Andrew Morrish
After nearly two decades
of improvisational performing, beginning with Al WunderÌs Theatre of the Ordinary
in 1982, leading on into Trotman and Morrish in 1988 and then adding street
theatre with Strange Trade (1989) and Project Blue (1990) leading to The Urban
Dream Capsule (1996) it is tempting to believe that I might have learnt some
of the rules of improvisation. This is a useful arrogance when I am teaching,
but the truth is that what I have developed is a long series of personal prejudices
about improvisation. I am not sure if these prejudices are of any use to anyone
else, as their coherence (for me) lies in the overall picture they make rather
than in the specifics of any one of them.
Despite this (and why not since paradox is a central quality of improvisation?)
I have decided to put some of this down in writing - stealing freely from things
that I have written in the past.
THE FUNDAMENTALS
Presence
Improvisational performance values a certain quality of presence that the performer
brings to the moment of performance. This is not a metaphysical construct but
a pragmatic necessity. As the performer is in the process of creating a performance
they have to attend to what is happening with a quality that is quite different
to the performer who has knowledge of what is going to happen. Without this
fundamental attention there is no performance.
Openness
The performer has, by holding the performance open to their choice making, stated
that the performance is a forum in which something will really happen. As Peter
Trotman says Ï anything can happen, and something must happen.Ó They have deliberately
decided to not decide until they are in the moment of performance. Once again
this openess is a pragmatic truth rather than a philosophical desire.
Now both of these qualities present a challenge to the conventions of the modern
theatrical tradition which we have inherited. In improvisational performance
practice what are the equivalents of the notions of crafting, polishing and
rehearsal that are the basis of performers having the courage to invite an audience
to see their work? In my view one of the distinctions between using improvisation
generatively in a choreographic process and performing improvisationally are
most evident here. In the first case improvisation is used to find some ÎgoodÌ
material, which can then be polished etc. It is endorsing the product of an
improvisation. In improvisational performance practice the performers ability
to find material is endorsed and it is these skills which form the basis of
becoming an improvisational performer and it is these skills which have to be
honed and refined in the search of satisfying theatrical experiences. Although
I see it happening a lot, I do not believe that improvisation is a short cut
to making a performance. I believe that the hours, weeks and months that are
used to create a choreographed piece are equivalent to years of improvisational
skill development that should be undertaken by the committed improvisational
performer.
The relationship between developing skills (in a workshop, class or ensemble
setting) and actually performing is relatively slight. You cannot ÏpracticeÓ
performing, you have to practice performing by doing it. It is necessary to
perform a great deal, and also to develop skills in a consistent but parallel
way. To this end we should really appreciate the regular forums for improvisational
performance (Conundrum, Melbourne, The Flummery Room, Bristol U.K., Rushing
for the Sloth, Sydney) and recall with deep fondness the Wunderful ÏYear of
FridaysÓ
NOT SO FUNDAMENTAL , BUT
INTERESTING ANYWAY...
The Improvisational Mind
Its a little tricky for me to talk about this because I think the construct
of mind is problematic (as it contributes to the Mind Body split debate) But
lets not dwell on that too long. I think there is an Improvisational State,
or an Improvisational Attitude, and also an Improvisational Space, marked by
presence and openness. It may surprise some who have watched me perform, but
my ÏmindÓ in improvisation is actually very body based, I experience my content
nearly always as movement first, and language second. Language is fantastic
for getting rid of ÏthinkingÓ which is getting in the way of my presence and
openness, its also fantastic for helping the audience to keep up with me, but
the fundamental level of it all is sensation and especially the sensation of
moving which for me often leads to the sensation of emotion or image which then
easily goes to the sensation of speaking.
In addition Peter and I have exhaustively inquired into abstracting our language,
and putting our skills under stress so that we are comfortable with not being
in control of what will be said or what will happen.
Structure
The real role of structure is in training. Clarification of structural aspects
of improvisational performing is a great way to conduct sensible discussion
of improvisation practice. It generates confidence in performers because structure
is always present, and is relatively easy to perceive. It encourages a more
relaxed grip on its sister - CONTENT and thus is supportive of openness. When
used assiduously in training it also points to the skill base that is necessary
for improvisational performing. But in my own work, I train in the use of structure
explicitly and consciously. However I do not find it interesting to perform
in this way. I prefer to have an emergent attitude to structure in performance.
I watch them come rather that bring them up. They also rarely appear in their
pure forms (as they do in training) they nearly always appear as subtle variations
of themselves, which is a source of fascination and pleasure in the performance.
Humour
People often laugh during Trotman and Morrish performances. But are we funny?
I donÌt think Peter and I have tried to be funny for a long time. The laughter
is about things like recognition, sudden twists, strange associations and in
particular the ÏunlikelyÓ nature of Peter and I as performers. It is very common
for improvisation to generate laughter, but I think trying to be funny is not
a useful way to do it.
Vulnerability
I think it is universal and paradoxical that performing is about vulnerability
(its paradoxical because we love performers who look comfortable.) Now in improvisation
the vulnerability is partially about the self revealing aspects that occur because
you have not planned what you will perform. Everything you do says ÏIÌm the
kind of person that chooses to perform like thisÓ So we constantly reveal how
we think, how we feel, what we imagine.
Connectedness
Conventional logic (linear logical connections between related thoughts) is
a highly unnatural process, which is why we spend so much time in school trying
to learn how to do it. It has proved to be extremely useful for things like
building bridges. However associations of more subtle form, such as leaps of
topic, unfinished sentences, cycles of association, patterns of meaning are
much more the way humans really are. It is dangerous to start to want to connect
your material as ÎtryingÌ to connect material is generally tedious to watch.
Connections occur if we let them- so a basic training strategy is to preoccupy
the performers mind with concrete (structural) tasks that will keep them busy
enough to let the connections occur.
Peter Trotman and I went
through a stage of list writing and spontaneous listing that we found very useful.
In conclusion I give you a list we wrote in 1995 when we were anxious about
performing at the Green Mill for the first time and worried that out work might
lack substance!
The Trotman and Morrish Catalogue of Sources:
Improvisational Movement Theatre - Al Wunder/Lynden Nicholls Contact Improvisation
Creative Movement Existential thought Phenomenolgy Gestalt Psychology Object
relations theory Psychoanalytic theory Jungian Psychology Chaos Theory Quantum
Physics Computer terminology Laban Movement Analysis Dance Therapy Neo Reichian
Bio Energetics Science Fiction Crime Fiction
vol 6 ed 1 - ed 2 - ed 3&4 - 2003 vol 5 ed 1 - ed 2 - ed 3 - ed 4 - 2002 vol 4 ed 1 - ed 2 - ed 3 - ed 4 - 2001 vol 3 ed 1 - ed 2 - ed 3 - ed 4 - 2000 vol 2 ed 1 - ed 2 - ed 3 - ed 4 - 1999 vol 1 ed 1 - ed 2 - ed 3 - ed 4 - 1998 |
e m a i l - <Proximity> |