Study Lab Report – Freiburg International Contact Improvisation Festival
3-day Pre-Festival Teachers’ Meeting – 1.8.08 to 4.8.08

Study Lab : Improvising Contact Improvisation

Although contact improvisation is improvisational in nature, when one acquires more skills and experience then what I have experienced myself, and think I have seen in others, is that it is easy to slip into a dance of exercising codified skills (like the rolling point of contact or alternating weight exchange) rather than truly improvising. It is paradoxical that the beginner figuring the form out for the first time is possibly more likely to be actually improvising than the more experienced dancer. 

My proposal is to explore what I call “restricted choice scores”. The idea is to interrupt habitual patterns and pathways by restricting the choices available to the dancers. By doing so, the intention is to awaken in the seasoned CI dancer a truly improvisational moment-by-moment problem solving mode of dancing, and hence a state of mind, more akin to that of the beginner. My intention in the lab is to show a few things that we do already as teachers that fit into this category, to show one simple score that I work with as a further example, and then to work in small groups to research and create more.

Everyone knows the first two exercises that I propose as a way of warming up into dancing together – they are classic contact exercises:

1. Small dance – this simple practice of standing that has been a core preparatory exercise in CI since the very beginning of the form – the practise is simply to stand in as relaxed a way as possible without falling over and observe what the body does in standing – to consciously observe all the small reflex actions that normally occur unconsciously – we can also observe the effects of various images on the body – for example, imagining walking (about 5 mins)

2. Head to head – two people stand opposite each other tracking their own small dances – they then lean their heads together so they are sharing a little weight, their centres falling towards each other, reaching a little into the point of contact and playing with the possibility of extending between where they touch the floor and the point of contact – at first they listen to the new small dance that is created by joining together while maintaining the position – next they begin to move to seek easier alignment, as they each correct their alignment the point of contact rolls and the whole system begins to move, paradoxically, as a result of each partners search for a still place to rest – now the partners can also ask questions and make suggestions of each other through the touch and their movement (about 10 mins)

I point out that head-to-head is itself a “restricted choice score”. And one which I like to return to to explore and through doing that realise that there is an enormous range of possibilities that it offers. In returning to it, I often sense the possibility that something new might reveal itself, and sometimes it does. In discussing this, many in the group have similar experiences.

I propose a very simple score which is an extension of head-to head – horizontal weight sharing – it’s an exercise that we all know in offering it to beginners but most hadn’t considered as a score for a dance for experienced dancers. I offer this an example of a restricted choice score and also as a way to continue coming into dancing with each other.

3. Horizontal weight sharing score – beginning with head to head, the point of contact is free to travel to any surface of the body so long as the weight sharing remains horizontal – point of contact can roll or slide or jump (20 mins)

By taking away the possibility to give weight onto a partner (from above) or to offer support (from below), but instead to rely only on giving weight into a partner (from the side), many pathways and qualities can be explored that might otherwise be missed in our habitual readiness to employ more “advanced” skills. 

The kinds of things that came to the foreground of our attention in this dance included: 

▪the possibilities to play with varying the amount of weight in the touch

▪taking the head down and the tail up leads to the possibility of pivoting around the point of contact

▪the possibilities to play with proximal and distal points of contact

▪the possibilities of falling and rising together

▪many moments of feeling the potency of our habitual pathways to bring weight over/support under our partner

▪some moments of noticing possible new pathways to bring weight over/support under our partner

▪fuller use and exploration of sliding and jumping points of contact

One further point that I notice and others concur with is that in exploring this score one drops into a certain state of mind which could be described as being “improvisational” in the sense of being ready and open to deal with the unexpected.

4. We split into groups of three to work for 45 minutes on exploring and devising more restricted choice scores – the working was extended by agreement to 60 minutes

We met back in a group to share what we had found. We didn’t have enough time to show the scores since while working the groups wanted more time to explore. Instead, we just went around and described what we had been working on. What follows is are the noted that I made gathered from the research of all of the groups:

▪horizontal weight sharing but only looking at the floor or only looking into space

▪no use of arms – only horizontal weight sharing – alternating one on top and one below

▪both not extending the hip joint – looking for the tail

▪both only taking the weight through one leg/foot – also one foot NOT touching the floor

▪“one out breath one intention”

▪head to head into horizontal weight sharing with one hand always attached

▪trio – one down close to the floor and the other two standing up

▪hands and arms connecting to the centre

▪light touch only – rolling and sliding – no jumping

People were happy with what they had found and nearly everyone had their notebooks out at the end. There was a feeling that we had between us generated a lot of material that we could take away and investigate further. We also discussed a little the wider concept of “ restricted choice scores” and their use in teaching – that they can be used in a very directed way by carefully setting the parameters and yet are open for the dancers to have an experience of genuine exploration.

I finally was asked to very briefly show my favourite restricted choice score of all the ones that I have figured out. I had mentioned at the beginning that there was a very simple score that I had discovered that I found very interesting to work with. 

It is to dance with neither horizontal nor vertical weight sharing – sometimes we might pass momentarily through horizontal weight sharing but we never rest there – vertical weight sharing can be avoided altogether. 

I like this score very much since the weight moves back and forth but again the familiar pathways up into lifts are avoided and new possibilities reveal themselves. It’s also quite dynamic and for myself a lot more reflex movement is stimulated.

Further stages that would have been nice to explore would have been to have time to work in this group with some of the restricted choice scores that others had investigated. A further stage that I am particularly interested in would be to return to open dancing after exploring some of these restricted scores to see what effect it has – to test whether in fact our dancing becomes more improvisational as a result – to see if it’s not just new patterns that are revealed but also a more explorative state of mind.