The Art of Choreography

THE ART OF CHOREOGRAPHY Those of us who have been through the process of creating a choreography know that in contemporary dance, a choreographer does a lot more than just composing dance. Unlike in other scenic arts, a contemporary dance choreographer is usually a general director in charge of making the decisions upon every matter included in her/his creation. In many cases, she or he is its producer, manager and even one of the dancers! This situation varies according to professional or economical contexts, but it really seems to be that creating contemporary dance choreography is a task of many MANY tasks. But, if we stay closer to the popular meaning of the word itself (choreography), we could say that it refers to the practice of dance composition with human body‟s movement. So, the choreographer‟s work is the art of inventing or arranging movement, as well as choosing dramatic structures to organize it or present it to an audience. The art of choreography itself is concerned about movement alone (or dance) before its relationship with costumes, lightning or any other scenic complements. I know however, that some contemporary dance artists have troubles to think about all those components of a performance separately. I ask my self if this is really an aesthetic point of view or if some choreographers just don‟t really want to face movement… (?!) Now, if we think of the popular current use of the word „choreographer‟ between contemporary dancers, we‟re talking about the BIG CREATIVE HEAD. First of all, the profile of a person who composes a contemporary dance piece is usually between the one of a theater director and an orchestra conductor . To decide upon the general organization of its dance, the choreographer chooses or creates movement dramaturgy, whether her/his dance is an abstraction or a story. S/He chooses dancers as well, considering the „taste‟ he‟d like his piece to have. Remember that there are virtuous dancers, lyrical, mature, acrobatic, young, with all types of features, etc… . That is for the theatrical side of his character… Concerning his „conductor‟ side, he decides how movement will relate to any type of music or sounds (if that‟s the case). As contemporary dance is generally accompanied by 1

music… (we dance in the silence too…), the choreographer also needs to have musical knowledge. Now I must say, this is an hypothetical, ideal choreographer… but anyway, he entrusts a musician to create for him, chooses upon already existing pieces or creates music himself. Before inviting you to a page where you can exercise music analysis for choreographers, I‟d like to remind you that the use of music in contemporary dance sometimes differs from its employment in mostly all other types of dance. In contemporary dance performances, music can be just a background soundscape. This means that movement is not necessarily matching its rhythm or dynamics. This is a weird feature for many audiences, but believe me, you can find it very, very often. Nevertheless, sometimes we do make use of the music‟s structure, rhythm or dynamics when composing choreography. Actually you can find both types of relation to music on contemporary dance stages (sometimes during the same piece). If you‟re one of those choreographers interested in relating your dance to a musical piece, you might want to visit our contemporary dance music page. Deciding upon costumes for a performance is another one of the choreographer‟s responsibilities. As contemporary dance is frequently theatrical, all kind of clothes are accepted for symbolic or aesthetic meanings. But, if a choreographer really takes everything in consideration, he doesn‟t forget the dancers sensibility and needs. Comfortable clothes are more important in contemporary dance as people would normally talk about. If you already now enough about our training ways, you are aware of the fact that what we feel while moving is essential for us. As a dancer, and after many years of practice, I‟d sincerely say that the shape and feel of an outfit can strongly determine our posture or muscular tone (which transforms movement qualities and even shapes). Soft and loose-fitting costumes are highly preferred by contemporary dancers than too tight, rigid or complicated clothes (linking page to a selection of fantastic contemporary dance wear coming soon!). In choosing costumes, the choreographer work as a visual artist, as much as he does when working his lightning (if that‟s the case), scenography, or any other visual complements. This means that, even if he is following his intuition, he considers their aesthetic values, according to the sense he is constructing. For some purposes he might 2

prioritize symbolic elements that can make the dancer‟s performance more difficult (for example a male dancer on heels…!), for others he‟ll respond to the movement needs. Allow me to give you an advice from the dancer I am… (I‟ve gone trough difficult experiences with clothes on stage!): If you‟re a choreographer, always remember that DANCING is the priority of your dancers. They‟ll be much happier if you choose costumes that facilitate their moving skills (I know, I know… it all depends on your piece‟s needs). But, anyway, think that achieving a good balance between visual and dancing needs might be the wisest…! (If you‟re interested in the stage lighting work, wait for our future linking page where you will learn basics about equipments, their features and the way to set them for a show.) One last word about making choreography… Remember that dance composition is different from directing. Guiding a group in a dance creation process requires more skills than just knowing how to play with movement SHAPE or QUALITIES. Some people might think that directing is a matter of common sense, and that choreographers find their working ways during each creative process. Somehow I agree. Still, I‟d like to share some ideas that might help you avoid bad moods… or unsatisfied dancers: • Keep in mind that your working „material‟ is made out of human beings. Even if it is important to demand some sweat or discipline, remember that dancing many hours a day can be more exhausting than sitting on an office‟s chair… . I just mean that it‟s important to measure your dancer‟s reserve of energy, in order to plan rehearsals in a more effective and friendlier way. Resting is as important for your dancers as rehearsing, no matter how stressed you feel… •Start composing with what you think will be the most difficult part of your piece and stop making changes to your choreography as soon as you can. Movement matures in time within your dancer‟s memories. The more time they know their dancing parts, the more refined their movement will be.

3

•Manage the working time of your dancers in the most professional way your conditions allow. Establish contracts or agreements from the very beginning, according to the timescales of your plan. Their commitment is to dance what you establish. Your commitment is to be consistent with the working program you propose. This should assure that your „material‟ (dancers…) is in an easy working mood… and that IS very important. (I know what I‟m telling you…) •Avoid the situation of having part of your dancers waiting in the studio, while you work on your choreography with others. Plan your rehearsals and appointments with them so that they won‟t be sitting and feeling that they waste their time. •Be receptive and open minded to the dancers signals. You are reading their bodies constantly. So, take in consideration what they have to propose. Make profit of the richness that each one of them can add to your choreography. You know there are many related topics we can share. For example, some people say that there‟s a special phase called „incubating‟ dance ideas before composing; I haven‟ said a word about the role of the choreographer during the performance or production and artistic management… There‟s a lot about creating dance we can talk about. For now, explore the related pages and remember, if contemporary dance choreography is your passion, I‟ll be here to share it with you. Don‟t be shy to send me your questions, comments or related ideas. I‟ll be working on the missing subjects in time. 1. What does a contemporary dance choreographer expect from dancers? A few days ago, a young dancer posted a question at our site. She (or he, because no name was entered for the post) was worried about her possibilities of success as a professional, arguing that she was already 21 years old. I answered her question briefly (you can read the whole post here:Too late? (to succeed professionally in the dance world)). Her concern made me remember how often I‟ve heard that people believe that the value of dancers lies in their physical condition and skills. Considering that the most popular concert dance form in the world might be ballet, I understand the existence of this general misconception. But, as our site‟s main interest is contemporary dance, I decided to write a short reflection related to the topic. It has 4

been of use even for me, as a reminder. I have interviewed three contemporary dance choreographers, without introducing them to the subject as I just did with you. I simply asked them: What do you expect from your dancers? Among the series of things they answered, I was surprised, and glad, to find a strong point in common. The three of them told me that the dancers‟ technique and/or shape of movement ARE SECONDARY - CONSEQUENTIAL factors in their creative process and results. So, if acrobatic displays are not their main expectation, what do they wait for? Testimonies:

1. JOSE DARIO FLOREZ. Contemporary dance choreographer; dancer; teacher. -When creating, I propose an EXPERIENCE, so I‟m more interested in the human being than in the „dancer‟. I don‟t worry about the technique but try to make use of their natural conditions. I don‟t have soloists because I believe that every dancer has something to give. I like that statement from Pina Bausch that says: “the important thing is WHAT makes dancers move and not HOW they move”. -My dance has an aesthetical, conceptual research and I use narrative discourses and metaphors. Therefore I expect dancers to produce honest movement, free of stereotypes and based on emotions or feelings. Dancers should leave shape beside to achieve this (for me, shape does already exist). When this doesn‟t happen, I stop and explore more. The findings must fit the dancer, though s/he should be able to transform it or appropriate it. -I understand choreography as an experience more than as a sequence of movements. So I don‟t create separated parts but a net from which things arise. For example, if the dancer gets tired, that will be part of the choreography instead of trying choreography to hide it. If technical virtuosity happens, it is because that arises naturally. -I expect dancers to be mentally flexible and ready to improvise on stage. They should be spontaneous, observant, attentive to the group and ready to make creative 5

proposals. I try to take them out of their comfort so that they find things that they don‟t know about themselves. -Dancers should be versatile and at the service of the project. -“The dancer is the canvas, the skin where the choreographer paints her/his aesthetical and human sensibility” (original words, in Spanish: “El bailarín es el lienzo, la piel, donde el coreógrafo pinta su sensibilidad estética, humana”). 2. LUIS FELIPE VIANA. Professor, University of Antioquia; contemporary dance choreographer. -When creating, I propose a COMMON SPACE. Therefore I expect dancers to be ready for both being directed and create or recreate my ideas. They will be asked to create their roles and express their will. -I prefer to have dancers that want to participate in my project and that are ready to invest on it. For me, dancers are human beings and I like to establish a close relationship with them. -My dance is not only about shape. It includes sensitive, thoughtful or emotional content. I see virtuosity as an expressive possibility and shape as a consequence; there is a physical component which I consider fundamental, but technique should be a medium and not a goal. -My dancers should be ready to assume the choreographic vocabulary postulated by each project. They should be ductile, adaptable to modification, change and to the development of each proposal. -I prefer more intimate projects. Therefore I‟ve worked mostly over the „Solo‟ format, which allows a close relationship with the dancer and material. 3. PETER PALACIO. Contemporary dance choreographer. -I expect dancers to BE CONSISTENT WITH THEIR TIME. Nowadays, you can ask them to do any kind of unexpected things, so dancers should be ready to act, sing, talk, be an athlete or so. It is their task to know how to be prepared for that. -I wish them to feel dance in a visceral way. Colombia has a passionate culture and my dance is a reflection of it. Therefore I don‟t seek for a dance that is mathematical, exact 6

or precise but rather coming from the entrails. I don‟t expect dancers to be machines of lifting legs up. I want them to be able to express themselves and feel. -Dancers should have a very wide disposition to dare knowing other possibilities of movement and risk themselves to face the adventure that implies creating a choreographic piece. -If they are artists, they should already be subdued to a process of training, discipline and responsibility. As I understand, these contemporary dance choreographers have expectations that could be fulfilled by a great variety of non acrobatic dancers. I‟m glad for so many artists (including myself) that our creative possibilities do not subjugate us to the empire of a competitive practice based on youth or circumstances that do not depend on ourselves. That, I believe, is one of the greatest values of contemporary dance. I know we might get really acrobatic sometimes too. Though, the point here is that choreographers will not necessarily demand it. Maybe, or for some projects, more mature dancers with less choreographic story or habitudes will be better received… THE CHOREOGRAPHER’S MANIFESTO by Serge Lifar 1935 Some days ago, I was listening to the contemporary dance choreographer Siobhan Davies talk about the making of her piece “Bird Song”. She explained that at the beginning of the process she felt like avoiding to use a specific music, because she didn‟t want to have a predetermined structure to work over. Her statement made me remember Noverre, and the fact that even after so many years of the edition of his ideas, choreographers are still in the search of what the autonomy of dance is. I believe, just like Siobhan Davies seems to express, that the creation of the dramatic structure of a dance piece is one of the main acts that determines the autonomy of the choreographer from the musician or the playwright. Defining a dramatic structure is for me at the core of generating a choreographic event, regardless of its nature. If the choreographer uses a predetermined structure created by a musician, playwright, visual artist or anything likewise, s/he would miss the fundamental experience of proposing the basic form of her/his creation. Before I had lost myself in particular considerations about that matter, I remembered that at the very heart of the so called modernity of dance (beginning of the XXth century), Serge Lifar insisted in his own way over the same subject. 7

I have knowledge of this because of a quotation that I found in a French book about dance history (“La danse au XXième siècle”). The title of the referenced text is “Le Manifest du chorégraphe”. I have tried to share the manuscript with students and friends, but unfortunately the French language is not very wide spread where I live. And as it seems to me, that text is still not available in English in the web, except for some short passages that promote the whole book that has the same name, also by Serge Lifar. So, I thought of translating it, as I believe that even if it talks in the voice of the beginning of the XXth century, it summarizes a good group of related ideas for choreographers to consider. I hope this is of use for some of you or that at least it makes your creative mind work over a few questions and possible answers. So, here‟s the text: THE CHOREOGRAPHER‟S MANIFESTO The manifesto of the new autonomous ballet, is the one of the “ballet-dance” (first of all a ballet should be danced!) that does not borrow its rhythm, and that discovers it inside its own essence.

That does not mean that I pretend to impoverish ballet by depriving it from its musical decoration (there‟s no one as suitable as a choreographer for measuring the emotional effect of music over dance and -let‟s name things as they are- over our bodies). However, I admit the possibility of existence of a ballet without musical accompaniment. More than that: a ballet -with or without music- should emerge spontaneously from its own elements and not from music. As the choreographer that I am, I compose a ballet, I write it down and I present it to an audience. I write it down… Until now, tradition has only allowed certain ballets to survive, enriching the verbal transmission of musical contexts only. But currently, we posses an unexploited writing mean: the cinema. The cinema can allow masses to know ballet. Furthermore, it can register it, assure its permanence and become some kind of „edition‟ of ballet. Recorded like this, ballet becomes from all perspectives comparable to a printed poem. The musician can be inspired by it, as s/he is by a poem, and can compose a score over the rhythmical outline of my dance and enrich it with new flames. All this, in the same 8

way that I can find inspiration in an ancient myth, in “The Divine Comedy”, in a piece of modern literature, etc.. All poems, even if they are based on rigorous rhythmical patterns, can give birth to several different melodies. Why wouldn‟t it be the same regarding a film of mute choreography? My rhythmical pattern leaves the musician‟s freedom of inspiration intact. Even more: let‟s suppose that I create a movement that lasts two half notes. The musician can do two half notes, four quarter notes, etc., considering that s/he does not transform my rhythm. Musician and choreographer are placed equally, but the way I propose -from ballet to music and not from music to ballet- seems to me to be the right one because on the one hand we can not dance everything, and on the other hand all dances possess a rhythmical potential that can communicate to music. There can be two types of ballets: with or without music. What should we prefer? As a choreographer, I answer without doubting: ballet with music. Because it would be short saying that we like music: often she is indispensable. In music we find the necessary accents to our psycho-physical movement and our elevation. In music we find the emotions, the forces, the inspiration demanded by our impetus: „Excelsior‟! I do not really have the right to talk about the musical field, though it is very familiar to me. However, I dare making a shy comment about the music for ballet: it needs its special orchestra. But it is the task of the musician and not of the choreographer to think it out. Another comment: the choreographer should not try to impose her/him self in the field of another autonomous art: painting. And the painter as well, should consider the particularities of ballet when s/he composes a model. S/he should inspire her/him self from the choreography, supply the dancer with the more suitable costumes and try to highlight the plastic elements of the role, instead of crushing them as s/he has the tendency to do. For the big synthesis to arrive, it is necessary that each of the arts has first its own free development. Ballet -I don´t speak for other arts or I‟d make the figure of an intruder- needs to engage in a new path that is its path. Ballet should know that: 1. We can not, we should not dance to anything. 2. Ballet should remain tied to its source: dance. 3. Ballet should not be the illustration of another art. 4. Ballet should not borrow its rhythmical pattern from music. 9

5. Ballet can do without music. 6. Ballet can and should be written down. 7. In the case of ballet associated with music, the rhythmical base should be created by the choreographer and not by the musician. 8. Ballet needs a special orchestra. 9. The choreographer should not be the servant of the painter. 10. It is necessary to found an autonomous choreographic theater.

Those are the essential principles of a choreographer‟s manifesto. Some of you, mature artists and choreographers, might want to tell me that this is so obvious, that we could forget about the matter now. What I personally see in the dance composition classes I teach is that this is not true at all. There are many forms of dance that use music and/or texts to rely on their dramatic structures. And this seems to create a tendency to believe that this is also the creative approach of contemporary dance. So, I believe that remembering this from time to time can be healthy. I personally do not think that it is wrong to lean over dramatic structures created by others (musicians, playwrights or whatever). However, I kind of feel that there‟s a fundamental act of expression and creation in the act of proposing the structure of a piece. I ask my self if working in this way would not construct the status of autonomy we‟ve been talking about since Noverre‟s time… DANCE COMPOSITION When we talk about dance composition, we mean that we choose a choreographic material, we arrange it according to an aesthetic idea or project and we fix it. To do that, we need first to have some choreographic fragments to work with. In contemporary dance, one of the most common methods for producing that first content of choreography is the practice of improvisation. We use it with the intention of developing innovative movement ideas and generally as the first step in the dance composition process. (Dance improvisation on stage has a different purpose and is another big independent topic. I‟m only talking about improvisation as a part of dance composition, because this last one is the subject of this page.) Improvisation before composing usually leans on ideas, music or any kind of associations referred to the piece that is being created. Now, there are as many ways to 10

compose, as choreographers (or even projects!) exist. There‟s really no better method or composing strategy. Every choreographer has her/his own goals and interests and every project usually demands its own methodology. The following text is the description of a possible way of composing choreography. If you know another great composing method, we‟ll all be glad to hear about it. Since the beginning of the XX century and thanks to Rudolph Laban, modern and contemporary dance use some conceptual tools that allow us to generate movement by the exploration of some of its own basic components: BODY, SPACE and TIME. This is from an abstract perspective, without the need of subjects, images or external inspirational themes. Now, to improvise this way in the search for movement, imagine that composing dance is like assembling a puzzle. Different kinds of pieces are used and put together to create a whole organic unity. Let‟s talk about those pieces. We can improvise to create them, exploring the three main categories mentioned above: BODY: movements of the joints (example: knees, hips, elbows…), movements of the six main segments of the body (legs, arms, trunk, head), movements of parts of those main segments (example: forearms, feet, hands…), movements of the whole body (the center of the body has to be involved), movements that involve the contact of body surfaces between them or with something else (a partner, an object, the floor…), movements that involve supporting the weight of the body on other parts than the feet (on the shoulders, on the back, on the forearms…), and other possibilities concerning movements of the body that you create… SPACE: there are two possible different ways to think about space. - Kinespheric space: it surrounds the body until the limits that our extremities can reach and travel with us across the scenic space. To dance with the whole body considering the kinespheric space it is necessary to move the center of the body. We can also move parts of the body within this space without involving the center. Kinespheric pieces for a dance composition puzzle are considered as movements in place (not travelling more than changing weight from one support to another). Laban defined that there are 27 seven main directions towards which we can move within the kinesphere: 11



1: Downward



2: Upward



3, 4, and 5: To the left: low level, middle level, high level.



6, 7, and 8: To the right: low level, middle level, high level.



9, 10, and 11: Backward: low level, middle level, high level.



12, 13, and 14: Forward: low level, middle level, high level.



15, 16, and 17: To the left diagonal backward: low level, middle level, high level.



18, 19, and 20: To the right diagonal backward: low level, middle level, high level.



21, 22, and 23: To the left diagonal forward: low level, middle level, high level.



24, 25, and 26: To the right diagonal forward: low level, middle level, high level.



27: To the center of the kinesphere (as the center of the body coincide with the center of the kinesphere, it can not move towards it; but parts of the body or its extremities can).

- Scenic space: it is the total architectonical space defined for the dance (the stage, the studio, the park or whatever). Laban divided this space in 9 main zones: 

1: The center of the stage.



2, 3, 4, and 5: The four corners (left back and front, right back and front).



6, 7, 8, and 9: The four centered remaining zones (back, front, left and right).

We can occupy all this sectors of the scenic space (or spaces in between if you want to think about it that way). To go from one zone to another we create paths. They can be straight (towards the eight basic directions: backward, forward, to the left, to the right, to one of the four diagonals), circular (to the left or to the right) or combining both ways. The shapes mentioned refer to the paths themselves and not to the movements that the body performs during the travelling. When changing the frontal relationship between kinespheric space and scenic space we obtain turns. Turns can be to the right, to the left, with all kind of different degrees (half turn, 3/4 of a turn, 1/8 of a turn, 3 turns, etc…), in the three main levels (low, middle, high), on different supporting body parts, around the three main axes (vertical, horizontal and sagittal), etc…

12

When reaching higher than the high level and elevating weight over the support area we obtain jumps. If they are performed on the legs they can be classified in five basic forms: 1. From one leg to another. 2. From one leg to the same leg. 3. From one leg to two legs. 4 From two legs to one leg. 5. From two legs to two legs. Of course there are a lot of other possibilities to search for jumps. Think about leaps that start and arrive, from and to, other parts of the body. You‟ll see how many pieces for your dance composition puzzle you‟ll find. TIME: time is a feature that affects both BODY and SPACE movements. It gives them length, allows us to dance rhythmically and offers a possibility to construct choreographic phrases with a musical sense. Before talking about how to apply time variations to our movements, it‟s good to be sure of the meaning of some of the terms concerning the TIME category. - Beat: is the basic unity and reference for measuring time. It is what we count when defining the length of a movement or phrase. We establish the speed of the beat according to the dance needs. This speed (or frequency per minute) is expressed in numbers and is called tempo. -Tempo: (or bpm: beats per minute) this is a word borrowed from musical language, but it is used in dance with the same meaning. It expresses the frequency of the beat of any rhythmic pattern, in numbers. For example Tempo= 60 or Tempo = 120. This means that there are 60 or 120 beats in a minute respectively (the higher the number, the fastest the tempo). Tempo is measured by a tool called metronome. -Length: is the amount of beats that a movement lasts (example: walking forward in four beats or „counts‟, if you prefer…). When dancing rhythmically, it is always dependant of the tempo. When dancing without rhythm we can measure length in seconds (the chronologic units) which is the same as having Tempo=60.

13

-Phrasing: organizing movements into choreographic fragments that have unity and the feeling of a beginning and an ending. So, all your „BODY and SPACE puzzle pieces‟ can be manipulated in terms of their timing. We can give as many lengths as we decide to one same movement and create different movement qualities. We can vary the tempo, and by doing so, decrease or increase the speed throughout the whole choreography. We can organize our dance in phrases, according to a rhythmicmusical feeling, and make it match to a corresponding musical piece. TIME category allows us to modify movement, creating new shapes and qualities that enrich the shades of our choreography. Like in a deck of cards, in this group of puzzle pieces there‟s a special one between those we already mentioned (some people consider it as belonging to the time category): The Pause: (there‟s not much to say, but anyway…) quietness or stillness. It has a length and is part of choreography as well. We can create contrasts by the use of the pause. Seems evident… but it is not. It is another piece to work with. How to proceed: If you want to try dance composition using this method, start improvising and generating small movements according to BODY, SPACE and TIME. After you feel you have enough starting material, begin mixing the pieces as you prefer. For example you take a movement of the arms, followed by a diagonal path, a turn and a pause. You adapt this sequence to a rhythmical phrase of, for example, eight counts, and there you are on your way… That‟s it. You can go on and on. The game is endless. Create as many choreographic fragments as you wish, or need, and start thinking about your dramatic structure. Go and read our movement dramaturgy page if you want to know more about that subject. Now you know how to easily create choreography for one dancer. If you want to convert your basic dance into choreography for two or more dancers, continue reading. SOME OF THE COMPONENTS OF CHOREOGRAPHY FOR GROUPS: 1. Space distribution: creating geometric patterns (circles, triangles, lines, half circles…) symmetries and asymmetries, irregular shapes… 14

2. Time variations: unison (everybody at the same time), canon (beginning a same phrase in different but regular moments of the counting), dialogs (a dancer or a group of dancers moves while the other is in pause; they switch the situation several times), counterpoint (each dancer or group of dancers performs a different choreographic fragment at the same time)… 3. Ensemble types: duo, trio, quartet, etc., … soloist-group, … Now, if you go and observe any choreography, you‟ll see how it‟s easy to recognize some of the dance composition components mentioned above. For the case of your own practice, just take your time to experience with each one of them with a basic dance material you create before. You know artists create freely and it‟s not really appropriate to say that a dance composition method is better than another. The tools described above are just an option, for the case you want to deepen your understanding of choreography or are in the search for new alternatives. Still, consider the following methodological aspects as possible issues for future experiences: - As a choreographer you can create the dance and ask the dancers to copy it, but you can also propose starting points, sources, ideas or structures from which the dancers generate the basic movements themselves. This method expands creative possibilities by integrating the whole group in the stage of proposing ideas. - You can work in an intuitive way, without analyzing what you are creating. Though, using the intellect (and conceptual elements for dance composition, like the ones described in this page) to observe or create your choreography, allows you to have another degree of consciousness about what you are doing; by that it can contribute to the whole process with alternative ideas or issues. - Using dramatic texts, music, images or themes as the source of inspiration to generate movement is a common and valid strategy. Just remember that movement itself and its components can be the source of choreography. Dance is an autonomous art and it doesn‟t necessarily need a dramatic structure or inspiration coming from another aesthetical language. - There are two common trends in contemporary dance composition: individual creation and collective creation. Be a choreographer that makes all the decisions is practical. For 15

some cases it is just the only viable way. Though, the practice of collective dance composition has proven to be an interesting experience, as much from the artistic perspective as from the social one. - And last but not least… your personal aesthetical judgment is an allied but it doesn‟t have to be the only ruler of the game. Remember that contemporary dance history considers Merce Cunningham as one of its most important figures. Somehow this is because he was radical with his dance composition method, to the point of leaving the final decisions of his choreographies to chance (he used dice to arrange the form of his pieces)… So, just to keep in mind: dance composition is like a game, an experience to go through and enjoy; it is impossible to please all aesthetical judgments of an audience anyway (including yours), so take that point easy…. We‟d rather be in the studio, talking about all these dance composition ideas with real dancing examples. As we find each other so far away, let‟s say that this is a good alternative for the moment. IMPROVISATION AS A VALUE SHIFT IN CONTEMPORARY DANCE (CONJECTURE 5.0) Kristian Larsen Last year I went to see a contemporary dance performance. At the end of the show a colleague of mine leaned over to me and said, “I hate knowing how this stuff works”. The comment had not been aimed at the show. But rather it expressed a sense of being tired of not being surprised or satisfied when watching dance. I felt a similar sentiment. I have no pretensions of being a master of choreography but I do know enough about it to have a clear sense of what I find dissatisfying. Where I had gotten to as a practitioner was the equivalent of being stuck on an intellectual island in the middle of an ocean of dissatisfaction, surrounded by sharks of critique and living on a diet of sour grapes. I was very close to abandoning dance as a worthwhile pursuit. I thought I‟d do one more thing before I let it go and that was to attend a workshop with a teacher that friends had recommended. Predictably, as these things go, the experience was a revelation and I made a conscious decision to take a very specific direction in contemporary dance. The decision I made was to specialize in the practice of performance improvisation. The decision itself did not come about from a rejection of standard dance practices, which as a choreographer I had burnt a lot of energy up on doing. It came from a genuine discovery of “This is what I really want to do”. It also embraced the notion that in order to improvise well, a 16

high level of understanding of dance technique and choreographic practice was required. Generally in set choreography the aim is to predetermine as many numbers of „knowns‟ as possible so that the work can be repeated. So structures, patterns, sequences of gesture, set time frames and spatial relationships are memorized and preserved. The pattern takes precedence and is faithfully rendered again and again by the dancer‟s bodies. Duration is not negotiable ie: the piece takes the same amount of time to complete each time it is performed. In this formalized mode of composition there are certain advantages. For example complex themes or a singular idea can be explored and worked until a very clear and skilfully rendered composition emerges. There is opportunity in the rehearsal process to make an abundance of versions, rough drafts and mistakes that a paying public will never get to see. This allows the choreographer to choose elements that they like to be included in very precise detail in the work. Thus a degree of control is available. But never enough control for a choreographer to ever be satisfied with what they have made and how the dancers perform it. For the dancer there are advantages such as feeling a sense of challenge and progression in their technical abilities. Dancing the same choreography again and again allows the dancer to deepen sensitivity to timing, develop real understanding of nuance & performance, and is an essential part of becoming an artist in this field. But because dance is still largely a live medium and does not actually have a recording industry to publish or distribute it, the pressure on the dancer and choreographer to reproduce a facsimile of the original is enormous. So is the pressure to create and dance a masterpiece every single time. In the construction, mounting & performance of set choreography there is an establishment of roles. Along with roles comes a structure of status within the group. At an organizational level this has to happen. In order for a group to function it must have a purpose. And someone within that group has to take on the role of embodying that purpose, a leader. It is the leader‟s job to see that the job gets done. That‟s an important role. Often the choreographer will take the highest status within the group because getting the job done IS their role and they created the idea in the first place. There are other tasks that may need doing so other roles may include publicist, rehearsal director, dramaturge, composer etc. Then of course there is the choreography 17

itself. Unless the choreographer is making a solo for themselves to perform then there are dancers involved. The dancer tends to be of a lower status than the choreographer. It‟s the Queen Bee / worker bee model, still widely in use and accepted by most. It gets the job done. For some time now the process of making set choreography in contemporary dance has relied heavily upon the process of improvising. The choreographer will have an idea they want to work with & will then ask their dancers to improvise movement based on that idea. The process is observed and recorded. Then the choreographer will look at the material and take from it what they like. The dancers then learn the movements they originally created through the improvisation. The choreographer will edit, add their own movements & dynamics, re-edit, & set ad infinitum until the piece is performed. So far so good. A lot of interesting material is made and shown from this method. One thing I think is of value is that it gets the choreographer and dancer into some degree of artistic dialogue. A genuine two-way discussion in which gives the dancer some level of input into the artistic process. It‟s a little more satisfying than the more dictatorial “Learn it and shut up” model of making dance. However the downside as any dancer who has tried to reproduce an improvisation from a video will tell you, it‟s an incredibly difficult task, sometimes it‟s impossible. The most problematic question I see with this process is “who takes credit?” It is usually the choreographer who assumes total rights and responsibility for the choreography even when dancers have constructed entire sections of an evening length work. In that instance isn‟t the role of „choreographer„ more accurately described as „director‟? At best the dancers are given some vague mention of thanks in the programme for their „input‟ or „contribution‟. The lack of generosity is appalling. Only once have I ever heard of the dancers being publicly & explicitly credited for their actual role in the creation of a work ie: as choreographers. The physical, emotional, and intellectual energy that goes into the construction of a set choreography is only one half of the actual process. The other half happens onstage. Performance is more than just a „live‟ aspect of a dance piece. It‟s a major reason why a piece gets made in the first place. Once onstage it‟s out of the choreographers hands & belongs entirely to the dancer. The work evolves because the dancer transforms. The dancer transforms because their performance now has context, meaning & relationship. This is what the audience brings to the equation. 18

As previously stated, in set choreography time, space, and relationship is largely predetermined. Choice is very limited. The opportunity to have any real dialogue with another performer or with the music or the light or the space is not really available to any large degree. It is a choice the performer cannot make because reproduction is key. Along with the task of reproduction comes a lot of baggage for the dancer. Mostly this takes the form of variations on perfection fantasies and unrealistic ideologues about our bodies and talents. And God help them if they should have a “bad performance” and fall over on stage. With all of this I perceive a misguided tendency to elevate the product beyond the artist. I am not referring to the “process vs. product” argument. I am referring to the emphasis placed on the ability of the dancer to reproduce steps time and again because primary value is assigned to the choreography, not the dancer. So I posit this: There is no such thing as dance. There is only the dancer. This seems obvious when reflected upon. If there is no dancer there is no choreography to be witnessed in any format. Be it live, dance film, CD or DVD ROM. Without the dancer there is no body for the choreographer to create and form ideas on & no performance. No dancer, no dance. So how does performance improvisation deal with these questions? Mostly through thinking about the dance composition equation differently. I do not see improvisation as an alternative to set choreography. That would be like stating that jazz is an alternative to music, an inherently stupid statement. As a compositional model performance improvisation has both commonalities & differences with its more widely acknowledged cousin. One of the key differences I perceive is that the value system is rearranged. For example the role of choreographer no longer rests on an individual (in an ensemble situation) but rather is extrapolated out to that of a shared responsibility. Typical dance hierarchy with its implications of status has to be relinquished in order for a group to improvise. The value of „acceptance‟ has to be actively used in performance because so many events are out of the individual‟s hands. The lack of control in the way that control is used in constructing set works is one of the most rewarding and terrifying aspects of improvisation. Predetermined responses almost always fail in this realm so a more real kind of communication has to occur. And

19

by „real‟ I mean dynamic in the sense that language, context and meaning change in relationship to each other. Also the process of communication IS the product. There is no separation between these two realities and this is what the audience bears witness to. In an improvised setting the dancer has some very different responsibilities to the dancer in a set piece. And these responsibilities come from one principle: choice. Because there is infinite choice available it is easy to get lost. So certain understandings and skills have to be in place in order for the performer and the performance to survive an audience. The dancer has to make compositional decisions very quickly. So the role of „dancer‟ expands to the role of „composer-in-live-dialogue-withother- artists‟. To do that well the dancer needs to have ability to read what is happening & respond appropriately, to treat memory and forgetting as a process of interpretation & imagination, to have a shared understanding of time/space with the other participants, to edit choices, to make contributions that go beyond personal themes to more universal themes, to relinquish an agenda of control and predetermined ideas, to actively be able to set up circumstances that allow chance/coincidence/the unknown to occur. These skills the dancer needs as well as a thorough physical practice. And I am not referring to a practice based in somatics, but a technical dance practice. Another critical aspect is one of collaboration. In my experience collaboration is intrinsic to the construction of a work. In set choreography the dialogue between artists from different genres begins and ends in rehearsal. Onstage, a predetermined response to music, light etc is the way it functions. Collaboration is often considered a separate technical process rather than a natural given. But if a dance is to escape the bounds of the artists own mind and body then communication with other artists has to occur. When this communication happens in real time ie: live, is when collaboration is at its most vital. In an improvised setting this communication becomes abundantly clear. It is not difficult to work in the medium of dance in isolation, it is impossible. To believe one can create & mount work that is „stand alone dance‟ and have it be a satisfying and worthwhile event is aberrant thinking. I believe it contrary to the integral nature of dance or more broadly, art. This belief is based Photo of Kristian Larsen 11 on the idea that art is an embedded aspect of community with a deeply social function to fulfil. It is therefore a given (in my understanding) that interdisciplinary & collaborative practices are both profoundly important and incredibly ordinary in day to day practice. 20

Collaboration occurs as a “live” element in improvisation. In an ensemble piece everyone is speaking in the language of composition and building the work in a way akin to a conversation. Not all the artists are speaking in the same dialect in these conversations. Often accents are vastly different. But the dancers get to dance their way, the musicians get to play their music their way, and the lighting operators treat the light and space in their way also. At first glance this looks like a formula for a mess. But when all are working from a shared compositional understanding the results are often extraordinary. There are two points about this that I think are key. One is „dialogue‟. In a performance situation dancer and musician can have a meaningful exchange that allows for a full range of response. There can be pauses, dynamic shifts, beginnings and endings, one can lead the other and the lead can shift. But in order for it to work there has to be a strong emphasis on listening. And timing. It‟s a lot like a conversation. This dialogue can and does occur between all participants, dancer and dancer, lighting and musician, musician and space, etc. This is what brings this process to life: autonomy and choice. The ability to respond (ie: responsibility). The other important point is „diversity‟ - diversity of expression, of age, of individual talents and strengths, of perspective and of response. This is how it works in life (biodiversity) and it is diversity that makes improvisation work. All of it working on a common ground of understanding and clarity of purpose. I love the allegory of a band in this instance. Everyone has their own instrument to play in order to get the job done the drummer drums, the guitarist plays their guitar the singer sings and so music gets made. In set choreography a lot of the time everyone is trying to dance the same way as each other, uniformity is given precedence over individuality. The tradition of „unison‟ has a power, which often gets rendered insipid through overuse. It is hard to achieve but it is possible in improvisation. Sometimes it occurs by accident. This brings me to “coincidence‟. I was given a piece of advice about theatrical conventions by a German professor of choreography. I can‟t quote it precisely but he more or less said „you can‟t beat reality‟. He explained that if you are performing a rehearsed choreography and it is interrupted by a „real time „event such as a dog or a child walking on stage then it doesn‟t matter what you are doing, the unexpected event will take precedence in the eye of the audience. That unplanned event has a certain kind of power. It is random, chance, coincidental in its nature. But it only has meaning and power in relationship to a context or another event. Coincidence has an extraordinary 21

potential to provide meaning in a theatrical context. Also in day-to-day life. The mind perceives a coincidental event and does one of two things with it. It either associates a significant amount of meaning to it or dismisses the event as, well, mere coincidence. In improvisation we are looking to set up conditions where coincidence can occur. This is where real discovery and response to those discoveries can occur. Chance and coincidence can transform the banal and abstract into a meaningful and rewarding event to witness. The two models of composition do have a great deal in common. I don‟t see one as inherently superior to the other. They have a lot to offer each other in terms of new and not so new information. One model is tradition. To its own detriment contemporary dance has a tendency to reject its own history. But rejection of prior codes shouldn‟t be mistaken for evolution of the art. Neither should a refusal to examine the structures of relationship within the form. I am not referring to choreographic structures but relationships between people. Contemporary dance is a fine art driven by deeply intellectual concerns. Currently it has its hands tied; it is bound to its own classicism. And no amount of multimedia, text, minimalism, somatic based movement, inclusion of cultural dances (e.g.: Pacific island or Hip Hop etc), dramaturgy, innovative set design, or technology is going but give us anything else but „more and better of the same‟. I believe performance improvisation to be an opportunity, a forum for dialogue and relationship with vast potential to transform the underlying paradigms of thought that propel contemporary dance. It is not a question of form. It is a question of values and of relationship. And most probably it is a question of relinquishing current understanding of status & control within the art.

http://proximity.slightly.net/v_six/v6e3a1.htm

22