This lesson was slightly different to the lessons we have had in the past. We began by warming up and rehearsing our group piece in our classes. The order of our piece changed, showing how it is a piece in progress and is always being reformulated to create the best version of the performance possible. I found this quite tiring both physically (as we kept running through the piece) and mentally (as I had to be on the ball all the time to remember the changes that were being made and the notes I was being given). Overall I thought my general participation and effort levels in the group were good, and I was focused fully on getting through the piece and envisaging what it will be like in the real performance. I thought I could have worked slightly harder and taken on board more of the notes if I had written them down as I was going along - I think that note taking in general is something that I need to work on, as I remember them throughout the day but tend to forget some after a longer period of time.
After working on our class pieces, we came together as a 75-strong year group and began to devise our whole group piece around stimulus questions. The first steps of getting the work were very similar to what we had done in our classes - working first on our breath, then expanding on our bodies' natural ergonomic movement and transferring this to a partner. I really enjoyed this section - working in partners yet all the partners being part of a large group. However, I found it quite uncomfortable to improvise due to the confines of the space. The very limited space was good for experimenting with proxemics with one another though and we played with being touching to being on opposite sides of the room but maintaining a connection with one another. I was surprised at how easy I found this - even when my partner was at the other end of the room, I was entirely focused on him and we worked together very well.
The main part of our piece came from being individuals within a group. We were posed a very ambiguous question and we had to answer it with purely physical movement. I was very sceptical about this, and was sure that it would not be very productive with 75 people all trying to work together. I was proved wrong - as with every improvisation there were many bland bits but moments of technicolour also. Below are some of the 'success criteria' that we came up with as a class for how to create an emotive piece and my interpretations of these criteria - what they mean to me:
I think that if we achieve what we had at the end of the rehearsal in the real performance, it will be a very interesting spectacle for the audience. I hope that we will not get caught up in the middle of the room, and I know that I have a responsibility as part of the company to prevent this from happening and maintain a level of honesty. I think it is a huge risk to not choreograph or stage anything for the conclusion of our piece, and one I cannot say whether it will be a good risk or not because it is improvisation that will happen on the day. I have never had a level of spontaneity filtered into a performance before, and is something I find quite daunting yet exhilarating.
After working on our class pieces, we came together as a 75-strong year group and began to devise our whole group piece around stimulus questions. The first steps of getting the work were very similar to what we had done in our classes - working first on our breath, then expanding on our bodies' natural ergonomic movement and transferring this to a partner. I really enjoyed this section - working in partners yet all the partners being part of a large group. However, I found it quite uncomfortable to improvise due to the confines of the space. The very limited space was good for experimenting with proxemics with one another though and we played with being touching to being on opposite sides of the room but maintaining a connection with one another. I was surprised at how easy I found this - even when my partner was at the other end of the room, I was entirely focused on him and we worked together very well.
The main part of our piece came from being individuals within a group. We were posed a very ambiguous question and we had to answer it with purely physical movement. I was very sceptical about this, and was sure that it would not be very productive with 75 people all trying to work together. I was proved wrong - as with every improvisation there were many bland bits but moments of technicolour also. Below are some of the 'success criteria' that we came up with as a class for how to create an emotive piece and my interpretations of these criteria - what they mean to me:
- Make discoveries - allow yourself to be free and not held back by anything.
- Don't talk to yourself - instead interact with other people and ensure that you are making and accepting offers from other people.
- Respond to each new movement and moment - when working as an ensemble it is critical that you are always aware of what the others are doing.
- If you feel it your response is right - if your body tells you to do something, go with it and try to get out of thinking about what movements to do that will impress the audience; it is often much more impressive to do instinctual, honest movements.
- Be aware of others - safety is very important when working in a large group; be careful and cautious of other people, do not try to hurt them and be aware of how you may be hurting them.
- Focus on your breathing so you work with your instinct - if ever you feel stuck or completely lost with a question that is called out, go back to the breath and feel how it moves around the body.
By following these criteria, I think this will make the piece alive - especially referring to the breath, as getting 75 people to breathe in time with one another and be in sync with each other is something very special that work will come out of.
We were then asked what it feels like to be a part of the piece. I said that it felt like for some people it is clear that working in a big group empowers them, whereas for others it seems to swallow them up. This made the piece feel uncomfortable and chaotic to be a part of, whereas it should be freeing and controlled, yet with a sense of unpredictability and opportunity. I don't think we will ever get to this state of being completely harmonious with one another purely because people are in different mindsets, but it would be amazing to be a part of something close to that. Other people said that they felt claustrophobic and disjointed because people kept pushing - I agree with this fully as we were in a huge clump in the middle of the room which should have been ironed out, allowing us to be more creative.
From this very helpful group discussion, we decided to refer back to the success criteria and really hone in on creating an honest and beautiful piece. We tried it again with one person standing up and finding an answer to the question physically, then transferring slowly to the rest of us and the results were much better than when we did it the first time. It seemed less like a cluster in the middle and people were not on top of each other - everyone seemed much more free and it was much more enjoyable.
I think that if we achieve what we had at the end of the rehearsal in the real performance, it will be a very interesting spectacle for the audience. I hope that we will not get caught up in the middle of the room, and I know that I have a responsibility as part of the company to prevent this from happening and maintain a level of honesty. I think it is a huge risk to not choreograph or stage anything for the conclusion of our piece, and one I cannot say whether it will be a good risk or not because it is improvisation that will happen on the day. I have never had a level of spontaneity filtered into a performance before, and is something I find quite daunting yet exhilarating.
No comments:
Post a Comment