After focusing on pushing, pulling and folding around the space, we began to experiment with the affects of spirals in partners, in which both of us were constantly spiralling around one another. When spiralling, the tone of my movement dramatically increased as my action became dynamically chaotic, faster-paced and energetic, which completely contrasts against the sustained and controlled quality my movement retained from previous weeks. The idea of constantly spiralling whilst always remaining in contact completely removed my movement from anything habitual, especially when the pace quickened as we both fought to become the under or over dancer. As our movement was constant, there was also a continuous weight exchange between the two of us, allowing us to really listen to one another, release control and shift through the space with ease and fluidity. Continuing on from our research lab last week, spiralling created various ways to not only travel around the space but also through levels quickly and unhabitually, which is something I hope to use in our score.

However the majority of the lesson focused on developing our scores for the open studio on Thursday, modifying our rules only slightly from the previous week before we performed in front of the other group. The set of rules are score followed included:

• To start, each dancer asks an audience member to pick a number between 1 – 10. This number relates to the number of people you must dance with before leaving the space and whether you start on the floor, if its an even number, or on a higher level, if an odd number.
• You can only enter the space after seeing 3 lifts performed
• Whenever transitioning between levels you have to find the most complicated route
• If a duet is left in the space, the others must create a corridor for them to travel down – this can only end after the duet complete 3 lifts
• To end, each dancer must move to sit in the audience leaving either a soloist or a duet in the space, who must decide on an ending position coherently

After performing our score the first time, we were given feedback in order to modify or keep in mind certain aspects of the score before we performed it once more. Overall the audience stated that the idea of chance was both visually and mentally interesting, as many tried to guess the relevance of the numbers. However it was noted that we could have utilised the space more, as most of the action happened upstage away from the audience and therefore as a group we need to be spatially aware when improvising to ensure the entire space is filled. Also when the corridor is created, the two dancers should not rush to perform three lifts but instead enjoy the improvisation, allowing the audience to really engage in the movement happening before other dancers join in. Additionally we need to be careful when trios are created as often one person becomes the under dance taking the weight from the other two dancers instead of creating a constant shift between all three. It is also important to know your role within the trio, in which the third dance does not need to completely take or give her weight onto the other two dancers but instead could simply offer more surfaces or support that might or might not be taken, depending on where the duet takes them.

Performing the score for the second time before the open studio, there was a moment when a duet was performing in the space and before the other dancers could create a corridor coherently, the two dancers had already dispersed, which left some members of the groups confused to carry on or return to the side of the space. Taking this into consideration we decided as a group to be really clear in your conviction to whether or not you are entering the space as well as pay attention to when a corridor is being created.

Open Studio Performance

To start the performance, we participated in a normal jam session as the audience members entered the space. We then started the score as soon as the audience were seated and settled in which all members of the group approached the audience separately and at different times to ask them to pick a number between 1 and 10. Both during the performance and practice, I was given a higher number, which not only meant I was constantly moving in the space, only stepping out and observing once or twice, but also it allowed me to quickly travel between duets, getting the chance to dance with the majority of the group. I also found that performing to an audience, I was able to push the boundaries a lot more and at one point Robyn and I sat in the audience as there was a spare seat before continuing our duet, which was exciting and different to anything we have done in class. Personally I also think I utilised the space a lot more, travelling from upstage to downstage constantly. However as our score primarily surrounded chance, there were not as many chances to create a corridor for the duet in the space, as there were always either three or four people in the space at any one time. If we were to perform the score again, I think we would change the rule involving the corridor to include trios or even if there was a duet and solo in the space so that there were more opportunities to change the dynamics of the space. Overall I enjoyed performing the score and found that I not only shifted between levels with ease but also had the opportunity to give and take the weight of dancers I previously have not improvised with.

We began today’s session by watching back clips from our on-going assessment during Week 7, which included participating and performing in the round-robin formation. I often feel during contact improvisation that the movement feels clumpy, as non-verbally communicating to my partner that she can give me more of her weight or that I can lift her in a certain position is difficult to do. However watching the recording, I found it surprising that the majority of the movement and the way I transitioned between certain lifts or levels with my partner was not only dynamically fluid but also the movement continually developed and grew. I found myself taking my partner’s weight more and becoming the under dancer, which is something I shied away from at the beginning of the semester as I trusted my partner to take my weight more than I trusted myself to take someone else’s weight. I was also surprised at how the lifts were executed and transitioned into our improvisation and although there was diversity between who was being lifted, I want to develop the idea of a continuous weight exchange between my partner and I further in later scores or jam sessions. In terms of improving, I found myself using my arms to direct movement and lean on my partner when transitioning between levels, which is something I had no conscious awareness of doing until watching the recording. I also want to develop new and original surfaces to offer my partner instead of habitually using my back to lift and support my partner’s weight.

After watching the video, we investigated ways to move our pelvis up and through the space rather than across it. To do this, we began lying on the floor and initiating our movement solely by lifting the pelvis, which in turn moved the rest of the body in a different direction. In order to shift through the space, I relied on my feet at first to find a new direction as leading with my pelvis felt awkward and heavy. However thinking about the idea of lifting the pelvis to initiate the movement instead of wanting to move through the space quickly allowed me to explore and become comfortable with this way of moving. In partners, this exercise was then developed further by moving our pelvis on and off another body as they changed positions and levels. At first I struggled to execute my pelvis on and off my partner quickly and fluently as I wasn’t used to leading with this body part when becoming the over dancer. However once I relaxed into solely letting my pelvis take control of the movement, I found it easier to transition on and off of my partner, especially when she was on a lower level. Developing on from this, we began to use our legs to quickly transition on and off of our partner, as they constantly changed positions. I felt more comfortable leading with my legs and landing on my partner was lighter than initiating the movement from my pelvis. However when my partner was on a higher level, I found I utilised my pelvis a lot more in order to reach the desired height with my feet, which in turn made me realise that by using the pelvis I could achieve better contact with my partner and find new ways to transition on and off a surface instead of delicately placing body parts onto it.

Next we experimented with moving along the floor without hooking onto our partner to change direction or to move them across the space, which, although I tend not to do on a lower level, is something I habitually do on a higher level to maintain contact with my partner. During this exercise, I realised that hooking onto my partner can actually stop the natural flow of the movement producing a duet that seems and looks awkward and clumpy. However when it became a conversation between the two, we were able to really listen and feel one another’s movements, finding new ways to initiate this and subsequently fall into transitions. The fluidity of the duet without hooking drastically contrasted against the movement that was initiated by only one person dominantly moving her partner around the space.

The next task focused on pouring our pelvis onto our partner’s back exploring ways to utilise the pelvis more frequently as well as to gain a better understanding of how using the pelvis can provide better support when being lifted. To do this partner A leant over placing her hands on her knees and providing her back as a surface for partner B to pour her pelvis onto in order to lift both her arms and legs away from the floor. Once in this position partner B either rolled up her partner’s back and onto the floor in front of her or continued to pour her weight over her partner in order to reach a handstand position before sliding off her partners back. When providing a surface for my partner, I discovered I needed to get lower in order for her to easily place her pelvis onto my back, which also made it easier for me to support her weight as she lifted her legs off the floor. However when I was being lifted, I found I could pour my pelvis further in order to support my weight independently rather than fully relying on my partner’s support. This also made it easier to transition off my partner without just habitually standing and moving away from her, which is something I tend to do during duet exercises or jam sessions.

Our final task was to devise a contact score in groups to be performed at an open studio event in a week’s time. In order to create our score, we referred to Jamie Stover’s Some Considerations When Structuring an Improvisation, which identified the two ways that a score could differ. Firstly a score could either follow a strong structure that the dancers religiously keep to or the dance itself could influence and change the original score depending on the dancer’s performing. Secondly a score can either be formal enough for the audience to follow and understand the action or completely invisible with no particular purpose or ending. In relation to Stover’s considerations, we also had to decide whether the score include visual markers, how much the dancers needed to rely on the rules and what spatial rhythm structure the score would follow. Following on from our research labs, we wanted to primarily focus on a way to transition between levels fluently and diversely as well as experiment with using different tones and speeds within our score.

So far our score follows these rules, however these will be developed further before our performance:

• To start, each dancer asks an audience member to pick a number between 1 and 10 – if the number is even you start on the floor, and if odd you begin on a higher level
• If you are on a lower level, the movement must be slow, sustained and controlled
• If you are on a high level, the movement must be faster
• Whenever transitioning between levels you have to find the most complicated route
• Everyone brings their own rule to the score which is applied throughout the score but no other member of the group knows
• You must exit the space after dancing with 2 dancers
• You can only enter the space after seeing 3 lifts performed
• If a duet is left in the space, the others create a corridor for them to travel down

Citations

Stover, J. (1989). Some Considerations When Structuring an Improvisation (to be seen by an audience). Contact Quarterly/ Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II, (14)185.

This week, we decided to focus on the question ‘how can we transition between levels without just standing or falling through them?’ as we all agreed that during improvisational tasks or jam sessions, we tend to just stand from the floor if we feel like we have spent the majority of the time on a lower level instead of finding a way to transition between them. In order to explore and answer this, we focused on three different tasks that included:

• Keeping different body parts in contact while moving through different levels
• Responding to a time limit
• Figuring out the most complicated way to get from one level to the next.

Firstly we began by facing one another in partners keeping certain body parts in constant contact. Starting from the floor, we explored ways to lift ourselves by keeping our knees in contact in which rising to a higher level was easier as we were able to resist one another’s weight to pull ourselves up without losing contact. However from standing we found it difficult to lower to the floor without just falling or pulling one another to the ground. I also found I was still just standing to shift between levels, even though there was a sense of resistance between my partner and I, and when we tried to stand without this, only partner A was able to transition to a higher level by placing her weight onto her partner’s knees while she remained on a lower level. We decided that keeping our knees together restricted how we manoeuvred around the space making it difficult to transition through levels fluidly and coherently without someone dominantly pushing or pulling their partner to stand. In order to further explore this idea of facing one another, we decided to investigate how keeping our stomachs together would affect our movement. Originally before we did the task, we agreed that it would be easier to transition between levels as the partner’s connection allowed movement in their arms and legs to provide stability and mobility to move through the space as well as through different levels. However when we practically explored this, it was challenging to lift off the floor as we were both pushing against one another’s centres so much so that there was no where to move accept changing who was the over or under dancer. There was a moment where I was in table top position but my stomach was facing outwards instead of towards the ground, and my partner was resting on top of me in order to keep our stomach to stomach contact but as I couldn’t provide a stable base for her to give me her weight we immediately fell out of this position and onto the floor. We soon realised that to be able to transition between levels with ease, we had to provide our partner with a stable base to give and take weight in order to lift off from the floor and vice versa.

Therefore we began to explore shifting through levels either by facing the same way (stomach to back connection) or facing away from one another (back to back connection) to see how this would affect our movement quality or whether it was easier to transition through the space compared to facing one another. By facing the same way, partner A was able to provide a stable base using her back so that her partner could give her weight confidently and shift through levels much more fluently and easily. This was also enhanced as both partners were able to use their arms and legs to not only support their own weight but also their partner’s weight relying on one another’s movement to travel around the space as well as through various levels. Although I felt comfortable giving or taking my partner’s weight fully, keeping in contact this way, and was able to discover new ways to manoeuvre through this connection, I felt it was something I find myself habitually doing in jam sessions as it’s an easy way to provide a base for the person I’m improvising with. Whereas when we were facing away from one another, I felt more vulnerable and uneasy giving my partner my weight at first, as when I leaned over her back I was worried I’d carry on moving over her body and therefore found it difficult to relax my head and shoulders. However once we had explored numerous ways to shift between levels back-to-back, the movement became a lot more fluid as we began to trust one another’s strength enabling us to effortlessly change who was the under or over dancer as we were both able to provide a stable base for our partner.

Finally we explored ways to shift through levels keeping our heads in contact. All members of the group stated that they preferred this connection over the other body parts as the rest of the body was free to move and support one another, enabling the duo to find different ways to lift or fall through various levels as well as travel around the space with ease. Although maintaining head to head contact was easier, I still felt at times I was just standing to get to a higher level instead of listening or reacting to where my partner was moving to or from, whereas with the back-to-back or stomach-to-back connection I had to give or take weight in order to shift fluently through the space.

Developing on from this, we decided to explore how responding to given instructions, such as the body part to keep in contact and the direction to travel in, would affect the way we transitioned through levels and how this would ultimately affect our movement quality. As we were constantly changing the body part, it enabled us to explore new ways to change levels that previously we wouldn’t have thought to use and new ways to support each other’s weight. For example there was one moment where we were instructed to move to the floor keeping our stomachs in contact where I lifted my partner onto her side in order to maintain this connection, which was not only completely out of my comfort zone as I am normally the over dancer but also something I wouldn’t have even thought about trying in improvisational tasks or jam sessions. Although changing which body part to keep in contact felt awkward and clumpy, this exercise enabled me to understand and explore the vast variety of ways I could shift through the space, not only by directing the movement but also by being completely dependent and responding to the way in which my partner moved.

For our second task we incorporated a time limit in which we were given a certain amount of seconds to shift from one level to the next without a specific body part or direction. When we were given a shorter time, like two or three seconds, to change between levels, I found myself rushing to stand or fall so that we reached the desired level in time and reverted back to my habitual ways of moving. However the longer we had to transition between levels, the more creative we became with our movement as we had time to incorporate different levels into our duet before reaching the desired place. This also provided more opportunity to improvise and explore ways to travel around and through the space, developing a sense of open-mindedness when it came to movement and coherent weight exchange between my partner and I. The more we explored transitioning with a longer time limit, the more risks we began to take as a duet, incorporating lifts into how we got up and down in the space.

Keeping that in mind, our final task was focused around finding the most complicated way to transition between levels. Each time we were given a starting position and directed to either travel to a higher level or down to the floor, which allowed us to not only incorporate different body parts to shift between levels but also put emphasis on removing habitual movement patterns by starting in an unusual position. I’ve noticed that during jam sessions, I repeat certain movement that I feel comfortable and confident with, especially if working with a new partner however having a starting position pushed me outside of my comfort zone, allowing me to experiment with how much weight I could give or take in certain positions and where a sense of resistance or balance would take my movement next. The idea of finding the most complicated way focused on lingering in different levels before moving straight up or down in space, promoting a chance to play with gravity and constantly swap between who was the over or under dancer. It made me realise that incorporating levels into contact improvisation doesn’t just mean immediately changing from being on the floor to standing or vice versa but the focus is on the idea of lingering and playing with space and levels and how that affects the movement direction and the relationship between the people dancing.

Although we explored transitioning between levels through various tasks and touched briefly on the questions below, we would investigate and integrate them fully if we were to develop our research lab further:

1. How can we transition through levels instead of using the simplest route?
2. How can lifts be incorporated when travelling through levels?
3. How does facing different directions change the role of the under and over dancer?
4. How does a time limit change the complexity of the movement?

Jam

This weeks jam session focused on blindfolded contact improvisation, which was something I was extremely excited to try. By removing my sight, I heavily relied on hearing for people close to me and sensing if someone was improvising around me. At first moving while blindfolded felt very disorientating as I couldn’t figure out where I was in the space or who was around me. However after a while I began to feel comfortable in my surroundings and confident to take bigger risks when it came to giving or taking other’s weight, even though I couldn’t see who I was improvising with. The fact I didn’t know who I had danced with suggested that no matter who my partner is, there can always be a constant weight exchange, shifting between who is the under or over dancer – which is something I will keep in mind in normal improvisational or jam sessions.

Citation

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

For today’s session the focus was shared between pushing beyond our boundaries and experimenting with more advanced lifts as well as focusing on the fluidity of moving and staying in close contact in a duet or trio. We watched two videos that incorporated both the daring and fluid nature of contact improvisation in which both videos included a man and woman duet. In the first video, Martin and Neige never broke contact once during their duet, constantly alternating between who was the over or under dancer although dominantly the male maintained a more under dancer role supporting and lifting the female dancer. Whereas Mirva and Otto equally distributed weight between one another crossing gender barriers as the female dancer lifted the male numerous times. In both videos, the fluidity and effortless dynamic of the movement was mesmerising as they constantly travelled around the space offering new surfaces for their partners to balance or initiate movement from. The dynamics within these two videos is something I want to strive for over the next couple of weeks with the intent of always offering surfaces for my partner and to experiment with how much weight I can give or support instead of limiting myself.

To begin the session today, we experimented with rolling across the floor in numerous ways, focusing on the idea of reaching across the space with same arm as leg, which in turn moves the torso to initiate the roll. The banana roll was including in this, which began by lying on our backs before moving both arms and legs in the direction of the roll, coming onto that side of the body to create a ‘banana’ shape. As you twist onto your stomach and begin to roll onto the opposite side, the arms and legs extend from the back creating a back bend before returning to the starting position and beginning the sequence again. Another roll included the helix, which also began by lying on our backs with the left arm crossed over the right in front of the face. The left leg crosses over the right initiating the roll, while the left arm still in the same position extends into the space to also assist the momentum to roll. These exercises hinted at the fluidity of using the legs and arms to provide the momentum to roll instead of pushing onto your hands to manoeuvre the body. Both these rolls could be transitioned onto an actual body during contact improvisation allowing the momentum of the roll to take the duet or trio in a completely different direction instead of habitually initiating the roll from the hands to move off or away from your partner statically.

Carrying on with the floor work, partner A lays with her back on the floor while partner B lays across her stomach-to-stomach to create a cross position with the two bodies. Pressing our centres together we were able to sense our partner’s breathing pattern and any slight torso movement in which this discrete movement progressed to the extent of changing who was the over or under dancer so that partner B now lays with her back on the floor ready to repeat the movement. This then developed further by using different body parts of the body to remain in close contact instead of just the stomach with the aim of travelling across to the other side of the space. Keeping in mind, the familiar issues shared in Curtis’s Exposed to Gravity, which touched on the idea of “not giving or taking weight without listening for the agreement of your partner’s body” and to “stay in the present moment as mutual trust is based on uncompromised attention”, I realised the importance of really listening to your partner’s movement, whether they initiated it or not, and how this allows the two bodies to work as one. This therefore creates dynamically fluid and an almost effortless rolling motion. Although it was easy to maintain close contact with my partner, the movement felt clumpy at first as we had to think about how I could become the under dancer from the over dancer without losing the contact of our stomachs and vice versa. Having to keep our stomachs constantly connected, it provided a way to investigate how to move in a completely different way with my partner, rather than falling into habitual patterns. As our confidence grew with the notion of rolling and changing positions from under to over dancer, we began to quicken up the pace of the duet, promoting non-habitual responses as well as creating new movement potential.

Afterwards we were introduced to more advanced lifts than those from last week, starting with a back-to-back lift, in which both partners stand back-to-back while the lifter lowers her pelvis and the lifted lifts her pelvis resting onto her partner’s back. As the lifter leans forward, grabbing her partner’s hip flexors, so much so that her partner is off the floor balancing on the lifter’s back. As the pair returns to standing the lifted becomes the lifter creating a seesaw transition and vice versa. Completing the movement slowly I found it easier to trust my partner to take my weight, especially if I was supported by my partner grabbing my hips rather than holding my hands above my head. I found it difficult to relax my head and shoulders over my partner’s back at first as I was worried I’d carry on moving over her body instead of returning back to standing position. Using my back as a steady base I was able to support and lift a variety of people and by practicing the continuity of the seesaw motion, my partner and I began to give each other much more of our weight making the lift appear effortless and dynamically smooth.

Another lift I enjoyed was where partner A places her hands around and under partner B’s shoulder blades. As both plié, partner B jumps back while partner A supports her partner’s weight, running back as she follows the movement, providing height to her partner’s jump. I found it easy to support my partner’s weight from her shoulders and was able to lift a range of different people as well as those I hadn’t had chance to work with previously. When I was being lifted, I was able to travel across further and jump higher while my partner supported my weight as well as trust anyone to initiate this lift with me. Being both the lifter and the person lifted; there was a sense of ease and comfortability around the group, as the jump reduced the amount of weight given to the partner supporting the movement. I definitely want to experiment with both of these lifts during the jam to not only experience taking and giving my weight to different people but also where the lift is initiated from and to.

Another lift I want to introduce into the jam is the paper clip lift. Facing one another partner A throws her right arm over partner B’s right shoulder so that her armpit is resting on B’s shoulder. As A faces to the side away from her partner, B grabs her waist with her right arm to provide support. A then leans into the movement in which the momentum lifts her feet from the floor as her weight is distributed onto her partner who provides a stable base. I personally think this lift would be easy to initiate in a jam atmosphere by simply placing your arm over your partner’s shoulder or placing your arm around her waist depending on the role you wanted to play. I think it would be interesting to see what possibilities this lift could provide after it has been completed in a duet and how it can be adapted in an improvised setting. I was comfortable being both the lifter and the lifted as the lift focuses on a shift of weight rather than actually carrying someone hence why I was able to support and create the lift with numerous people.

The final lift began like the paper clip lift with partner A throwing her right arm over partner B’s right shoulder, however her pelvis is resting on B’s shoulder as A relaxes her upper body giving her weight into her partner’s back. During this, B plies supporting A’s legs and rises to stand once A is in correct position resting on her shoulder. The height of this lift caused some difficulties as it challenged our ‘safety blankets’ surrounding lifts as we were used to being lifted no higher than the chest. However when the lift was successful, it wasn’t difficult manoeuvring in or out of the lift, it was more to do with the trust between the two people and how much weight the person being lifted would give in order to make it easy to be lifted. Without enough practice, I personally don’t think I would be comfortable in initiating this lift as the fall from this height would be a lot greater than the other lifts we have been introduced to and therefore too much of risk in a relaxed jam setting.

Finally, we ended the session with a duet integrating the lifts we have learnt into the lesson. This then expanded into two duet’s performing in a round-robin formation in which other members would choose when to join to make a trio and then who would leave to create the duet once more and so on. Being the first time we were able to watch others improvise, it was interesting to observe the movement escalate, how lifts were incorporated in and the relationship between all the dancers. When creating an improvised duet, I always try to maintain the bodily-felt relationship between my partner and I to communicate when to give and take weight as well as staying open to possible impulses and where this will take the movement next in which Ptashek in Exposed to Gravity states will create a “playful, energetic and innovative dance”. It was evident that the group had not only become comfortable moving in close contact and able to equally distribute weight between one another but also the confidence had grown as people were pushing the boundaries and testing new lifts even if they didn’t successfully work at first. Personally I felt closer to the videos we watched at the beginning with the fluidity and comfortable nature of the duet from when we were first introduced to contact improvisation in September.

Citations

Curtis, B. (1988). Exposed to Gravity. Contact Quartlerly/Contact Improvisation Sourcebook I. (3)156-163.

Neige Christenson (2009) The Play of Weight. [online video] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltq6y06E8ew [Accessed 13 November 2014].

Omegabranch (2011) Contact Improvisation Mirva Makinen & Otto Akkanen. [online video] Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMLbWxujoGw [Accessed 13 November 2014].

Contact is about communication and sharing and one element we share is playing with the consequences of physical laws.

The focus for today’s session was the exploration of giving and taking weight and how this would enable us to lift our partner during contact improvisation. To begin with, partner A travelled around the space while B lightly traced her movement using her hands, significantly touching the parts of the body that initiated the movement. Developing this, B was told to increase the pressure placed into her partner’s body while A was told to resist this pressure creating moments of counterbalance between the two. When I was resisting my partner’s weight, it allowed me to not only experiment with placing emphasis on body parts I tend not to use during contact such as my lumbar spine but also I became familiar with using this sense of counterbalance to take my movement in a completely different direction to what I had been doing before. B then began to press with other parts of the body, giving more weight into her partner as she travels across the space. When I began to put pressure into my partner using different body parts, I found myself habitually using my upper body such as my shoulders or elbows as I’d become so dependent on my hands to provide that counterbalance. As the task developed I found it easier to use my whole body, experimenting with how much weight I could give my partner when different body parts were in contact. Towards the end of the task, I was a lot more daring and practically gave my entire weight to my partner lifting my limbs off the floor.

The next task experimented with a continuous giving and taking of weight. Partner A remains in table top position while B bends over her partner as a base so the two are back to back. B then tucked one foot underneath her partner to flip round so now B is in table top position and A, who follows the movement, is now pressed into her partner’s back. This followed a continuous motion constantly changing between who was the under or over dancer. While doing this exercise, I kept in mind Woodhull’s Centre of Gravity article in which she states that “when you are rolling on another person you change your body shape, the centre of gravity and point of support change, and you move, not because you have pushed or pulled yourself but simply shifting centre of gravity and allowing gravity to do the rest”. This therefore made me realise that by going with the momentum of the movement instead of resisting the change in gravity, my partner and I were able to move effortlessly and efficiently without causing injury to one another. Also by providing a strong and stable base for one another, this created a sense of trust and comfortability between my partner and I and therefore I was able to give my weight entirely to my partner. Taking her weight while in table top position was also something I felt at ease doing and want to experiment this further by becoming the under dancer to people I tend to be the over dancer with. Experimenting further with this, we played with giving weight to our partner, still in table top position, using different body parts. Primarily we focused on using the pelvis to create moments of balance and transitions which was personally helpful as when I am improvising I tend to give me weight to my partner through my stomach or upper back however I felt comfortable to provide weight through the side of my torso and lower back when experimenting.

The next couple of tasks focused on further exploring counterbalance between partners. Firstly holding one another’s wrists, both partners counterbalance their weight to allow A to pull B into the space causing her to jump through the air to then start again. The emphasis of this task was the importance of maintaining our centres in line, as this would not only allow us to counterbalance one another’s weight efficiently but also make it easier to pull and be pulled through the space, even if you’re not the same height or weight as your partner. In the development of this task, partner A was lowered to the floor still maintaining the counterbalance between her and partner B, to then prepare her to be pulled up vertically and caught. Being partner B, I found it difficult to catch my partner at first as she was resisting the counterbalance and therefore instead of me pulling her up she was simply jumping from the floor. I think the difficulty we faced was the fact we had not worked together before, which made me realise the importance of trusting your partner, whether they were someone you had or hadn’t worked with, as well as the necessity of providing that counterbalance to prevent injury to either you or the person being pulled from the floor. The next task that explored counterbalance was a side lean in which A has their arm around B’s shoulders and B has their arm around their partner’s waist. Partner B then leans away from her partner in which the momentum of the moment pulls A with her so much so that she comes off the floor. This exercise was one I explored with a number of different partners, new and old, and each time the movement was effortless as we gave and took each other’s weight with ease. The simplicity of this lift would make it ideal to further explore in improvisation or jams to not only direct and move your partner around the space but also to experiment with transitioning in and out of the lift itself.

Afterwards we tried some more advance lifts including the cradle in which partner B holds A’s nearest knee up while A has the same arm around B’s shoulders as she jumps into foetal position to be caught and spun around. To develop this, A jumped with her legs and body stretched out with her pelvis twisted into their partner’s chest. The impact of my partner’s weight on my upper body was a lot harder than simply lifting someone in a foetal position and therefore I found it difficult to do at first, worrying in case I dropped my partner or didn’t provide a stable base for her to feel safe or comfortable. The second lift consisted of partner A lowering their pelvis as partner B lifts their pelvis up and onto A leaning into them. Once this position was achieved then the base could support and lift B over her back in which the only points of contact was B’s side pressed into A’s back. B could then use her pelvis to move onto her back and slowly fall off A’s back safely. The challenging aspect of the lift was ensuring both pelvises were in the right place for the lift to work, which depended on the height of both partners. There was also this sense of being unstable when you were lifted as there was only one point of contact and no hands or arms were used to provide a ‘safety blanket’, which is something I find as a habitual necessity when lifting or being lifted. Overall I’ve realised I prefer to be the one lifted, simply because I trust my partner to take my weight more than I trust myself to carry my partner’s weight, especially in more advanced lifts such as these. However I want to work on this, pushing myself to lift others and build my confidence in my ability to do so.

Finally, we completed a short improvisational task starting with partner A lying on their backs and B lying over their torso. After listening to one another’s breathing and feeling small torso movement, this then intensified developing into a duet using the majority of the tasks we had focused on during the session. I was surprised with how easy it was to transition between the individual tasks and the versatility of where and how each lift could be developed and how it could initiate and create movement. However I found at times it was difficult to initiate certain lifts such as the cradle without verbal communication, even if I felt my intensions were clear and strong enough for my partner to understand.

Jam

To start today’s Jam we began pushing our partner’s pelvis around the space, exploring direction, pace and levels. This then developed leading with the hand, then shoulder and then the partner leading the movement became the over dance and explored ways to balance and move over the under dancer and vice versa. In the same partners, we had to fight to either be the under or over dancer which allowed us to explore ways of moving around our partners and initiating the momentum to move. Afterwards we began the jam, focusing on solos, duos and trios. As it was a smaller group this week, I found myself working with the majority of the group, especially those I hadn’t had the chance to work with yet as well as exploring different ways to give and take weight. There were a number of times I initiated people to give me their weight however I again found it difficult to try the more advanced lifts without verbal communication and a mutual understanding between my partner and I.

Citation

Woodhull, A. (1997) Centre of Gravity. In: Contact Quarterly/Contact Improvisation Sourcebook 1(4)43-48