How and what are extremely important to dance for many reasons. I'm going to focus on two important uses: specific movements and communication.
When learning choreography, it is important to understand the distinction between how a movement is done and what movement you are doing. This seems overly simple at first. But as the process continues and movements inevitably change, it is important to recognize when a movement itself changes and when how is movement is done has changed. As a dancer it is important to recognize this because it improves your ability to embody the movement as the choreographer envisions it. We've all been in a situation where a particular movement become very hard because it has evolved over time as the piece takes shape. It is in this situation where you must decide if the movement has changed (whereby you must realize that the movement has a new initiation, a new center of gravity, and a new transition into the following movement) or if the way in which you do the movement has changed (in which case you must simply alter the execution).
As for communication, the relationship between choreographer and dancer becomes much simpler when the choreographer plainly states that they would like to alter the how of a movement or change the movement altogether. This feeds directly into the dancer's abilities outlined above. If you, as a choreographer, clearly state your intention, then half the battle is won for the dancer and you are that much closer to bringing your vision to life and not a subpar version of almost your vision.
5 comments:
You are right with the thought that How and Why seem so simple, until you really get thinking about the many aspects of both How and What!
In regards to specific movements and communication my own How and What are lacking, I do believe! I think it can be kind of hard as a choreographer or teacher (maybe you have found this, but maybe not?) to communicate in a way that reaches everyone, since everyone comprehends your words differently. It's both interesting (in situations where time isn't important) and/or semi-frustrating to have to give each student in a class or dancer in a rehearsal a separate translation of what you want/mean/need. Or... maybe that's because not everyone speaks Kim, which I realize. I have issues sometimes when I can't find a simple/concise way to ask for what I want, sometimes there are too many layers/motives/meanings that are all coming into play.
Funny from a taking-class standpoint I appreciate simple directions and corrections and knowing just what I am supposed to do... BUT it is kind of fun to be vague as a choreographer, since I can see what people bring to the table when they aren't sure what they are 'supposed' to do... also fun to see those uncomfortable individuals get frustrated in having to come up with something, when they would rather just do what they are told.
ramble ramble ramble.
challenge. is there a how or what in this response? haha.
To your challenge question: yes! There is always a how and what in communication. Rhetoric is precisely how we communicate what we are communicating. Word choice, sentence structure, spacing, etc., all have a part to play in verbal (term used loosely) rhetoric.
What I find to be most important as a choreographer and teacher is consistency and confidence. (This being specific to the how/what question). Not everyone speaks Kim but over time, we come to understand what is being said, even if we never learn to speak Kim. I must complement your class last week because I was really able to see strong communication of such ideas, even though the verbiage that was expressed was not terribly different or new.
Most importantly, I got a sense not just of what you wanted in the moment, but how you wanted things done in the future. For example, what you might want us to do is stand in parallel. How you might want us to do that is with our feet beneath our hip bones. Or you might want us to stand with our feet together. Or with our insoles lined beneath our hips, a slightly wider stance. Now, if you wanted to get that specific in class, fantastic. If not, that's fine too. What is important is that last week, you spoke with that kind of clarity more than you have in the past and it was much appreciated.
I would find it very interesting if others appreciated it, did not appreciate it, or simply even noticed the difference.
As to there being too many layers/motives/meanings to communicate, I fully understand this. I have the same problem although I often choose to explain it too fully, effectively wasting rehearsal time. I'm convinced there is a happy medium, but it can only come with practice. I would say that the most necessary things to communicate are the simple things. Start with the precise how/what of the movement itself. Once that has been conveyed to your standard, then begin to introduce the why behind the how/what. Sometimes we as choreographers get in a hurry for our dancers to understand what we are doing. I think it is good for the dancers to begin with some anonymity in what they are doing. Then as the process continues, like a herd of sheep, the choreographer first drives them into a group and finally into a corral.
Hope that makes sense. I've had several of the kids at work chattering and generally causing a ruckus. I would be surprised if I could hold a singular train of thought.
This blog is pretty great because no one ever takes enough time to talk about dance.
That being said, I find your reply to be great and makes enough sense, kids and all. Thanks for the teaching compliment, I'm trying to speak Kim more efficiently/concisely, and I'm glad you noticed. There are so many different ways to do a simple movement that it was interesting to watch some dancers pick up on different notes I gave, and some just gloss over them. (thanks!) It's sometimes hard for me (taking class, not teaching) to focus on moving the way whoever is teaching wants me to move, instead of how I feel like moving... I think what makes the different between someone who is invested in dancing is being professional enough to take those notes, and not just self-gratify (though there's a time and a place...). This response makes me realize even more of how 'how and why' applies to everything, taking class, teaching class, choreography, choreographing, etc etc...
good topic. maybe you should lead your own grapevine!!
i'm not in any mood to punctuate properly/use even average grammar. decode how you see fit.
It's funny that you mentioned focusing on how the teacher wants you to move as opposed to moving how you feel like moving. I have found that in my own development, I have the exact opposite problem. By focusing so hard on what the teacher wants, I forget how good the movement should feel and thus lose the artist inside for the mirror image created outside. But you really hit it on the head when you mentioned a time and a place. It is the balance between the two that should be the goal.
There are two ways that I can think of to guide that balancing act. First is by the type of class. It seems appropriate to me that by attending a company class (for a company you are involved with or not), one should submit themselves to the visual style of the teacher. The same could be said of a specific technique class, as that is the entire purpose of a specific technique. The contrast would be attending a general technique class or a class that is not necessarily directly related to your field but may influence your movement. That is to say a heavy post-modern dancer taking a Balanchine class to gain strength and posture benefits, but not trying to become a ballet dancer.*
Secondly would be by personal decision. This is a bit more tricky grounds, but if you know yourself well enough and possess the professionalism/discipline that is required, you may decide within a class which exercises are best fit to help you gain the technique of the teacher and which will best serve as a workout of sorts. This really comes into play when you have the desire to strengthen one area of your own movement, say the pathways of your arms. Throughout class, you pay very specific attention to your arms and match that to your teacher's bidding with precision. By paying less attention to the rest of your body, it will no doubt be less reflective of the teacher's desire. I would strongly suggest to include said teacher in this decision. Many teachers will not only appreciate the heads up, but will take it unto themselves to correct your arms throughout class while maybe letting other parts slip.
Thank you for the compliments as well. Maybe we should suggest this blog as a potential topic of a grapevine...or not.
*At first, this example may seem to contradict the prior statement, regarding specific technique classes. Even if that same post-modern dancer were to take a Graham class, I think the same decision would be relevant because it is far enough from the field in which that dancer resides that the class only serves to inform, not train. I see this in very simple terms as different specific techniques will teach common positions slightly differently. When taking that class, one should attempt to follow the appropriate direction, but not dwell upon it if it is foreign to their chosen profession. A subtle but important distinction.
Yeah, I think type of class and personal decision are definitely the seesaw we ride.
The dance school I grew up with was grounded in Cecchetti ballet, but at college it was straight up Vaganova, and at first all of the fanciful additions were sort of a shock. I approached it as a challenge, obviously you can't weasel out of ballet requirements as a dance major, so I competed with myself on how accurately I could take on the new style and how quickly I could pick it up. I think this is similar to your footnote... follow it, don't dwell on it. I'm glad I have the experience, but I can say it definitely hasn't changed my own movement style or my choreography... I was able to leave it self-contained in its own little ballet bubble. (Not to say Vaganova ballet isn't good for you, isn't beautiful, etc etc, it just has its own purpose/realm!)
Dance discussion... a good use of a weird work schedule week.
Post a Comment