3/10/17 december 13.00-15.30
A new series of three sessions start next week. artists from any discipline (performing ans non-performing) are welcome to join us in the search for balancing the groupwork and solowork within improvisation. What makes us a group, how do we perform as a group, how can i go solo within the group, where is my timing, our energy, how does it flow?
all these questions came up in the previous series. Now we want to continue our work.
if you want to know what happened in the previous sessions, read our summary below
Leave a respons if you want to join in.
“There was a sense of Rebellion”
About Can I go solo?
Three sessions have taken place by now.
In these three sessions we worked with actors, musicians, dancers, visual artists.
A lot of questions arose during the work. We wrote them down to share, but we didn’t try to come to a group answer on them. Everyone found their own answers (or not). The ones i write down here are a combination of our shared observations and my personal thoughts on the subject.
Questions written down were:
Observations on GROUP:
We started our research by doing the same thing all together at the same time. There was no audience, everybody was improvising all the time, the whole time. This lead to the following remarks:
Not copying defines the group, but focusing on the same while doing different things.
A group becomes interesting to watch when you can still see the individuals within the group.
Feeling part of the group came with a feeling of organic mood/rhythm/movement.
There was a sense of rebellion, which leads to making small changes to the given group theme: was this impatience or evolution?
The second and third sessions we worked with a more structured way of improvising. There was audience, and the structure meant we started with an empty space, and one by one we would start improvising, up to a maximum of 4 performers. This way we wanted to create more room, time and space for all the elements we encountered in the first session. It gave us the possibility to observe the process more. These are some observations on those sessions.
What makes us a group? The very fact that we are in this room, concentrating on the same work, makes us a group. But then we find there are groups within groups.
The performers are a group, the visual artists are a group, the audience is a group. You can play with this. You can try to diffuse the boundaries between these sub-groups by not acknowledging the difference. If you consider everyone who is physically present as part of the group, then you create a kind of confusion for everyone about the part their taking in the improvisation (e.g. Is there an audience, when you consider the audience a part of the improvisers?)
TRUST was a word that came up more and more; trusting your group members to focus on the same thing as you. Trusting the each other to follow and lead when it feels necessary. But also trusting yourself to change or alter the improvisations form/energy/etc. When you think it necessary.
It appears that often everyone felt the action needed to change, but no one dared taking charge and break or shift the action. So group ca also mean no one dares to take initiative.
Trusting the group gives a natural rhythm to the improvisation.
Waiting long enough to be/ feel like a group seems to be important.
ADDING and BUILDING and DIVERSIFY:
We defined a difference between the several actions you can take as a group;
You can ADD to one another’s action. Meaning a does something, and B steps in and does something to counter it, or support it or, broaden it.
but you can also BUILD. This would mean, A starts with an action, B steps in and does the same, so does C, D, etc. By committing our self to this one action as a group, we narrow down and intensify the action until a climax is reached, after which something new can start to happen.
DIVERSIFYING would mean that every group member has an individual action, but is still very much aware of the actions of all the other performers. So there is still a group work going on, although it is not immediately clear on sight what the group focus is. It’s just the TRUST between all the group members that our mutual focus will keep us together.
On the matter of SOLO:
Does solo work exist within a group? Or is it merely a continuous shifting of focus, between doing the same thing, to everybody doing something individual to one person doing something different from the rest, with all the group giving their attention?
Also solo moments can work as a tool for changing the group energy ans rhythm. It bends/breaks/shifts the ongoing flow.
Solo can be:
a new starting point
the shifting of focusing
breaking the energy.
In the first session the performing group seemed to be a more dominant subgroup within the group. Fast decision making, feedback, action, leading. Whereas the non-performing artists seemed more observant, following, silent. After talking about this the next session, there was more room for different kind of impulses and initiative. More visual actions, more awareness of space, colour, sound. And a greater sense of freedom by everyone to bring in any impulse or action you wanted. This freedom led to a beautiful series of moments where performance, colour, sound and spacing came together. This freedom seemed to give us more sensitivity for each others’ impulses and more possibilities to explore new grounds.
The last two sessions we have been working on shifting focus in groupwork and solowork. And a lot of new ideas, concepts and questions arose.
We have been focussing on:
It has been an exciting journey up till now. During the last two sessions we found a way to shift from group to one or none, endings becoming new startingpoints, individuals becoming a group, doing the same thing, doing different things but still remaining a group, then becoming a group of soloists, evolving into a solo of blue squares.
Next week we want to go deeper into themes like
waiting/ strechting time/timing. Adding to eachothers ideas/building on eachothers input/taking time and space/giving time and space.
Sounds interesting? Come and join us next week to share our research. Let us know through the posts, or email me at email@example.com.
We start at 13.00 and work till 15.30.
For more info on the Carpet Sessions: What are the Carpet Sessions? / Where is the studio?
Zwaan and me, summarized the second session on identity from Thursday 24th.
For those who would be interested to read what we did, please find our text below.
See you soon!
Nadine & Zwaan
We started the second session with a talk in a “circle”. Our aim was to create an atmosphere in which everyone could give their input and relate our questions to his/her own research.
Through this approach many new intriguing questions arose involving themes that could be further investigated by one’s self or in future carpet sessions.
In this second challenging session we worked on identity in improvisation, bringing the factor of the audience in the equation.
We stuck with the first session structure of giving the task of the impro, performing and then talking as well as taking notes with the feedback.
Here are the research challenges we explored together with the group:
We started with an impro exploring the traces we leave in space. Imagining that our bodies, on a energetic, molecular, physical and many more levels, left traces in space. The impro developed connections between the traces in space, creating different dynamics and new relationships between performers in space and their movements.
This impro was challenging for some as it was difficult to connect, to get a sense of a whole, of a connected group.
For others the shape of the room influenced much their explorations (drawn to the door).
Third got inspired by literature they were currently reading on “the other” and what is between people which led back to the traces that are left after us.
The geography of the space changed dramatically. New paths and itineraries were created in the invisible architecture, space embodied in its memory.
A wave of impulses and movements spread between different performers and new spatial relations developed throughout the research.
This task was very challenging and interesting to investigate, as the spatial anchors were not the same for everyone. The free interpretation of the levels of traces you leave in space multiplied the connections and possibilities to play with one another, or by oneself.
The idea of this impro was to enter it having picked a clear identity for yourself (human, natural element, animal etc.). Then, being very conscious of the choice (who you are entering the impro like) and the development of the impro, change into another identity. (three changes maximum; no time limit set) Then meditate on why you changed, what was your inner process etc.
The task turned out to be very inspiring, gave us as observers (from time to time) a magnificent picture. Counter intuitively most of the performers remained with the first picked identities even though it was very hard and some felt very limited by it.
Feedback & questions:
This impro’s idea was that inside the impro the performers have now the opportunity to become observers/audience when they want, and then return to improvising.
Some performers did not leave the space of the improvisation but continued to move while switching between observer and performer. Others made a still while being audience, and third went out of the impro zone.
The performers that chose to be the audience sat on chairs along one of the walls facing the performers. A classical arrangement which was the starting point of our research on audience identity.
In the third audience configuration the observers were standing (we changed the orientation) facing back to the windows.
The audience members would sit in a chessboard like constellation, spread in the space, facing different directions.
In this audience constellation the mixed audience was performer and the performers could have become audience as well. There was a dynamic of action – reaction which could have been developed further between audience and performer that arose in the end of the impro as an initiative form one of the audience members.
What we found interesting is the inner changes one feels being audience in different spatial and physical conditions. The vulnerability, the illusion on the power relation, the mirror effect, the relationships and dynamics, the different points of view on a impro enriched the many aspects of identity in improvisation we researched during our two sessions.
We observed many different phenomena in the interchanging of audience/performer roles. We should bear in mind though, that most of the concepts we became aware of were also influenced by the fact that we are all improvisational performers. So these experiments we made are not representative for any audience.
These two sessions on Identity brought us a very rich palette of deeper understanding, widened awareness and most of all new questions which broadened our vision.
New themes were introduced in both sessions such as:
Thanks to all the inspiring discussions we had with the performers the exchange of ideas we were hoping for not only took place but blew us away in its depths and intriguing elements.
This has been a very existential, fruitful and useful research (we hope for everyone!) that has given us so much to investigate in the future!
Thank you all for your devotion and participation,
See you soon,
Nadine & Zwaan
Zwaan and me, summarized the first session on identity from last Thursday.
For those who would be interested to come to our second session and for all those who could not come, we think this could be useful and interesting to read.
Please find our text below.
Hope to see you on our second session this Thursday!
Nadine & Zwaan
Recap of the first identity Carpet session 17/09/2015
What is Identity?
On 17 September, we (Zwaan de Vries & Nadine Grinberg) lead a session on Identity in the context of improvisation. For those who might be interested in the process we engaged in, or will join us for the second session, we wrote a summary of the research session we led.
Second Session (24/09/2015)
On Thursday 24th we would like to explore Identity by adding the audience point of view and vice versa: the improvisation artist point of view towards ‘the audience’. Does this factor affect your Identity in improvisations?
We will perhaps also review some of the themes we worked on last Thursday.
If you have any suggestions, we would love to hear them.
You are more than welcome to come to our second session if these questions intrigue you as well!
See you in the studio!
Zwaan & Nadine
First Session Introduction
We began by introducing ourselves, our relation to the topic and how we got into researching it. One important point was defining the concept of identity from our point of view, as we used it throughout the whole session.
For us, identity is not stable, very complex and multiple. Tightly linked with western psychology and philosophy, identity evokes the ego, the Self, the dualism body/mind, cultural and sociological context as well as many other vast entities.
Meditating on identity as artists is a fruitful and engaging practice, as art is created directly from one’s self and therefore its shape and dynamics are unique.
Gaining consciousness of the inner processes involved and the build in mechanisms of our body and mind, can open many new paths of exploration of the self and of the group in a improvisation.
About the session structure
Our session was structured by several research impros in which we identified different elements and phenomena and their impact on the concept of identity. After each task, we spoke about what each experienced, gathered feedback and newly formulated questions. The outcome was very different for each of the participants which enriched the session and the exploration of this complex research..
Time/ speed research:
Feedback & questions that arose:
Risk factor research theme
Getting out of your comfort zone, being bombarded with questions. Some of which concerning risk taking in an impro (ex: is it dangerous to be in the center of the space?), the theme of belonging (are you afraid to be left out?), and other questions with no relation to the impro (do you like your feet?).
This frame gave space to everyone to interpret the task their own way, either answer to the questions or stick with only one, or ignore them all.
The task involved inner flexibility of an ever changing state of mind. Building a coping mechanism, but also reflecting actively on your state in such an environment.
Say it all research theme
Feedback & challenges:
Switch of identities
We began being interested into melting into new identities and exploring the possibilities of become someone else of the research group. This new idea was suggested by the participants.
New task about switching identities – imitating another performer, being him/her. As we had now already enough observation about how the others move, what their energy is and so on, we were able to investigate the inner and outer metamorphosis between identities. (an exercise we will develop in the second session as well)
Feedback & challenges & questions:
On leading the session:
Zwaan: Observing, as well as being part of the Improvisations myself, was hard to get in line with the talks and readings we did on this subject in our preparation. To see and experience, how rich the outcome was from the different perspectives on the floor was overwhelming.
I found it rather difficult not to be the ‘leader’ with assumed responsibilities for the well-being of the group, but instead being the co-initiator for research. That last identity needed time to get used to, because it felt strange and ‘irresponsible’ not being the one who makes the others happy. I often had to force myself to go back to the question, ‘What actually do I want, from the point of view on your own projects? Well, I know this conflict very good and is often an item in my improvisations, if not a life-theme. After all I can say that I met that tension between identities in a challenging and confronting way. That was a good experience.
Nadine: After long discussions and reflections on the philosophical, psychological, social, cultural and other aspects of Identity, we prepared a serie of research themes that would put in light different phenomena occurring in the relation improvisation – identity. Which would give us insight on this broad research and will help us contextualize it in the improvisation frame.
Personally I experienced the complexity of leading such a philosophical/psychological session, as the only tool we had were the questions we prepared, fruits from our long discussions and speculations on the theme of Identity. The role then of a leader in a research session resides in the power of the questions and premeditated outcomes.
I was very happy about all the interesting topics that arose from the questions we confronted the performers with. I came out of the session with a lot of new ramifications and enriching insights from the performers reasoning and active participation in the research.
I (Esther Eij) want to invite artists from all kinds of artdisciplines (performing and non-performing!) to join me in a 6 session research on the balance between groupwork and individuality.
WHEN: 1, 8, 15 oct. + 3, 10, 17 dec. 2015 between 13.00-15.30
Each cycle of three will end with an open session in wich we share our findings with others.
WHAT: In group improvisation there is always a balance to be found between the group and it’s individual members. This makes group improvisation an exciting way to research the role of the individual in the process of the group.
In the sessions I want to focus on the questions:
Themes that we will focus on are e.g.:
initiating, waiting, timing
taking and giving space, time, attention, focus.
solo work- group work
WHO: To research this, I would like to work with a group of artists from different disciplines, performing and non-performing! The mix between artists who more often work alone (e.g. visual artists, writers) and performers who mostly work in relation to others (e.g. musicians, dancers, actors) will create a rich context to look at both interdisciplinary improvisation principles and your own artistic practice.
HOW: It’s my intention to work with the same group of people for these 6 sessions, so we can find the time to explore and experiment and maybe develop a way of working that helps us use our individual qualities during group work.
Please announce yourself if you would like to join in by writing a comment to this blogpost (below) or emailing me directly firstname.lastname@example.org.
Participants contribute between 5-10 euro p.p. per session as a Carpet donation for helping to keep the studio open all year for improvisation research. For more info on the Carpet Sessions: What are the Carpet Sessions? / Where is the studio?
I come from a theatre background, teaching, directing, performing. More and more i started to focus my work on how we communicate with one another, how we interact, and how we experience ourselves and the ones around us. I call this:Practising Communication. Under that name I organise different forms of conversations,Socratic Dialogues, training- and improvisationsessions, performances in daily live.
Hope to see you in october. And please share this invite!
This is an early announcement and call for participants for a research project I will be doing in January/February 2013, focusing on structured group improvisation. This project is part of my studies’ research on composing for interdisciplinary, collaborative improvisation groups, and it combines the composition of scores with composing in the moment through improvisation.
WHEN: This research project will happen in 3 sessions: 17th and 24th of January, and 7th of February 2013, from 13:00 to 17:00. Please note that the sessions are sequential, which means you need to commit to attending all three of them.
WHAT’S GOING TO HAPPEN: In these sessions, we’ll be exploring in detail just how a pre-fabricated score or set of rules can be used as a starting point for group improvisation and collaborative composition, as well as a tool for achieving connectedness between the improvisers. It is already stated in this blog’s Knowledge Base that “crisp and open interaction does not happen without a shared, transparent context,” and that “the more you have a clear picture of the context you are in, […] the more connected you will feel” with the other performers. My wish is to explore how could a score provide this very transparency and clarity of context for interaction to happen; in other words, how can a score, that is composed especially for improvisers, be designed in such a way that it conditions interaction and expression, and could become a helpful support for the sought-after precision, control and focus within an improvisation context. Can a score solve problems of performance, while subtly adding to the complexity of the improvising moment?
As a classically trained composer myself, I’m also interested in how does the role of the composer change within such a context and when facing these questions. I don’t have a particular vision or idea about what the final “product” of the sessions will be. All I know is that we will use a score as a starting point for experimentation and discussion, and that while tackling the aforementioned questions (and others that will come up during the process) a performative event will emerge out of our sessions. On the last day of the sessions we’ll be doing an informal sharing, where we’ll invite a group of friends and colleagues to come and watch, give us feedback, and discuss about our findings and process.
WHO: I encourage experienced improvisers and performers from any artistic background to sign up. As I already mentioned, it’s required that the participants commit to all 3 sessions; unfortunately I deem this necessary, because the work will be created in collaboration with the group, and it will grow based on our day-to-day work throughout the three sessions.
If you are interested please let me know by the 20th of December, so that I can then organise the group and prepare the score accordingly. You can sign up to the sessions by posting a comment below this post.
Also note that the sessions will be documented in video and audio, for archiving and research purposes. The plan is then to create a small documentary of the sessions, to be posted online as a research film and also accompany my thesis. (We’re looking for two cameramen! Let me know if you know someone.)
Normally participants of the Carpet Sessions are asked to donate a small amount, so that the rent of the studio can be covered. However, I’m looking for some funding at the moment, so maybe this cost could be paid for you. (I will keep you posted.) You can find more about the Carpet Sessions (info, address, etc) here.
This message is an early invitation to the sessions, so some things might change on the way! More info will follow in December, about the details of the research questions, the score, the group formation etc. Looking forward to your messages and participation!
ABOUT ME: I’m Kiriakos Spirou, a composer and pianist from Cyprus, currently studying Music Design at the Utrecht School for the Arts, while also doing research at Bournemouth University in the UK. You can find out more about me and my work on my blog. You can also stalk me on Facebook/kiriakos.spirou. I’d be happy to answer any questions you might have via email@example.com, or in the comments below.