July - November 2016
NO
Something that has often come up in our explorations of the shaper-shifter role, and also in our performance at UDS, is what if we say no to the direction/instruction? We've found it hard to find a way to explore saying no. We brainstormed modes of saying no (how/why we say no in daily life):
We began with cumulative partnering as warm-up (catch/throw/grab) which lead again to our biosis duet. We find this to be a good way to prepare for the session, as not only does it engage our bodies fully, but it also sets up a connection and an understanding of the group's mood right from the beginning. We work through a series of provocations focussing on several initiation directives, each fine tuning the day's approach to movement. This biosis was not as fluid as previous ones have been, but it allowed us to ask the question about what allows and what blocks the development of an improvisation.
After warming up, we discussed the possibility to/methods of saying no within an improvisation. We realised that to feed our interests and to keep the improvisation moving forward, we needed to make change for development, but a complete block would halt that. This created a ponder-ment on how we could say no, or to what extent or variability we could do so; a graph was devised with the vertical axis ranging from yes at the bottom to no at the top, and the horizontal showing possible variabilities, for example: 'yes I will accept your offer right now' would sit right in the corner of the graph, and 'no I will not accept your offer, but I will build up to it' might sit somewhere in the middle of the graph.
Following our discussion, we moved into an almost tag-in/tag-out structured experiment, playing one pair at a time, with saying no. As we moved further into it and continued creating and changing the rules of the game, we made an organic transition into a long improvisation.
DISCOVERIES:
-no is actually just offers a varied form of saying yes -our yes offers were much more considered -even if we say no, how can we still compliment the improvisation / the others -an absolute no is no awareness -giving a brand new offer to the situation is a form of saying no to whats already gone before
this improvisation, we felt, was completely successful. A successful improvisation feels cohesive, productive, fun, aware, we are attempting to uncover HOW/WHY/WHAT makes a successful improvisation. -structure of the session? -the way we enter the improvisation? -our group focus?
SO NEXT WEEK, we are going to try the exact formula of this week..... will it give us the same outcome?! will having a different group of people change / help / hinder?
NO
Something that has often come up in our explorations of the shaper-shifter role, and also in our performance at UDS, is what if we say no to the direction/instruction? We've found it hard to find a way to explore saying no. We brainstormed modes of saying no (how/why we say no in daily life):
(We used these modes as explorations in the improvisation)
We began with cumulative partnering as warm-up (catch/throw/grab) which lead again to our biosis duet. We find this to be a good way to prepare for the session, as not only does it engage our bodies fully, but it also sets up a connection and an understanding of the group's mood right from the beginning. We work through a series of provocations focussing on several initiation directives, each fine tuning the day's approach to movement. This biosis was not as fluid as previous ones have been, but it allowed us to ask the question about what allows and what blocks the development of an improvisation.
After warming up, we discussed the possibility to/methods of saying no within an improvisation. We realised that to feed our interests and to keep the improvisation moving forward, we needed to make change for development, but a complete block would halt that. This created a ponder-ment on how we could say no, or to what extent or variability we could do so; a graph was devised with the vertical axis ranging from yes at the bottom to no at the top, and the horizontal showing possible variabilities, for example: 'yes I will accept your offer right now' would sit right in the corner of the graph, and 'no I will not accept your offer, but I will build up to it' might sit somewhere in the middle of the graph.
Following our discussion, we moved into an almost tag-in/tag-out structured experiment, playing one pair at a time, with saying no. As we moved further into it and continued creating and changing the rules of the game, we made an organic transition into a long improvisation.
DISCOVERIES:
-no is actually just offers a varied form of saying yes -our yes offers were much more considered -even if we say no, how can we still compliment the improvisation / the others -an absolute no is no awareness -giving a brand new offer to the situation is a form of saying no to whats already gone before
this improvisation, we felt, was completely successful. A successful improvisation feels cohesive, productive, fun, aware, we are attempting to uncover HOW/WHY/WHAT makes a successful improvisation. -structure of the session? -the way we enter the improvisation? -our group focus?
SO NEXT WEEK, we are going to try the exact formula of this week..... will it give us the same outcome?! will having a different group of people change / help / hinder?
No comments:
Post a Comment