So…improvisation…what is it? (updated)
What do you want from or through improvisation?
What are improvisations / your outcomes ( aims / intentions / directions ) ?
Perhaps a better beginning for this question might be: When you are improvising in performance are you trying to communicate with the world? If so, what are you trying to communicate? Can you know prior to the moment of emergence?
How do you train for improvisation ? (provided that you care to)
Or more specifically how do you train to represent aesthetic non idiomatic departures in dance – seriously what skills do you need in order to pull that off?
What kinds of improvisation do you distinguish (if any) ?
If improvised dance is non idiomatic, does its reliance on perpetual-departure-from-idiom to define and redesign itself keep it pre-cultural and pre-lingual ?
20. January 2009 at 10:52
Back to basics eh?
I’ve gone on a bender to avoid using the word “outcome”. It’s difficult.
I am going to quote Kirstie Simson:
“… in the way I am describing my process in a very vague way, that it comes to that focus and concentration, in that what comes out of that, you don’t know what it is going to be. I am not trying to be a contact dancer. I am not trying to be a this dancer or a that dancer … I am trying to engage in a process every time … it’s like a meditation or a process, or a focus … something like that, that’s what I am doing. it’s very simple in a way. I just apply myself to that, and then what comes out of that is what comes out of that. I am not trying to be something, I am not trying to be a contact dancer, I am not interested in that.”
21. January 2009 at 00:34
I would love for you to use the word ‘outcome’ mate. There’s always an outcome to an improvisation. There’s a kind of an approach-avoidance dynamic going on in that sentence and in Kirstie’s text that makes it confusing. In trying not to be something there seems to be a denial or a resistance in operation. If one is attempting to engage in a process and commit to that does a resistance to prior codes, aesthetics, styles, or idioms serve the process? It seems to me that this is maybe a little like the old chestnut of trying to define contemporary dance by describing what it is not.
Kirstie seems to be talking about presence when she uses words like ‘focus’ and ‘concentration’. They are words that refer to a state, a beingness. Being and doing are not the same thing however. Her text seems to be a statement about having an open approach, and avoiding the restrictions and cliche’s of contact. My question is; what does this quote mean to you sir?
24. January 2009 at 04:55
Well – I think you miss my point. I’ve been reading Don Watson’s “Death Sentence” which is basically a diatribe against the rise of corporate speak within every area of society. I have no problem with improvisations having outcomes, it is just calling them ‘outcomes’ that pisses me off a little. As if by doing so I have succumbed to corporate speak – with its ‘going forward’, and its ‘innovation’ …
Here’s a good example. University’s are in this kind of thing up to their arses.
I think your interpretation of Kirstie’s talking is spot on.
Ahhh, the miscommunications of the digital age.
24. January 2009 at 05:00
Off to see Ruth Zaporah and Andrew Harwood tonight. Will post a note about it later.
24. January 2009 at 07:38
If improvisation is going to target high priority initiatives its going to have to utilize consultants and think a lot bigger. Its going to have to think well outside the square in order to become more effective. So key priorities for the future must rest on a foundation of sustainability and achievable turnover. Realistic investments in the improvisation sector can have consistent returns provided that infrastructure isn’t laden with maintenance costs. Having consulted some key organizations I’m very optimistic about the forecast for this creative art form. Its a slow burner financially but the high level of innovation and cutting edge product can potentially provide ongoing revenue in these idea strapped times. As I see it key issues on the agenda for the future are; entry level market share, maintaining diversity by slowing down attrition rates of research output amongst professional level practitioners, and reducing emissions during projects. I think that provided we fine tune our outcomes we’ll stay on track with our performance indicators.
(hmmm, there could be an idea for a piece in this Si)
24. January 2009 at 20:33
In other words:
Let’s try and be better improvisers.
25. January 2009 at 04:08
Yeah, and the ‘how’ of that statement is what I was driving at with the original grouping of questions. I found (sorry to bleat on but I’m drilling down a bit here) that in toying with corporate vernacular in my last comment I was struck by how sophisticated and developed that language is, both in terms of the pervasive cultural it originates from, and its unpoetic specificity. I wonder if the specificity in that language, the clarity of the corporate agenda and its resultant outcomes are characteristic of corporate cultures alarming effectiveness at doing what it seeks to do.
I’m not advocating the adoption of their terms and values, hell no. But its interesting that Paxton described dance as ‘pre-cultural’, unable to identify itself fully and certainly without a developed language to describe itself and perhaps even communicate with itself and the world.
Anyway…lets try and be better improvisers.
25. January 2009 at 23:12
I disagree strongly. Because of that language’s contemporary omnipresence it is utterly unspecific. Devoid of meaning. Inarticulate. Baron.
26. January 2009 at 05:23
My point is; “corporate cultures alarming effectiveness at doing what it seeks to do.” It knows what its doing regardless of the attribute of barren-ness. Again I’m pressing that I’m not advocating the language nor the forces of evil etc that perpetuate it. Its just that I’ve seen enough improvisation that is utterly unspecific, devoid of meaning, and inarticulate as to make me think that that is a omnipresent standard within the form.
Yours
Baron Von Munchausen
6. July 2009 at 06:04
THROW disposable choreography
·creating brand awareness in a competitive market for contemporary dance & physical theatre
·presenting abstract live performance in non intimate settings
·providing distribution channels for contemporary choreography
·catharsis installation & removal
·marketing solutions for a marginalized profession
·domestic applications for contemporary dance
·sales, service, and suppliers to discerning audiences
ANNUAL STOCK CLEARANCE ALL CONTEMPORARY DANCE MUST GO
REDUCED PRICES
NO DEPOSIT
NO INTEREST