Caught Falling, The Confluence of Contact Improvisation, Nancy Stark Smith, and Other Moving Ideas page 90 onwards.

Curtis, B. (1988). Exposed to Gravity. Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook I, Vol. 13. Pp. 156-162.

dancetechtv (2013) An Emergent Underscore: a conversation with Nancy Stark Smith, London. [online] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzG609NWp1Y [Accessed 1 December 2014].

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

Neige Christenson (2009) The play of weight.[online video] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltq6y06E8ew [Accessed 12 November 2014].

Omegabranch (2011) Contact Improvisation Mirva Mäkinen & Otto Akkanen.[online video] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMLbWxujoGw [Accessed 12 November 2014].

Paxton, S. (2003) Drafting Interior Techniques. In: Ann Cooper Albright and David Gere (eds.) Taken By Surprise: A Dance Improvisation Reader. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 175-184.

Ravn, Susanne. (2010) Sensing weight in movement. Journal of Dance & Somatic Practices,2 (1) 21-24.

Steve Paxton’s “Interior Techniques”: Contact Improvisation and Political Power.Full Text Available By: Turner, Robert. TDR: The Drama Review, Fall2010, Vol. 54 Issue 3, p123-135, 13p, 5 Black and White Photographs

Stover, J. (1989). Some considerations when structuring an Improvisation (to be seen by an audience). Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II, Vol.14. pp185

Touch: Experience and knowledge.Full Text Available By: Bannon, Fiona; Holt, Duncan. Journal of Dance & Somatic Practices, 2012, Vol. 3 Issue 1/2, 215-227.

Woodhull, A. Center of Gravity. Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook I, Vol. 4. Pp. 43-48.

ZayacZhe (2009) Steve Paxton. smalldance [online video] Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sJKEXUtv44 [Accessed 13th October 2014].

To begin our final improvisation class we began with a simple exercise in partners that consisted of spirals. In partners, a spiral was always in motion with different parts of the body. When I carried out this task I found that the tone of my contact improvisation had dramatically increased, when spiralling my movement became more dynamic and the speed became vaster. This was an interesting outcome for me, as before my contact improvisation was relatively calm and sustained where as the spiralling influenced me to move in a different way. I will use this skill during contact performances to alter the dynamic of my movement and to create a different atmosphere.

The majority of the lesson focused on our group scores for the open studios. The set rules that influence my group’s score are as follows:

• A minimum of 2 dancers out of the space
• When a solo is occurring another dance must interact to form a duet
• When in a duet the aim is to travel to the opposite side of the space
• A third dancer can join a duet to form a trio, there aim is to change the direction and level
• Each dancer has their own goal in mind e.g. I will be the under-dancer. This will change each time they entre the space.

After we performed our score the feedback that we received was quite positive, from an audiences perspective our score was visually interesting and engaging to watch. However there were areas that could be improved:

1. Firstly the space could be better utilized. As a group the movement tended to happen upstage leaving vast empty space downstage. When all the movement occurred in one area it looked relatively cluttered and cramped. To improve on this, a better awareness of the space is needed. For example if there is a lot of action happening in one area then it can be your job to alter and direct the movement into the empty spaces that are available.
2. Secondly it was pointed out that we should allow for more time to watch individual solos, trios and duets. Meaning that often when an interesting duet/ solo/trio was taking place another dancer/ dancers joined the space taking the emphasis away from what is already happening. For an audience it can be difficult to stay engaged when there is a lot of movement happening, therefore it is beneficial to allow for time for dances to happen.
3. A final area of weakness that was discussed was the movement occurring in a trio. Often when a trio was formed one person became the under dancer taking the weight from the other two dancers. Although this can still be effective, it is important to consider your role in a trio. When joining a duet to form a trio you do not necessarily have to be in close proxemics, the third person can simply assist the duet offering more surfaces and structures to sustain the dance.

After this feedback we evaluated our score as a group and altered and added some new rules.

• Instead of a minimum of 2 dancers out of the space we increased this to 4. By having at least 4 dancers out of the space allows for more time to occur for trios/duets/ solos. What is more the space will be less cramped.
• To finish our score we decided that slowly we would fade out of contact improvisation coming to stillness on the floor. We have not set who fades out first or an order to this, simply just when you feel ready to stop dancing. Additionally, everyone will not stop moving at the same time, it will be a slow process of one by one.

I look forward to performing the score at the open studios this week. I will utilise all of the skills that I have learnt throughout this module to create an interesting and stimulating contact improvisation dance.

 Works Cited

Caught Falling, The Confluence of Contact Improvisation, Nancy Stark Smith, and Other Moving Ideas page 90 onwards.

dancetechtv (2013) An Emergent Underscore: a conversation with Nancy Stark Smith, London. [online] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzG609NWp1Y [Accessed 1 December 2014].

In today’s session we begun by watching back our work from the previous weeks, from this I found it extremely useful in visualising how I moved during contact improvisation. The way in which I fluidly gave my weight to others and smoothly transitioned out of contact lifts positively surprised me. Often when performing I do not feel as fluid, therefore watching myself back enabled me to see that my movement is more fluid than I initially thought. I feel I can improve on creating more surfaces on my body to effectively take more weight. When performing contact improvisation I try to encourage others to give me their weight, however I often fall back into the pattern of becoming the over dancer.

After watching the videos we moved onto a floor exercise that worked on quickly moving the pelvis through the space, this acted as ground work to be built up to moving the pelvis quickly and fluidly on and off another body. At first I found it relatively difficult to sharply execute my pelvis on and off my partner, however once I relaxed and let my body lead my movement became much more fluid and I felt confident in letting my pelvis take control. This exercise developed into leading with your legs. I felt more comfortable leading with my legs as I could achieve better contact positions, what’s more leading with the legs put less pressure and weight into my partner.

The final task of today’s session consisted of devising a contact score in groups to be performed during an open studio event. After reading Jamie Stover’s journal article Some Considerations When Structuring an improvisation it became clear that scores could differ in two ways. Firstly a score can be created that follows a strong structured order that does not alter during the performance. In contrast to this a loose score can be followed where the dance itself influences and changes the original score. (Stover, 1989, 185). Creating a structured score is beneficial as it means the improvisation has clarity and won’t get lost into a ‘jam’ style dance. My group has begun to devise a score that has a maximum of eight dancers in the space at a time; there can be less but no more than eight. What’s more when one dancer starts to enter the space another dancer must follow to create a duet, once a duet has been formed the aim is to travel in contact to the opposite side of the room. Within this score we have also created the opportunity for trios to be created, when I third person joins a duet there purpose is to change the direction and momentum of the dance. Our score so far is relatively simple and will be refined in next weeks class.

Works Cited

Stover, J. (1989). Some considerations when structuring an Improvisation (to be seen by an audience). Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II, Vol.14. pp185

This week’s class was devised into another contact research lab. The question that my group explored was:

‘Is it possible to do lifts with the same intention and fluidity in trios that it is in duets?’

As a group we decided to explore this question because from our own experiences when taking part in contact improvisation lifts normally only occur between two people. We wanted to explore this further by seeing what possibilities there are to incorporate more people into contact lifts, without leaving other dancers as a spare part. Our lab mapped out into experimenting with lifts that we have previously done in duets but developing and adapting them further to integrate a third person, what’s more after this experimentation we created a jam session to incorporate our findings into a contact improvisation dance.

The lifts that we investigated are as follows:

• Back to back (back bend)
• Crucifix
• Hip to hip

To start our research we began with the back to back lift. Our first attempt at trying this lift as trio began with having two dancers as a base rather than one. (Picture 1). It was important that both bases were positioned similarly with their pelvis at equal heights. I was the over dancer being lifted over the backs, at first it felt uncomfortable as the bases were uneven however when they altered their position it became easier.  Furthermore when I became one of the bases I found it awkward in holding the over dancers arm to take their weight over my back, the way in which I supported them was uncomfortable for me. We found this attempt in some ways successful but overall found it relatively uncomfortable to perform. Our second attempt at this lift consisted of performing the back to back the original way with one person lifting the weight.  However to transform this into a trio the under dancer original taking the weight of the back also became an over dancer by transferring their weight onto a third person. (Picture 2). This lift was successful although the third dancer taking weight of both people had to ensure a strong and stable base.

1    2 

After investigating the back to back lift we moved onto the crucifix. The crucifix originated from the jump back with hands under the shoulder blades giving support. We developed this by keeping the support of the shoulder blades but adding in a third person to support the weight of the legs. As the person being lifted, I jumped back into the support of the hands under my shoulder blades but was then lifted higher by the person supporting my legs. As a trio this lift was effective, yet we struggled with bringing the lift down. The transition down from the lift was relativity clumpy preventing a flow of movement into another lift.

Our final lift adapted from the hip to hip lift from our previous class. Unlike the original way of supporting the weight from the hips we altered this to take the weight at the shoulders. (Picture 3). Once the under dancer felt steady they shifted and extended the weight of the over dance onto their shoulder in a higher position. (Picture 4). Once in this position to incorporate a third person into the lift the weight of the over dancer was transferred to the other person. (Picture 5). In my opinion this lift was very successful as if flowed from one lifter to the next with smooth transitions of the over dancer going up and coming back down. This lift differed from the last variations that we explored as it did not involve two dancers lifting one but allowed for the weight to be passed over.

3   4     5

After experimenting with the different lifts we created a small jam session to explore our findings. During the first attempt it was obvious that as soon as contact occurred between two dancers the third person instantly supported with their arms, specifically holding the legs. This motion restricted the movement as the over dancer had no where to go making the contact lifts become stiff and clumpy. After this attempt we tried again bringing an awareness to the previous factors that hinder the contact. What’s more instead of using the arms for support we tried to use different body parts such as the back, shoulders and head. (Picture 6). Offering different body for support created more options and allowed for my interesting contact to take place.

6

From our research lab four questions arose:

1. Can you fluidly interchange the role of who is the lifter and who is being lifted?
2. How can you pass on the weight of the over dancer from one person to next?
3. How can you explore contact in trios without resorting to supporting the legs and using the arms?
4. How can trio lifts start from the floor and move upwards and travel across the space?

If we were to develop our research lab further these questions would be integrated and investigated in more depth.

Works Cited

Keefe, M. What’s the score? Improvisation in Everyday Life. In Albright, A. C., & Gere, D. (2003).Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader.   Middletown, Conneticut: Wesleyan University Press. Pp.229-238

In today’s session we began by watching two contact improvisation videos, both videos consisted of a duet between a male and female partnership. The duets equally portrayed a fluid and flowing dance which never broke out of contact, the dancers moved with ease. Martin and Neige who performed a contact duet in the first video moved effortlessly, the male acted as the more dominate under dancer although the female did at times support his weight. (Neige Christenson, 2009). In contrast, Mirva and Otto who performed in the second video shared the role of the under and over dancer equally. (Omegabranch , 2011). Throughout their duet they were constantly changing who was giving and taking weight. In addition to this both duets offered various surfaces and structures for their partner and initiated movement from the whole body.

After watching the videos we moved onto a simple exercise of rolling across the floor, the rolls focused on reaching with the arms and legs. The rolls on the floor corresponded to the technique that you would use when rolling on and off your partner. This exercise enabled me grasp an effective roll that I can translate onto a body rather than the floor. Moving on from this, in partners we laid across one another stomachs with our centres pressed together. To begin we created a small dance which was felt through the breath. During this I thought about Bruce Curtis’ article Exposed to gravity, Curtis states that a dance may differ visually on the outside but internally the same experience are felt through the flow of rhythm moving throughout the body (Curtis, 1988, 156). With my centre pressed against my partners I could feel a shared rhythm being created although our breath pattern was slightly different. This task progressed onto changing the position of the over and under dancer without loosing contact, developing into a continuous dance which gradually built up to standing. Myself and my partner were successful in not breaking the contact link, however compared to the videos that we watched earlier I felt that our movement was not as fluid as at times it was quite clumpy.

The second half of the session focused on the integration of more advanced lifts. We started off with a back to back lift, in order to safely carry out this out the lifters pelvis has to be lower than the persons being lifted. I enjoyed this lift and felt I was able to successfully lift a variety of people with different weights; my back was a strong and steady support. When I was being lifted I enjoyed being in the backbend position and felt like I could stay their all day. Another lift which I found successful was the jump back. This consisted of supporting my partner’s weight by placing my hands under their shoulder blades to give more height to their lift when they jump back. When I was being lifted my partner supported my weight to such an extent that I travelled back further than I imagined. I felt this lift and the back to back lift could be integrated easily into a contact improvisation dance.

The final lifts of the session consisted of the ‘paper clip’ and the shoulder lift. As the lifter I found the paper clip lift relatively easy, I believe it is a simple lift that can used to move and initiate dancers during a contact improvisation dance. The shoulder lift was the most difficult lifts of the session as it consisted of being lifted at a much higher height than the others. During this lift I was the person that was being lifted therefore my pelvis had to be higher than my partners shoulder. Overall I did not like the lift I was nervous to be lifted above the shoulder.

To finish the class we integrated all of our skills from previous sessions into a contact improvisation dance that was performed in a round-robin. This was one of the first times that we have performed our contact improvisation dances allowing others to observe. It was interesting to watch others and see how they interact and move with each other, what’s more when I was performing in the circle I felt as if I was in my own world with my partner and did not fell as if I was being watched.

Works Cited

Curtis, B. (1988). Exposed to Gravity. Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook I, Vol. 13. Pp. 156-162.

Omegabranch (2011) Contact Improvisation Mirva Mäkinen & Otto Akkanen.[online video] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMLbWxujoGw [Accessed 12 November 2014].

Neige Christenson (2009) The play of weight.[online video] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltq6y06E8ew [Accessed 12 November 2014].