performing with everyone and I didn’t think trust was a problem as I felt I gave everyone my weight equally. However, I did feel a slight difference as I felt I move away more habitual movements with regular partners, such as Robyn and Kelly. As a collective group we decided that a jam at the beginning of the research labs may have been beneficial as trust and relationship may have been built up during the course of the investigation so it may have not been a fair discovery. In our discoveries we found that trust is higher at a lower level and it appears that movement is not affected by trust by the way an individual moves and how you connect with them. One of our main discoveries was that relationship was a great impact on movement. Even though we all felt comfortable in giving weight to each other, some of us still felt more confident with working with certain people, even if we haven’t worked with them before. Therefore, it if a partner is confident and if they regularly initiate movement then it’s easier to bounce off them and improvise with them, which creates more comfortable movement. It can therefore be established trust and relationship can be applied equally with any partner if you are confident in your movement and don’t consciously think about what movement you are doing. This relates to Daniel Lepkoff’s statement that “contact improvisation as an art event was to display to the public the body’s innate ability to respond physically to its environment” as posing questions allow you to move away from habitual movement and create new relationships with different people.

In this weeks Jam I believe there was an increase in trust within the group and each member of the group started to perform with different people than they usually do, which has been limited in previous weeks. As we have approached week five, there is a more sense of comfortability within the group as we have been introduced to a number of exercises, which means we have more exploration material. In the Jam I wanted to focus on the question that our group formulated as part of our research lab. I felt that I was more comfortable with working with different people and giving them my weight. For example, usually I am looking to see who I can work with and tend to move towards people that I know well. However, in this jam I focused on not looking for anyone and there was an instance where Beth came up to me and started to move my head around. At the beginning of the contact improvisation this would have made me uncomfortable, as I don’t regularly work with her but it didn’t phase me and I allowed myself to give her my weight and unconsciously move.

 Bibliography 

Lepkoff, D. (2008) Contact Improvisation: A Question?. [online] Available fromhttp://www.daniellepkoff.com/Writings/CI%20A%20question.php [Accessed 25 October 2014].

Lepkoff, D. (1999) What is Release Technique? [online] Available fromhttp://www.daniellepkoff.com/Writings/What%20is%20Release.php [Accessed 25 October 2014].

When I was standing still, I didn’t realise how much my body was in constant motion. I became aware of how my reflexes were communicating with gravity, muscles  and the bones to stay in alignment. With minimal muscular effort, I became aware that my body reflexes were action to help prevent me from falling. In a stand still position, I felt myself losing balance and I found myself continuously wanting to move forward. As I was very conscious of losing my balance, I held a lot of tension in my calves and they appeared to be quite stiff as I felt this was necessary in order for me to regain my alignment. However, this is known as Steve Paxton’s notion of the ‘Small Dance’. The small dance is ‘continuously losing balance and regaining a new balanced alignment through the activity of body reflexes’, therefore leading the small dance to be a ‘unpredictable pattern of momentum and readjustment that travels through the body’.

We developed the small dance further and explored how we could take ourselves off balance. Initially, the momentum of my body directed my to run a few steps forward or backwards in the space. I realised that I held a lot of tension in my body because I was afraid of letting go but I soon began to think unconsciously and listen to my body impulses to direct in the direction it wanted to move. At first I was a bit apprehensive but then I found myself moving in different directions, such as forwards, backwards, to the side, diagonally and moving towards the floor. I soon realised that I would not injury myself because the ground would always be there to catch me and I wasn’t a far distance from the ground at all, which therefore led me to experiment more with the possibilities of the small dance.

The next exercise consisted of each partner taking the role of the cat and the cat owner. Whilst one partner acted as the cat owner, presenting a supportive base for the other partner, the other partner would act as the cat, using different surfaces of their partner’s body to explore how they could give them their weight. In pursuing this task, I found it very interesting because I found myself trying things that I haven’t done before and I was open to a lot more possibilities. Usually, I am reluctant to taking the role of the over dance because I am concious of hurting others or potentially giving them my full body weight. However, I came to realisation that after the small dance task, nothing drastic would happen if I gave my partner my body weight. This is because if I was to fall, the ground would always catch me and then I can experiment with different movement instead, as I believe a crucial part of contact improvisation is exploration. Using Kelly as a supportive base, I found myself using different body parts instead of the feet and hands, such as my knees, legs, hips and back to explore how I could give my weight to her. As the exercise continued, I grew in confidence to explore with more things. I knew that Kelly was there to support me and would move around me to act as base so I wouldn’t hurt her and this also allowed me to have more time to think of how I could her my weight. Therefore, this enabled me to step away from my reluctance and lift my feet of the ground and use other body parts to balance with and even roll over her.

Our final task was to perform a duet in our partners, alternating between the roles of the cat and cat owner. Both Kelly and I found this an easier task and it allowed us to listen to each other’s body impulses without taking much time to consciously think about how we could move. As we were alternating between roles, the momentum and pace of the performance increased, which therefore allowed me to experiment with both roles as the under and over dancer, as I realised there was even more scope for experimentation without consciously thinking about what I was going to do. By alternating between roles, it allowed me to see how I could use different ways to give my partner my weight and support their weight. For example, I supported Kelly’s weight with different body parts to usual, such as my hips and back and supported her on a higher level by going on all fours. This also led my to give my weight to Kelly at a higher level. Throughout this task, I allowed myself to become aware of Kelly’s weight and body impulses to move in a safe manner. This became evident in the jam session, as I tried to work with people that I don’t usually work with, alternating between the roles of the under and over dancer and allowing myself to become more trustworthy so I could become more experimental. However, I feel that I need to experiment more with movement standing up rather than keeping movement at a lower level, as this is a habitual pattern of mine. The darkness of the room also made the whole improvisation session easier as I didn’t have a chance to think who I was dancing with and I found myself improvising a cluster of people, which is normally something I don’t do. Throughout the lessons, I had intentions of exploring with weight further, allowing myself to give people my weight rather than receiving it and I felt I achieved this in the jam session as I pushed myself more. This because I didn’t worry about the consequences, I let go off any tension, allowed myself to be more relaxed and became more experimental in the way I was reacting to others.

Towards the end of the lesson, we formulated a research lab in groups and discussed a variety of topics that we wanted to explore further within the next few contact improvisation sessions.

 Bibliography 

Ravn, S. (2010) Sensing Weight in Movement.  Journal of Dance & Somatic Practices, 2(1)21-34.

Brown, B. (1997) Is Contact a Small Dance? Contact Improvisation Sourcebook, 1(6)72-75.

Hassmann, J. (2009) Explorations within the Small Dance. [online] Available from http://www.contactquarterly.com/contact-improvisation/webtexts/view/explorations-within-the-small-dance.php [Accessed 17 October 2014].

To begin our lesson, we compared two contact improvisation films. The first film Steve Paxton’s Magnesium (1972) portrayed a lot of aggressive movement, slamming on the floor and harsh dynamics. This ultimately suggested that both performers were engaging in some sort of battle. The movement in this piece was predominately drew from aikdo and presented a clear notion of unplanned movement material. Unlike the second film we watched, the non pre-set material in Magnesium began with eye contact, as they used eye contact to guide physicality.

The second film we watched was Blake and Brandon’s Earthdance (2010), which presented more fluid and sophisticated movement. It was evident that the performers in this piece had a better understanding of shape and surface. The roles of the over and under dancer were constantly interchanging as the notion of giving and receiving each others weight was presented. In comparison to Magnesium, the performers indicated a lot more awareness of strength when holding each others weight as their movement was much more fluid and the modulation of tone was more sophisticated, which immediately indicated that they had a greater understanding of weight and showed the connection that they had with each other. Furthermore, whilst both performances showed elements of creativity in them, it is evident that contact improvisation has changed slightly over time, as unlike Magnesium, the dancers in Earth Dance seems to be a lot more aware and concious of their decisions as the movement is more fluent but also suggests that now contact improvisation is including more choreographic conventions but not greatly.

We started our lesson by experimenting with the movement of the head, keeping all surfaces of the head in contact with the floor at all times, giving the floor the weight of our head and releasing the tension in the neck and head joints so our movements become more fluid. Usually, I hold quite a lot of tension in my head and neck and find it quite difficult to let the head go and become free. However, this exercise enabled me to think less habitually and use a different part of my body for contact, which I don’t normally use. This exercise was then developed in partners. Firstly, one partner would improvise around the space, whilst the other partner would follow their partner, supporting the back of their head as they travelled. In giving my partner all my weight of my head, I developed a sensation that I don’t usually feel as I allowed my head to become relaxed. This was due to the fact that I had confidence in my partner and I trusted that they were supporting my head efficiently so I didn’t need to worry about letting my head go. When my partner took their hand away from my head, I developed a sense of a heavy head and I was actually unaware that they had taken their hand away, which made me to continue to move in a relaxed way and actually move in an non habitual way. This therefore enabled me to think unconsciously and find different ways of moving with the initiation of my head, which is usually something I neglect when I am participating in contact improvisation. In relation to Steve Paxton’s “Interior Techniques” he states that

‘the body and its reflexes could be free, spontaneous, uninhibited, unfettered, it it were allowed to act without conciousness’s interference…’

Therefore, this unconscious thinking of my own led me to move differently and actually move more creatively.

Afterwards, in our partners we moved around the space, keeping contact with our heads to enforce a physical and an emotional connection. At the beginning of the contact improvisation sessions, I struggled to find different surfaces of my body to initiate movement with but this task helped me to become more experimental with body parts and which different body parts I could initiate movement with. For example, by starting movement with the head it lead into movement that started with body parts, such as the back, elbow and neck instead of starting movement with the hands or feet, which is a habitual nature of my mine.

The last task of our lesson was to use our partners as a base, as we rolled over them, giving them our full body weight. Our partner would start on their knees and gradually become higher as they supported themselves on their hands and knees. Initially, I felt more comfortable being the base as I had confidence in myself to hold my partners weight and I am always concious of giving other people my weight in case I hurt them. However, the exercises that we performed at the beginning of the session with regards to releasing the head and neck, really helped to get rid of my tension and have more confidence on rolling on my partner.

During the lesson, I created a question to individually focus on. How can I experiment with shape and weight without conscious thinking and how can I become more aware of my body when doing so? I believe I had started to experiment with shape a lot more as I have discovered different ways of moving and surfaces of the body to start movement with. However, I feel like I need to experiment with weight further and become more confident in giving others my weight. With reference to how can I experiment with shape? I found that engaging the eyes became effective. According to Daniel Lepkoff, he stated in his interview with Simone Forti (2005) that

‘As an adult we come to rely on tired and true habits. I’ve discovered that when I unhinge myself from my first impulse and read, and re-read and re-read again, where I am, my current physical circumstances, and I take a second, third, fourth, and fifth look, my environment literally transforms itself… it becomes a sensual presence, anything but neutral, and stimulates my imagination.’

In one of the tasks we performed, we had to engage our eyes by looking at one area of the room and moving to that area without consciously thinking about our movement. Therefore, I experimented with shape here because I found myself not thinking about what I was doing and how I was moving, as I had a mindset in my head on where I needed to travel to. Therefore, as I was focused on the place where I needed to go, I didn’t think about movement and this stimulated my imagination and I created something more unique than previously.

Bibliography 

 Paxton, S. (2010) Steven Paxton’s “Interior Techniques” Contact Improvisation and political power. The Drama Review, 54(3)123-135.

Lepkoff, D. (2008) Contact Improvisation: A Question?. [online] Available fromhttp://www.daniellepkoff.com/Writings/CI%20A%20question.php [Accessed 25 October 2014].

 “The touch that we remain most interested to explore in relation to learning in dance is touch that stimulates awareness, excites curiosity and increases a facility to form accessible active knowledge”

This statement from Touch: Experience and Knowledge article relates to my own personal view on how touch can be very experimental but this also relates to the tasks that we did in class this lesson. Throughout the lesson, the question I had in mind was: How can I use contact improvisation to engage more effectively with my surroundings and inner self?

To begin, as we do with each lesson, we started by energising the room by rolling on the floor with awareness of the skinsphere and then gradually moving up to a standing position to experiment with the upper kinesphere. Soon after, we incorporate both elements and use the whole body to experiment with movement and the space around us. This immediately wakes up our body but also relates to my question, as not only am I making use of the space to become aware of my surroundings but the skinsphere exercise is enabling me to be more intact, connected and aware of my body.

The first task involved getting into partners and one partner rolling over the back of the other partner. Initially, when I was rolling over my partner, I was very conscious of hurting her if I was to give her all of my weight. However, I came to realise that she would be fine if I moved in a safe way and stayed away from sensitive areas, such as the back of the knees or the head. Once I overcame the fear of hurting my partner, this enabled me to make more risks and be more experimental with movements. From the article Touch: Experience and Knowledge, they mention that it is argued that if we become fearful and don’t learn with touch then we don’t learn one of the most basic and informative sensations. Therefore, I kept this idea in the back of my mind and became more confident in the way in which I was moving. The next task involved sitting back to back with your partner. We started by moving our backs in different directions so there was a sense of connection and you were aware of where your partner was. One partner would drop to the floor and roll continuously, imitating a wave whilst the other partner would have to follow them and find different ways to roll over their partner. Then the roles of each partner would change alternatively. When I was the wave I felt much more in control than I did when I was the person who was rolling over their partner because I had to continuously try and catch up with my partner and I had to think quickly of how I could experiment with movement and roll onto them. Previously, I believe that I have spent too much time on deliberating with how I could experiment with movement. However, contact improvisation is about going with the flow and not thinking it about it too much, therefore this exercise helped me developed an immediate reaction and made me not think too much on how I could experiment with movement.

The next exercise consisted of getting into different partners and one person would move in a ‘structurally way’ whilst the other person would say stop and then that person would have to freeze and the other partner would have to find different ways of leaning on them. When I had to lean on my partner, I was still conscious of taking risks as I didn’t want to hurt my partner or myself. However, I didn’t think much about what I was going to do and this lead me to be more adventurous with my movements and more risk taking then I had been before. Afterwards, in our pairs, we put all of the exercises that we had performed throughout the lesson together to create a small performance piece. We discovered that if we were unsure what to do we would go back to the first task of the lesson of rolling on each other and then we would carry on with our improvisation. Although, all the tasks have given us an insight to how more experimental we could be with movement. This is because the idea of touch helps us to connect and engage with each other, which leads to a higher level of trust so we can be more adventurous. Also, touch allows us to share information and guide each other into how we can move differently.

With reference to my question How can I use contact improvisation to engage more effectively with my surroundings and inner self? I felt that this was partially answered as throughout the lesson I had to be spatially aware of my surroundings, which meant being aware of the environment but also other partners around me. The partner touch exercises helped me engage with my inner self as it made me feel more confident on what I could do and has lead to me to see how I can experiment more with movement. However, this question still has more scope for investigation.

Bibliography 

Bannon, F. and Holt, D. (2012) Touch: Experience and Knowledge. Journal of Dance & Somatic Practices, 3(1/2) 215-227.