We had an open rehearsal to share our practice with others, to invite discussion around improvisation / performance / practice / product.
We ran the rehearsal as usual, going from warm ups, to tasks, to improvisations. We did short improvisations with one shaper and a couple of shifters and then invited discussion for all to contribute to.
1. shaper = LC
JD -hung on to first provocation, even while finding new things
OG -stayed in the first task longer than later tasks - used it to totally drop in to start
JD -didn't really do any of own tasks, waited for shaper
BM -we did lots of morphing (what we explored in the warm up tasks!)
LC -began with idea of spacing; 3 physicallizing a task, 1 verbalizing the task.
OG -having an 'audience' meant that my experience was tainted... thought about 'what does this look like'
BM -was doing a head connected exploration with EF and at one point responded 'no' to a further direction. straight away realised it was wrong, so went back to exploration and morphed out of it instead
LC -aware of other people watching, offered them opportunity to suggest a task to me "what would you like to see them do?"
how did you respond to the improv? did hearing/not hearing the directions change experience? how were expectations created / met?
B -the struggle between OG lifting JD was really satisfying because it was so authentic
P -it's relational; authenticity comes from navigating space/other person through a genuine action
C -had different expectations, but didn't need to see certain tasks completed
P -at one point there were 2 duets, but no relationship between the two. how can you change the worlds/awareness to enable connection? identify particular moments / break away with nothing to do / spread out
A -I wanted to hear the instructions the shaper gave to the shifters
B -it's unsatisfying when the perfomers drop out of performance mode
2. shaper = BM
-----'audience' could sit anywhere in space / could move around in space / could join in
used tool of catch/throw/grab exercise to begin improv which clearly has 'rules' though those rules are not necessarily readable/understandable
OG -started at high energy
how was watching this one different from the last one?
J -it looked more fun therefore, nicer to watch
B -it's a big thing to introduce other bodies into the space / how long does audience interaction last for do we need to set up guidelines hereA -when I sat in the space, I felt involved (felt like moving) especially when a shifter sat next to me
C -wanted to sit in the middle of the space, for a close up view, but it was hard to watch up close
P -viewing this work as a show, it is relatively low risk. how do we raise the stakes?
K -you could show the tools / do you want to make the tools (the how of the task) visible or do you want it to be shiny/performative. this could be explored through how the shapers shape the work? how performative is that delivery?
v -this work and way of working seems pedagogical rather than performative
P -moments of show pony / seductive moments
3. shaper = JD
this was a trio
C -it was different to watch, easier to focus -perhaps because it was only 3 people, or perhaps the group was more unified in their movement / ideas / approach
B -trio is always relational
v -the piece was more performative in the performative nature of JD's directions. How to radically develop the role of the shaper? What is the intention behind shaping? -perhaps in each episode, the shaper has a different intention. What is the shaper interested in and why? What other modalities can that person take on? What is the balance between a matter of fact delivery and performance making?B -there is such a range of nuances in the language ... could we potentially utilize these through pre-writing offers?
C -would love to see the shifters make more offers, rather than waiting for shapers
This opportunity to open up our rehearsals as been really enriching ... it has given us much to think about!! If any thoughts continue to pop up, we'd love to hear from you! Nga mihi mahana tenei ki a koutou katoa.
We ran the rehearsal as usual, going from warm ups, to tasks, to improvisations. We did short improvisations with one shaper and a couple of shifters and then invited discussion for all to contribute to.
1. shaper = LC
JD -hung on to first provocation, even while finding new things
OG -stayed in the first task longer than later tasks - used it to totally drop in to start
JD -didn't really do any of own tasks, waited for shaper
BM -we did lots of morphing (what we explored in the warm up tasks!)
LC -began with idea of spacing; 3 physicallizing a task, 1 verbalizing the task.
OG -having an 'audience' meant that my experience was tainted... thought about 'what does this look like'
BM -was doing a head connected exploration with EF and at one point responded 'no' to a further direction. straight away realised it was wrong, so went back to exploration and morphed out of it instead
LC -aware of other people watching, offered them opportunity to suggest a task to me "what would you like to see them do?"
how did you respond to the improv? did hearing/not hearing the directions change experience? how were expectations created / met?
B -the struggle between OG lifting JD was really satisfying because it was so authentic
P -it's relational; authenticity comes from navigating space/other person through a genuine action
C -had different expectations, but didn't need to see certain tasks completed
P -at one point there were 2 duets, but no relationship between the two. how can you change the worlds/awareness to enable connection? identify particular moments / break away with nothing to do / spread out
A -I wanted to hear the instructions the shaper gave to the shifters
B -it's unsatisfying when the perfomers drop out of performance mode
2. shaper = BM
-----'audience' could sit anywhere in space / could move around in space / could join in
used tool of catch/throw/grab exercise to begin improv which clearly has 'rules' though those rules are not necessarily readable/understandable
OG -started at high energy
how was watching this one different from the last one?
J -it looked more fun therefore, nicer to watch
B -it's a big thing to introduce other bodies into the space / how long does audience interaction last for do we need to set up guidelines hereA -when I sat in the space, I felt involved (felt like moving) especially when a shifter sat next to me
C -wanted to sit in the middle of the space, for a close up view, but it was hard to watch up close
P -viewing this work as a show, it is relatively low risk. how do we raise the stakes?
K -you could show the tools / do you want to make the tools (the how of the task) visible or do you want it to be shiny/performative. this could be explored through how the shapers shape the work? how performative is that delivery?
v -this work and way of working seems pedagogical rather than performative
P -moments of show pony / seductive moments
3. shaper = JD
this was a trio
C -it was different to watch, easier to focus -perhaps because it was only 3 people, or perhaps the group was more unified in their movement / ideas / approach
B -trio is always relational
v -the piece was more performative in the performative nature of JD's directions. How to radically develop the role of the shaper? What is the intention behind shaping? -perhaps in each episode, the shaper has a different intention. What is the shaper interested in and why? What other modalities can that person take on? What is the balance between a matter of fact delivery and performance making?B -there is such a range of nuances in the language ... could we potentially utilize these through pre-writing offers?
C -would love to see the shifters make more offers, rather than waiting for shapers
This opportunity to open up our rehearsals as been really enriching ... it has given us much to think about!! If any thoughts continue to pop up, we'd love to hear from you! Nga mihi mahana tenei ki a koutou katoa.
No comments:
Post a Comment