(1) Weekly Blog (this blog was sent 15 minutes after class!)
Today was a great day for me, as you know I was initially very dubious and sceptical as to a lot of the concepts and exercises of 'Improbable', however since attending [Improbable] workshop I have a much better understanding of the concepts particularly in relation to performance, which is why I am so excited for our devised pieces when we will have a chance to put them into practice. I also found today I was for the first time truly involved in the exercises (newspaper/objects), and my energy levels rocketed!
So happy to have gotten over my initial reservations!
Posted by Chloe Gosling
(2) "Awareness"
I found that this lesson was much more useful than the previous lesson. This lesson wasn't as repetitive as the previous one. I found that watching the newspaper exercise being undertaken once was enough, as the object created out of the newspaper was original and wasn't forced. In the previous lesson we all undertook the exercise, which was useful as we were all able to try it out. However, in doing so, ideas were repeated in the fear that the individual's object wouldn't be original or creative enough. This relates to the idea of awareness. You feel aware of the audience and therefore want to create something new and exciting, therefore you focus on dominating the object and making it what you want it to be.
Watching people undertake the same exercise with the baskets was extremely interesting. At first, I didn't think the exercise would work as well as using newspapers, as newspapers can take on any shape, whereas baskets already have a fixed shape. However, the fact that baskets already have a fixed shape worked a lot better; it was so intriguing watching the baskets come to life.
Posted by Charlotte Harvey
(3) Weeks 4 & 5 Blog
Being introduced to puppets in week 4 was something that i really enjoyed. although i thought it was going to be a lot easier than it was! At first i struggled with the idea of not "controlling the paper" as I was eager to create a strange looking puppets that i could walk around with! But i soon realised that the puppets had so much more life if you stopped "controlling" them and let them be what they wanted to be. Likewise, in week 5 i was really glad to continue with the puppetry and I thought that the concept worked even better with the wicker baskets! this is something i would love to work with in my final piece. It was also good to watch the other groups devised pieces and how we all explored the four qualities from nearly completely different perspectives. I am also looking forward to looking into our theme of 'fear' and to get stuck into our devising pieces!
Posted by Emma Bilton
(4) Changing Objects
After last week's lesson I was left feeling a little confused as to the idea of exploring the newspapers. However, this lesson I found it much easier to understand the process and purpose of the newspapers. Using the baskets really helped to clarify the point of the exercise and I found it very interesting to see how the exercise changed due to the definitive shape of the baskets. I particularly enjoyed the group newspaper exercise. I found it much easier to work in ensemble in exploring the newspaper as you didn't feel like any one person was dominating or controlling it. This week's lesson really helped to clarify Improbable use of puppets in their performances and it has left me eager to begin our devised pieces next week.
Posted by Fran Smith
(5) Our Prepared Performance
When we presented our performances at the start of the lesson it was interesting to see the various outcomes of the different groups. Everything from a scene on a bus to a therapy session emerged as a result of the same exercises. Most groups seemed to have used the different qualities as their main inspiration. Our group had started by allocating different qualities to different characters and then simply choosing a location. Originally we chose a broken down lift as our starting point. From this we developed a storyline but the location we had chosen limited our movement and made the performance extremely static. For this reason we moved the location to a kitchen (the night after a busy night out). However our final performance actually used limited movement. We found that early on we were tempted to create a lot of movement, when in fact there was no real need for movement. The performance was just as if not more interesting when we internalised the different qualities. Another thing I noticed was that our performance seemed to change dramatically once we were performing to an audience. In rehearsals we had used far more dialogue whereas in the final performance this seemed un-natural and we left pauses, which brought out more tension than we had been experiencing in the rehearsals. I noticed in the feedback that the audience had seemed to enjoy the fact that we left a lot open for interpretation. There was one comment following another group’s performance that struck me. The group said that each rehearsal of their performance had been unique, i.e. they had found different comic moments emerging from each rehearsal. This interested me because of the way that our piece had changed in the actual performance. In their group one person had always acted as the audience for the group during rehearsals. In future this is something I would be interested in experimenting with. Having seen the freshness of their performance I would like to try rehearsing a performance with at least one person (perhaps who has a creative role) taking on the role of the audience.
Posted by Sylvie Barlow
(6) Blog
The newspaper task definitely go easier with practise, but I still found it hard to acknowledge the audience. At one point I'd spent 10 minutes forming my puppet before I realised I didn't know what it looked like from the front, only from my direction. I also preferred the newspapers to the baskets.
Posted by Emma Berge
(7) Baskets
This week I was incredibly interested in my own response to the different exercises, and the variations on already attempted ones. It was particularly evident for me when I took part in the basket exercise, expecting to find it as difficult as I had the newspaper one the week before. However, this was far from what actually happened. Suddenly, the initial fear and reservations I had about having to make the newspaper into something else was gone, because the object was in front of me fully formed - all that had to happen was for it to gain a character. I found that this exercise was much more reassuring because you could relax into the exercise and enjoy it - there was less pressure to create something new and original. I have gotten a new surge of confidence from this exercise, and am consequently less scared about the final piece! If you can create something great out of four baskets, surely a piece around these themes cant be impossible!
Posted by Emma Fielding
(8) Blog
Last week's class was quite strange to me. As I have been ill the week before that, working with newspaper was a completely new experience to me. To be honest, I find it hard to accept the idea that an object 'decides' how to move and that I am the one that 'only has to follow the material'. When I think of 'not dominating' an object there is no other way for me than to just drop it. Because HOW can I not dominate it?! An object is dead material, therefore it is me who has to do something with it. So I will always be dominating it just by touching or lifting it.
Posted by Mirjam Frank
(9) Blog for Week 5
This week’s lesson proved quite interesting for me, as we developed our work on puppetry into different varieties of mundane objects, as opposed to the use of just newspaper. On using the straw baskets instead, I found it much easier to work with the object and see it come to life. In the group’s post task discussion, I discovered this may be due to the fact that the basket already had a formed shape, therefore eliminating perhaps the most difficult part of the task in its transformation from object to being. Using the basket also felt as though the object was much more willing to cooperate with me as it was not vulnerable to a change in shape, therefore when joining together as one it was simply movement that required concentration while the baskets seemed to fit easily together.However, although this meant that a tendency to dominate the object became less likely, as it appeared more cooperative, a consideration of the elements seemed slightly sacrificed. This was, I felt, because as the object’s shape had been pre-determined, moving with the quality of moulding, for example, was much more difficult as the object wasn’t so malleable. It was, therefore, very important to compensate for this when dealing with the other elements, for example when dealing with the element of floating to consider both gravity and the polarities to maintain the object’s reality.In the lesson, we also experimented with size as the group attempted to make a puppet out of one giant piece of newspaper. This was intriguing as it appeared only to gain life when the number of puppeteers began to decrease, and its peak of life occurring when only three of the original ten puppeteers were left guiding the it.All in all, we learnt some very valuable concepts and ones which I personally am looking forward to taking into our group piece revolving around the stimulating theme of fear.
Posted by Laurence Brasted
(10) Blog for Week 5
(apologies for its lateness!)
In previous classes I had found working with newspaper to make puppets quite hard as I struggled to view the newspaper as an 'equal' on stage, and as an object or performer in its own right. Revisiting the work with newspaper on Monday's lesson at first seemed to me no different, and I still was very sceptical about it. However, as we began developing what we had learnt form the previous classes by using baskets and then a giant piece of newspaper I started to change my mind. Watching other class members use the baskets I was able to really see the puppets, or 'equal' performers, take shape and not focus on those behind the puppets making them move. I think not seeing the process that led up to the creation of the puppets helped as the baskets were already fully formed objects and so it was easier to accept their shape and use the imagination to view them as something other than baskets. I enjoyed the improvisation with baskets as it reminded me of children's TV shows when I was younger that often required imagination to turn everyday objects, such as newspapers or baskets, into performers or characters to tell a story. This brought to me the thought that having a 'childlike' mind and attitude towards this work is helpful as children constantly accept ideas and have an open mind towards offers, and this showed me that my skeptical mind was completely the wrong attitude to have in the class, so hopefully from now on as we begin to work on our final pieces this new attitude will help in the creation and development of the ideas we have as an ensemble.
Posted by Helen Hudson
(11) Creating a final piece
I have found that coming up with ideas for our group piece has been quite a difficult process. Because we have been studying Improbable it's hard not to completely copy all of their ideas and to try and make our piece original whilst sticking to the ideologies of Improbable. Although hard, it has also been quite fun working with my set group.
Posted by Louisa Hagan
Monday, 29 October 2007
IMPROVISATION: WHOSE LINE IS IT ANYWAY!
Genuinely funny improvisations, each actor trusts his mistakes and abuses them delightfully, really funny, enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fVEdJrdFio
Posted by Gemma Moran
Comment: This is very useful! A very good example of effective improvisation (offering and accepting). Thank you Gemma.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fVEdJrdFio
Posted by Gemma Moran
Comment: This is very useful! A very good example of effective improvisation (offering and accepting). Thank you Gemma.
Monday, 22 October 2007
GROUP D'S REFLECTIONS FROM WEEK FOUR
This week we were introduced to the object for the first time, trying to see its significance as a performing entity and as a devising tool within the context of Improbable practice. I'm aware that this concept may not be very familiar to some of you, but which you will hopefully begin to grasp after some practice and experimentation.
Nesreen
(1) "We Got it Wrong? Great!"
In the article 'we've got it wrong, great!' Brain Logon successfully articulates how original, collaborative and reflective Improbable really is. This article particularly concentrates on how difficult it is to improvise and how many actors would dislike and not be able to perform if the play was only 'half formed.' This observation was certainly reassuring as even professionals found spontaneity to be nervous-racking and difficult and to do so should be recognised and applauded. It is also interesting to find that Logon recognised how objects such as their tape made such a unique and interesting concept to the productions. This article helps one is understand how simple materials such as a rough storyline and bland objects can become a challenge to a western actor/ess due to perhaps being in such a consumerist society where such vivid imagination is not always encouraged, and a lot of things are literally told i.e. in most films.
Posted by Olivia Pointing.
(2) Improbable Influence & Short Scene
After working on our short scene in smaller groups, I feel I am beginning to understand why Improbable use certain exercises and games by selected practitioners. Various influences from a range of artists have created many levels to their work making it unique. By experimenting with a mixture of practitioners such as Keith Johnstone, who encompasses a more modern approach to theatre making, in comparison to say Michael Chekhov, you can see how their individual style has been formed. I particularly liked the work we did on atmospheres and qualities which was in the Michael Chekhov reading. We experimented with this in our short scene by each adopting a different quality for our characters. We transformed an ordinary script into something that is more than just 2 dimensional. I feel that this is something to bear in mind with Improbable. There work is not just about one plot or subject, but a whole range of issues which are explored through different mediums. This therefore, leaves an opening (a gap) for the audience to create their own interpretation and meaning.
Posted by Faith Brandon-Blatch
Comment: One of the important things to notice, and which is evident from your post here, is that the best way to understand the work of Improbable is through practice. Which you have experienced yourself through your work on your own piece with your small groups, on which you have applied the concepts you read about and explored in class.
(3) Week Four Blog
Having read the articles for our week 4 reading, I found them all very interesting. The first article – 'Objects in performance' had some very interesting views on what a puppet actually was as well as how in theatre, objects are now just as important as puppets. It mentions how we have to be able to transform the object in order for it to become characterised. You also have to be able to 'feel' the object and understand it, whilst working with it instead of dominating it. In class, it was interesting using newspaper to form our objects. At first it was difficult not to dominate the object and force it into a shape or structure that you wanted it to be. Improbable believe that you need to trust the creative process between yourself and the puppet and not rush it. They also yet again believe that the mistakes that come out of the process of making the object/puppet are the most useful and help them to progress. In class, many of us found it difficult not to copy ideas that we had seen from previous groups. However, in my group I found it very satisfactory working as an ensemble and creating our puppet together. In future lessons I would like to cover the idea of objects in the theatre in more depth as well as work on animating objects and not dominating them.
Posted by Charlotte Harvey
Comment: In order to discover the potential of an object as an expressive, theatrical tool... in order for it to come to life and become transformed on stage, we should try and see it as equal to a human performer. IT IS a puppet AS important as a performer.
(4) Improbable and Puppets
The first visual image I get whenever I think of puppetry is a ‘Punch and Judy’ performance. This may be because this is the form of puppetry I have had the most exposure to and it may also be because I first experienced a ‘Punch and Judy’ performance at a young age. I can see how the approach to puppetry that we explored during last lesson has evolved from the more traditional approaches. But this didn’t prevent me from struggling to achieve the kind of results I was hoping for (practically). I felt as though I was battling against my most natural instincts. For instance I found it difficult to see the newspaper (that I was making a puppet from) as though it had a certain quality. I felt as though I was being asked to see the newspaper as having a will of its own. In the article with Phelim McDermott and Julian Crouch the idea of asking your puppet for help when you are stuck with what to do alarmed me slightly for this reason. I am not saying that I do not think it is possible to create puppets in this way or that it would not achieve results that were fascinating to an audience. I am very curious to the way ‘Improbable’ use puppets. However I found it very difficult to adapt to this approach in one lesson. Overall I feel as though I achieved far better results in the first half of the lesson than the second. I experimented more and didn’t try to mould the newspaper into any pre-conceived shapes. Once I was asked to repeat the exercise and was in front of an audience I was more aware of how the newspaper looked and I fell into the habit of trying to create something that looked interesting. I gained a lot from watching others during the second half of the lesson. Often there would be moments where a puppet would seem to have life. There were a few comic moments where puppets would meet each other for the first time and react in an unexpected way. The exercise was clearly challenging and managing to create moments of life was a success in itself. I think another reason I struggled was that I was trying to re-create other moments of successful performance. I have not formed any strong opinions as to whether or not I like this form of theatre. I would like to re-try some of the exercises we did in class before I form an opinion. The reason is that I haven’t had enough experience of it yet.
Posted by Sylvie Barlow
(5) Puppets and Properties
This week I was really struck by Improbable's belief that all objects on stage are puppets rather than props. On reflection, it seems to be almost obvious that in many plays, the main character is effectively an object, with the main themes of the play being portrayed to the audience through the object. However, I had never really thought about the role of props in plays other than to assist the actors. After this lesson I realised how short-sighted I had been in this respect. I really like the way Improbable use objects in their performances as puppets rather than props, allowing the real significance of these objects to be communicated to the audience. This concept helped us work on our group improvisations, as we were able to use the newspaper puppets to help portray our movement qualities and develop our characters in general, with the newspapers becoming an element of our characters rather than just objects. I haven't had a chance to watch the video yet but I look forward to seeing how Improbable awaken their puppets and use them in performance.
Posted by Fran Smith
(6) The Difficulty of Puppets
I am still unsure about the use of puppets with Improbable. Even though I can see that the end product is clear, and I agree with and understand their idea that every object on stage is a puppet rather than a prop, I find it difficult to understand the process involved. Because I find the spontaneity idea difficult in itself, I think that the idea of doing this with newspaper is something that I haven't grasped properly yet. I am finding it interesting to read about and watch Improbable working with puppets though - I think it is easier to understand when you see their end product, even though so much of the emphasis is on the process. I think that I will find this idea easier to understand and do when I have seen this idea develop more, and seen how it connects into performance, which I have glimpsed within the smaller groups. This is something that I still find very new and challenging, but I am sure that with time and experience I will begin to see the bigger picture, and understand the process more.
Posted by Emma Fielding
(7) Blog
I found this week's lesson quite difficult. Although I try to keep an open mind, I found it really difficult to give a mind to an inanimate object. With the newspaper, I tried to find which folds appeared naturally as I moved it and used those, but otherwise couldn't see how the paper was telling me how it wanted to move. Every time I tried to stop myself imposing my own will upon the paper, I found myself thinking, 'it's only paper. It has no will other than the will I impose'.
Posted by Emma Berge
Comment (for all): Seeing the object as something other than itself, respecting and listening to the material, giving it life without imposing your own will, are all very difficult levels of perception to achieve when working with objects/puppets, and I'm aware that they are new to you. It takes time and a lot of practice to get a real sense of an object and allowing its character and presence to materialize in front of an audience. So don't rush the result and just think of your process of learning and experimenting. Try not to think of the end product or the final image and enjoy it as a 'game'. Improbable believe that playfulness is a great attitude to have when creating... it's actually the 'essence' of creation! Trying out the newspaper exercise for once is far from enough!
Now you find yourself dominating the newspaper, which is a very natural first reaction, but the more you do it, still with an 'open mind', the more the connection between you and the newspaper will happen, and the more the paper's own will will show itself to you. Right now it's not ready to talk yet!
(8) Week Four Blog
Week four's lesson was based around working with objects, specifically newspaper, and creating things with it. I noticed during this lesson, whilst people were working with the newspaper to create something, there was a lot of focus on creating a puppet that had a complete character. Improbable themselves said that when working like this, they may create sections of puppets; arms, legs, torsos, heads etc, rather than creating a full, complete puppet.
I found that people in our class were more concentrating on their puppet becoming a full character, ‘dominating it’ so to speak. Many people created creatures, as if they were animals, and forced animalistic characters on them, rather than letting the newspaper fully evolve into its own life.
This may be due to the fact that we have never done this before, and as human instinct, we like things that are complete and have a nature and purpose, therefore creating half a puppet or something without a complete character would not be satisfying for us. However, during the process in this lesson, many interesting creatures and puppets did evolve.
Posted by Emily Cookson
Comment: You are right. You should try to let go of your own pre-conceptions of things when working with objects. Don't presume a shape for the newspaper before developing a connection with it, or before developing a real sense of its nature and quality as a material. Improbable sometimes uses this exercise with designers and businessmen for that very reason: to help them let go of preconceptions and of predetermining things.
And yes, you all did great trying out the exercise for the first time, and some good images did started to appear.
(9) Puppetry
During Monday's lesson I found creating puppets from newspaper quite hard. Watching the other members of the class creating objects out of newspaper I thought that they made it look quite easy. I did notice that some of the objects different people made were very similar which would suggest a lot of awareness and control in the improvisation. I however found it quite hard to let the newspaper naturally take a form as I didn't want to force the newspaper into an object. I think with more practise the task would become easier.
Posted by Louisa Hagan
(10) Puppets
I found the lesson we just had on puppet making interesting as at firs I was a bit sceptical but ended up quite enjoying it. I found it easier to do at the beginning i think because i had no pre-concieved ideas about what i was doing so it came naturally. But once we started doing it many times and watching everyone i felt that it began to feel a bit forced and therefore less successful. It was also a very draining exercise and i found it hard to focus fully on it for 3 hours.
Posted by Fiona Allison
(11) Blog
Puppetry using stereotypically inanimate objects can always be fun (to a degree). But I'd never thought of using something so ordinary and from everyday like newspaper until '70 Hill Lane'. It is really interesting to see what different things people come up with as many puppets came to life very quickly and many others far more slowly. Our personalities probably define a large amount of what we're going to create in front of us and thus I'm curious to what degree can we see ourselves in what we created in class. The section on puppet interaction i thought was really interesting, the movement and life we had given to our puppets from within ourselves really came through there.
Posted by George Calderwood
Nesreen
(1) "We Got it Wrong? Great!"
In the article 'we've got it wrong, great!' Brain Logon successfully articulates how original, collaborative and reflective Improbable really is. This article particularly concentrates on how difficult it is to improvise and how many actors would dislike and not be able to perform if the play was only 'half formed.' This observation was certainly reassuring as even professionals found spontaneity to be nervous-racking and difficult and to do so should be recognised and applauded. It is also interesting to find that Logon recognised how objects such as their tape made such a unique and interesting concept to the productions. This article helps one is understand how simple materials such as a rough storyline and bland objects can become a challenge to a western actor/ess due to perhaps being in such a consumerist society where such vivid imagination is not always encouraged, and a lot of things are literally told i.e. in most films.
Posted by Olivia Pointing.
(2) Improbable Influence & Short Scene
After working on our short scene in smaller groups, I feel I am beginning to understand why Improbable use certain exercises and games by selected practitioners. Various influences from a range of artists have created many levels to their work making it unique. By experimenting with a mixture of practitioners such as Keith Johnstone, who encompasses a more modern approach to theatre making, in comparison to say Michael Chekhov, you can see how their individual style has been formed. I particularly liked the work we did on atmospheres and qualities which was in the Michael Chekhov reading. We experimented with this in our short scene by each adopting a different quality for our characters. We transformed an ordinary script into something that is more than just 2 dimensional. I feel that this is something to bear in mind with Improbable. There work is not just about one plot or subject, but a whole range of issues which are explored through different mediums. This therefore, leaves an opening (a gap) for the audience to create their own interpretation and meaning.
Posted by Faith Brandon-Blatch
Comment: One of the important things to notice, and which is evident from your post here, is that the best way to understand the work of Improbable is through practice. Which you have experienced yourself through your work on your own piece with your small groups, on which you have applied the concepts you read about and explored in class.
(3) Week Four Blog
Having read the articles for our week 4 reading, I found them all very interesting. The first article – 'Objects in performance' had some very interesting views on what a puppet actually was as well as how in theatre, objects are now just as important as puppets. It mentions how we have to be able to transform the object in order for it to become characterised. You also have to be able to 'feel' the object and understand it, whilst working with it instead of dominating it. In class, it was interesting using newspaper to form our objects. At first it was difficult not to dominate the object and force it into a shape or structure that you wanted it to be. Improbable believe that you need to trust the creative process between yourself and the puppet and not rush it. They also yet again believe that the mistakes that come out of the process of making the object/puppet are the most useful and help them to progress. In class, many of us found it difficult not to copy ideas that we had seen from previous groups. However, in my group I found it very satisfactory working as an ensemble and creating our puppet together. In future lessons I would like to cover the idea of objects in the theatre in more depth as well as work on animating objects and not dominating them.
Posted by Charlotte Harvey
Comment: In order to discover the potential of an object as an expressive, theatrical tool... in order for it to come to life and become transformed on stage, we should try and see it as equal to a human performer. IT IS a puppet AS important as a performer.
(4) Improbable and Puppets
The first visual image I get whenever I think of puppetry is a ‘Punch and Judy’ performance. This may be because this is the form of puppetry I have had the most exposure to and it may also be because I first experienced a ‘Punch and Judy’ performance at a young age. I can see how the approach to puppetry that we explored during last lesson has evolved from the more traditional approaches. But this didn’t prevent me from struggling to achieve the kind of results I was hoping for (practically). I felt as though I was battling against my most natural instincts. For instance I found it difficult to see the newspaper (that I was making a puppet from) as though it had a certain quality. I felt as though I was being asked to see the newspaper as having a will of its own. In the article with Phelim McDermott and Julian Crouch the idea of asking your puppet for help when you are stuck with what to do alarmed me slightly for this reason. I am not saying that I do not think it is possible to create puppets in this way or that it would not achieve results that were fascinating to an audience. I am very curious to the way ‘Improbable’ use puppets. However I found it very difficult to adapt to this approach in one lesson. Overall I feel as though I achieved far better results in the first half of the lesson than the second. I experimented more and didn’t try to mould the newspaper into any pre-conceived shapes. Once I was asked to repeat the exercise and was in front of an audience I was more aware of how the newspaper looked and I fell into the habit of trying to create something that looked interesting. I gained a lot from watching others during the second half of the lesson. Often there would be moments where a puppet would seem to have life. There were a few comic moments where puppets would meet each other for the first time and react in an unexpected way. The exercise was clearly challenging and managing to create moments of life was a success in itself. I think another reason I struggled was that I was trying to re-create other moments of successful performance. I have not formed any strong opinions as to whether or not I like this form of theatre. I would like to re-try some of the exercises we did in class before I form an opinion. The reason is that I haven’t had enough experience of it yet.
Posted by Sylvie Barlow
(5) Puppets and Properties
This week I was really struck by Improbable's belief that all objects on stage are puppets rather than props. On reflection, it seems to be almost obvious that in many plays, the main character is effectively an object, with the main themes of the play being portrayed to the audience through the object. However, I had never really thought about the role of props in plays other than to assist the actors. After this lesson I realised how short-sighted I had been in this respect. I really like the way Improbable use objects in their performances as puppets rather than props, allowing the real significance of these objects to be communicated to the audience. This concept helped us work on our group improvisations, as we were able to use the newspaper puppets to help portray our movement qualities and develop our characters in general, with the newspapers becoming an element of our characters rather than just objects. I haven't had a chance to watch the video yet but I look forward to seeing how Improbable awaken their puppets and use them in performance.
Posted by Fran Smith
(6) The Difficulty of Puppets
I am still unsure about the use of puppets with Improbable. Even though I can see that the end product is clear, and I agree with and understand their idea that every object on stage is a puppet rather than a prop, I find it difficult to understand the process involved. Because I find the spontaneity idea difficult in itself, I think that the idea of doing this with newspaper is something that I haven't grasped properly yet. I am finding it interesting to read about and watch Improbable working with puppets though - I think it is easier to understand when you see their end product, even though so much of the emphasis is on the process. I think that I will find this idea easier to understand and do when I have seen this idea develop more, and seen how it connects into performance, which I have glimpsed within the smaller groups. This is something that I still find very new and challenging, but I am sure that with time and experience I will begin to see the bigger picture, and understand the process more.
Posted by Emma Fielding
(7) Blog
I found this week's lesson quite difficult. Although I try to keep an open mind, I found it really difficult to give a mind to an inanimate object. With the newspaper, I tried to find which folds appeared naturally as I moved it and used those, but otherwise couldn't see how the paper was telling me how it wanted to move. Every time I tried to stop myself imposing my own will upon the paper, I found myself thinking, 'it's only paper. It has no will other than the will I impose'.
Posted by Emma Berge
Comment (for all): Seeing the object as something other than itself, respecting and listening to the material, giving it life without imposing your own will, are all very difficult levels of perception to achieve when working with objects/puppets, and I'm aware that they are new to you. It takes time and a lot of practice to get a real sense of an object and allowing its character and presence to materialize in front of an audience. So don't rush the result and just think of your process of learning and experimenting. Try not to think of the end product or the final image and enjoy it as a 'game'. Improbable believe that playfulness is a great attitude to have when creating... it's actually the 'essence' of creation! Trying out the newspaper exercise for once is far from enough!
Now you find yourself dominating the newspaper, which is a very natural first reaction, but the more you do it, still with an 'open mind', the more the connection between you and the newspaper will happen, and the more the paper's own will will show itself to you. Right now it's not ready to talk yet!
(8) Week Four Blog
Week four's lesson was based around working with objects, specifically newspaper, and creating things with it. I noticed during this lesson, whilst people were working with the newspaper to create something, there was a lot of focus on creating a puppet that had a complete character. Improbable themselves said that when working like this, they may create sections of puppets; arms, legs, torsos, heads etc, rather than creating a full, complete puppet.
I found that people in our class were more concentrating on their puppet becoming a full character, ‘dominating it’ so to speak. Many people created creatures, as if they were animals, and forced animalistic characters on them, rather than letting the newspaper fully evolve into its own life.
This may be due to the fact that we have never done this before, and as human instinct, we like things that are complete and have a nature and purpose, therefore creating half a puppet or something without a complete character would not be satisfying for us. However, during the process in this lesson, many interesting creatures and puppets did evolve.
Posted by Emily Cookson
Comment: You are right. You should try to let go of your own pre-conceptions of things when working with objects. Don't presume a shape for the newspaper before developing a connection with it, or before developing a real sense of its nature and quality as a material. Improbable sometimes uses this exercise with designers and businessmen for that very reason: to help them let go of preconceptions and of predetermining things.
And yes, you all did great trying out the exercise for the first time, and some good images did started to appear.
(9) Puppetry
During Monday's lesson I found creating puppets from newspaper quite hard. Watching the other members of the class creating objects out of newspaper I thought that they made it look quite easy. I did notice that some of the objects different people made were very similar which would suggest a lot of awareness and control in the improvisation. I however found it quite hard to let the newspaper naturally take a form as I didn't want to force the newspaper into an object. I think with more practise the task would become easier.
Posted by Louisa Hagan
(10) Puppets
I found the lesson we just had on puppet making interesting as at firs I was a bit sceptical but ended up quite enjoying it. I found it easier to do at the beginning i think because i had no pre-concieved ideas about what i was doing so it came naturally. But once we started doing it many times and watching everyone i felt that it began to feel a bit forced and therefore less successful. It was also a very draining exercise and i found it hard to focus fully on it for 3 hours.
Posted by Fiona Allison
(11) Blog
Puppetry using stereotypically inanimate objects can always be fun (to a degree). But I'd never thought of using something so ordinary and from everyday like newspaper until '70 Hill Lane'. It is really interesting to see what different things people come up with as many puppets came to life very quickly and many others far more slowly. Our personalities probably define a large amount of what we're going to create in front of us and thus I'm curious to what degree can we see ourselves in what we created in class. The section on puppet interaction i thought was really interesting, the movement and life we had given to our puppets from within ourselves really came through there.
Posted by George Calderwood
Saturday, 20 October 2007
Comedy Store Players
For those of you who are interested, Lee Simpson is performing at the Comedy Store Players every Sunday and Wednesday in October and December. And Phelim McDermott will be performing there on November 11th.
Tickets are £10 concessions and performances start at 8pm.
But you have to be over 18!
Here's the website for more details:
http://www.comedystoreplayers.com/
Tickets are £10 concessions and performances start at 8pm.
But you have to be over 18!
Here's the website for more details:
http://www.comedystoreplayers.com/
Week Three Image Gallery
Friday, 19 October 2007
GROUP D'S REFLECTIONS FROM WEEK THREE
Below are your posts after week three's class that focused on Chekhov's Atmospheres and Movement Qualities. You are also supposed to be working in small groups on devising a short piece based on what we have explored in the previous weeks so far (so some comment on that is expected). Some of you attended and commented on Improbable workshop that took place last Wednesday, which might be useful for those of you who didn't have the chance to do so.
I hope some of the concepts I introduced last Monday (which were not very accessible at that point) are becoming a bit clearer by now. If not, then you shouldn’t worry. As it takes time for clarity and understanding to happen in the case of such devising tools as the Quality Exercises. So don't rush results and take your time. Everything will make more sense as you go on with your practice... so DON'T LOOSE FAITH IN YOURSELVES!
Nesreen
(1) Blog
Has anyone else found this week's reading (Michael Chekhov) almost entirely derivative? I can't help but feel that it is an entirely simplified version of Stanislavsky and not an entirely good one at that. His "realm of qualities and actions" constantly reminded me of the method of physical actions, and his views on stage space and the emotions one can draw from it simply emotion memory provoked from outside the actor's own heart and recall. The only difference seems to be a call to gain inspiration from empty space, which does have merit, otherwise his methods seem to offer nothing new.
Posted by Gemma Moran
(2) Qualities/Atmospheres
This week's class was primarily based on different movement qualities and atmospheres (introduced by Michael Chekhov). To be quite honest, I'm not too convinced that these exercises will help me being spontaneous and original. The movements (to me) seemed to be pretended and forced. I felt like doing eurythmy or some esoterical stuff. Until this point, I don't see any connection to the actor's profession and skills. Anyway: I might be wrong and will be happy to change my opinion, if someone can convince me otherwise.
I also think that atmospheres are always 100% related to the person feeling/experiencing them. An "empty" room, with no person inside can hardly have any atmosphere, because there is nobody there who could possibly sense it. But if someone enters a room, he/she will always be reminded of something (probably on some unconscious level). That "something" can be a certain smell or light or sound,… . So, the atmosphere is always related to previous experiences. True: there is an atmosphere to everything, as long as there's somebody to perceive it. And this atmosphere is unique to every single person. We create it on our own. I believe that there are never two people in one room who share exactly the same feelings or thoughts about it.
Posted by Mirjam Frank
(3) Wednesday's Workshop
I have just returned from the workshop with Lee Simpson, and now having spent some time seeing how he works, and seeing how Improbable work, I now understand the topic a lot more! It was interesting that as we spent two hours on the same exercise, the principles we have been exploring became much clearer. Going from it just being a game where you held your partners' hands and led them around the room, it suddenly became about what you went through whilst you were in this position. He kept telling us to notice what we were feeling, and what we were doing, and what the experience reminded us of. This in itself gave a completely new level to theatre games. Playing a game, and making what you wanted of it, without it being under any pressure and without there being any problem if it went wrong, made the experience much more relaxing. It also was insightful being in a situation where people were making mistakes, and things were occasionally going wrong - and the worst thing that happened was that people laughed. Being partnered up for such a long time also gave you confidence - you were working in such a tight pair and going through any problems with this other person, so it took away much of the pressure. I realise now that as different stages of the exercise were added, he was adding levels of spontaneity to what we were doing - this should have been so scary! But I didn't even realise what was going on, and this is exactly the same for the word at a time game. This was a very interesting experience, and has now changed the way that I see improvisation - it can be incredibly simple and easy!
Posted by Emma Fielding
(4) Progress through Practice with Trust
At first I found Monday's lesson fairly confusing, although I had read the Michael Chekhov reading for week three, I was unsure the aims and purpose of the movement qualities exercise, when we tried it out in class. However, after watching the short extract clip of Phelim using the exercises with others, I was able to familiarise myself with the exercise and understand the benefits of doing it. As Phelim stated, this exercise is another way of saying yes to something and being able to explore your bodies, as well as being aware of what the audience can see. I found it interesting watching other people undertake the exercise, as I was able to have a better understanding of it, as well as how Improbable use the four movement qualities within their work.
I found the Improbable workshop extremely useful and was able to get a better understanding of the company itself. Firstly we undertook a key trust exercise, whereby one partner had their eyes closed and the other partner lead the 'blind' person around the room. As this exercise progressed we added in different elements such as letting the 'blind' person walk alone and swapping partners, trying to do it so the person with their eyes closed was unaware of the transition. Lee Simpson stated that in Improbable's work they use this exercise as it helps to progress your practice when you are on stage. He mentioned how you have to be able to trust others that you are working with. Although you will never trust everyone fully, you need to have some sort of trust relationship, or you won't be able to work with this person.
We also undertook the 'word at a time game' that we have been looking at in class. We focused on the tenses that we use when playing this game and tried to stick to the present tense. We then discussed how difficult (or in some people's minds easy) this was. Lee mentioned how making mistakes was all part of the progress and that in order to progress and form new ideas you had to 'fuck up' (in his words)!
I feel that I am more comfortable with the exercise and I feel that spontaneity is easier than I first thought.
Posted by Charlotte Harvey
(5) Chekhov's Exercises
Personally, I enjoyed the Chekhov exercises that we practised on the four elements. At times I felt overcome with different atmospheres especially when we were told to radiate- I felt strangely powerful! Although it seemed a lot of people found it hard to focus, but this may have been because many of us had never done anything like it before!
I think that it is important to go into things with an open mind and work hard as an ensemble, however often this is more easily said than done. I feel that it is important to explore different ways of portraying characters through mood, setting & emotion rather than just 'acting a part'.
I felt that it might even be possible, with enough practise, to build up a bank of various atmospheres which an actor could inhabit when playing various parts that coincide.
Posted by Faith Brandon-Blatch
(6) Authenticity and Michael Chekhov
This week's lesson was very challenging and highly thought provoking. I thoroughly enjoyed discussing the concept of Authenticity. Is the work of any company or artist ever truly authentic? Or has all their work been influenced by other people?
I believe that most of our work, and the work of Improbable, has had some sort of influence on them. Whether it be other practitioners or simply past life experiences. Improbable's work often reflects this. 70 Hill Lane portrays some events of Phelim's life and Improbable use many of Keith Johnstone and Michael Chekhov’s techniques to formulate new ideas and plots for their shows.
I also enjoyed learning about Michael Chekhov, and his influence on the work of Improbable. Although his writing is hard to grasp at times, as he is dealing with some highly abstract concepts, his words do hold some truth. The idea that every place on Earth has its own unique atmosphere, which can affect us as people, and also affect our work in a dramatic sense, rings very true with me.
It was very enjoyable participating in some of Chekhov’s exercises. Although it was scary, venturing into the unknown, I believe techniques such as those can really help improvisers to develop characters quickly on stage, which obviously is a very necessary talent.
The Improbable workshop, with Lee Simpson on Wednesday was brilliant! At first I though that concentrating on 2 exercises for the whole of the workshop may become laborious or even boring, however, I was very much mistaken. Although only 2 exercises were involved in the workshop, concentrating on them for so long, gave them a new depth and meaning, and demonstrated how very useful they can be for actors and improvisers alike.
Posted by Ella Rhodes
(7) Workshop with Lee Simpson
I found the Improbable workshop with Lee Simpson both enjoyable and informative. It really helped me to understand Improbable's key ideas, particularly being able to observe our reactions and understand why these occur. Lee kept drawing our attention to our responses to each exercise, prompting us to observe our emotions and thoughts and use these in performance. For example, in the 'word at a time' exercise in pairs, I noticed that I was consistently using an exaggerated tone of voice as I spoke each word in an attempt to indicate to my partner were I wanted the story to go. This observation allowed me to understand that our brains are constantly wanting to predict the future by knowing where the story is going, thus I was trying to lead my partner to follow my brain's idea of the story.
Similarly, we did an exercise in which we held hands in pairs, one person with their eyes closed being led around the space by the other. When it was safe to do so, the leading person would let go of the person being led and let them 'coast' until it was necessary to begin leading them again. From Lee's instruction to be conscious of our own responses I was able to note how I felt more scared as the person being led when my partner re-took my hand as I knew that there was a potential danger in front of me which I needed to be led away from. By noticing how my brain was reacting to certain experiences I feel I gained a greater understanding of how to achieve spontaneity and how to use my responses in Improvisation.
Posted by Fran Smith
(8) Week 3 Blog
I have just got back from watching Improbables performance of 'Sticky'. If I'm honest, I was a little disappointed... even though the pyro-technics were amazing and the structure of the insect to a clock tower was phenomenal, I found myself thinking that even though this is amazing to watch, there was nothing to do with improvisation or any of the things we have learnt that improbable stand for. I do suspect that I'm just looking at the video in the wrong perspective, but if you could explain their intentions I would greatly appreciate it.
As for our week 3 seminar, I struggled at the beginning of the lesson with the understanding and reason for exploring these 4 'qualities'. However, after participating in the exercise where we used those qualities to create characters, I began to understand that those qualities evoke different emotions in the actor which is linked to the way you move depending on the element you are in. I can see how this would be useful in terms of improvisation as a way of categorising certain stereotypes, and just in the different postures that are developed by each quality, helps you to instantly be able to think of locations and situations that that particular character would be in. At least that was my interpretation of it!
I'm meeting up with my group on Sunday to rehearse the devised piece. But I have already been brain storming some ideas to work with.
Posted by Emma Bilton
(9) Blog
I just watched Sticky. For the first 5 minutes i was quite intrigued as to what was going to happen. Although the visual effects created were quite astonishing, sadly that's all the piece seemed to be to me; A visual spectacle. There wasn't really a story that seemed obvious to me, granted a piece of theatre doesn't necessarily need a straight story, but i feel the aim or point of the piece was lost in the visual aesthetics. This lack of aim to me, made the play quite uninteresting, as after ten minutes of looking at fascinating sculptures made of sellotape and more, I wanted something new to grasp my attention. Due to the slow moving nature of the piece as a whole my concentration lapsed from this point on. Although i stress i did love the idea of the piece, and the work and effort that Improbable put into sticky must have been immense, i still felt it lacked a key ingredient somewhere along the lines.
Posted by George Islay Calderwood
(10) Sticky
I watched Sticky today and I was quite confused. Maybe I completely missed the point but i could not see how it related to Improbable's ideologies. It seemed to me that it was aiming at being more of a spectacle than anything else. It was a shame because so far i have really enjoyed Improbable's productions but i just couldn't get into this one. If anyone can tell me what I'm missing it would be most appreciated.
Posted by Fiona Allison
(11) Blog
I found using quality of movements in a scene quite difficult. In our scene I'm 'radiating' and I'm angry at Gemma. Being angry, my natural instinct is to cross my arms, but that doesn't fit in with the 'radiating'. It was easy to begin with, but it got harder throughout the scene.
Posted by Emma Berge
(12) 'Word At A Time' Workshop With Lee Simpson
Overall the ‘Word At A Time’ workshop with Lee Simpson increased my curiosity regarding ‘Improbable’ and their methods of work. I wasn’t entirely sure how I felt about the prospect of four hours structured around one or two exercises upon arrival but now am grateful that I had this time to really experiment. During lessons we have a limited number of hours to get through the necessary number of exercises so have less time to get a sense of your reactions to individual exercises. The first exercise we did was one I have done many times but there are many variations of it. I shall name it the ‘Blind Trust’ exercise as it involves one person closing their eyes whilst their partner leads them round the room holding their hand. This variant of the game involved the steering being subtle. The person with their eyes open held their partners hand gently (never gripping or steering through just the hands). This meant that a relationship formed between the two people. If both partners trusted one another then the relationship was often similar to that of a parent/ child relationship. However where there were cases of mistrust people voiced feelings of anger towards their partner. We evolved the exercise so that we had periods where the blind person walked unaided but this only happened if the chance turned up (i.e. there was space ahead). Then we played a version where the leaders could switch partners during the exercise and the final version encompassed all previous ways of playing the game but had the additional rule that whenever Lee shouted ‘change’ the person with their eyes open closed their eyes and vice versa. I noticed that I would be thinking of quite mundane thoughts whenever I had my partner holding my hand but whenever I walked unaided my thoughts were dreamy and I felt free. I also noticed that whenever I switched partner I would have a sudden rush of panic. Worrying about things such as ‘who is it holding my hand now’, ‘can I trust them’ and ‘I hope they don’t think that my hand is sweaty’. I can see how these feelings could be used to make a piece of theatre that interests an audience. All the feelings we experienced were real and the fact that they were fresh and alive could bring a performance to life. The second part of the workshop focused on the ‘Word At A Time’ exercise. This was exactly the same as the exercise we did in class but involved re-trying the exercise with different people to see what different kind of narratives could be created. We also experimented with different tenses to see how our experience varied when doing this. I remember one point where I became so engrossed in a bizarre story that I felt angry towards Lee Simpson when he halted the exercise. The reason I became so engrossed was that my partner seemed to accept and enjoy whatever bizarre twists I added to the story. We ended the workshop by creating performances out of this exercise. It required two people to put their arms around one another and perform the exercise whilst acting out what they were saying in whatever ways possible. It became clear that the audience loved the more vulnerable moments. It caused far more laughs for a pair to say a sentence such as ‘I think this exercise is a bad idea’ than for the pair to create a story that could be award winning. There was no way to do the exercise correctly and it was ok to be honest or to screw up. By the end of the workshop I found myself aching with laughter and can see how an audience is interested in theatre that feels real and raw. I feel more confident in using the kinds of exercises we have been learning and would feel more comfortable in using them during a rehearsal process now. I am unsure whether it would be possible to make a performance purely from this type of exercise. I also still wonder whether it is better or as good as making theatre from texts. I love reading and watching scripted theatre and I have been exposed to this kind of theatre for much longer so I want to put this newer approach to the test.
Posted by Sylvie Barlow
(13) Week Three Blog
I found the discussion in this week's lesson on spontaneity interesting. Spontaneity is a key point in improvisation and if you’re not used to the quick-fire nature of being spontaneous, it takes a while to become accustomed. I find that a big factor in letting yourself become spontaneous is loosing all inhibitions. People are less likely to do or say the first thing that comes to them if they have a lot of inhibitions. Feeling silly or fear of being judged is a big factor in people being unable to be spontaneous and it takes a lot of time and work to train your self and your mind not to think but simply act, do or say. Once inhibitions are lost, people become more comfortable with being spontaneous and doing the first thing that comes to their mind. It become almost as ifyou do not care and are no longer restrained by social ‘norms’.
Training yourself to be spontaneous can take months, if not years and needs a lot of practice. I have been doing ‘Comedy Sportz” for 7 years and this is a kind of improvisation similar to ‘Theatre Sports’ and is linked to the comedy store players. Doing ‘Comedy Sportz’ takes a lot of spontaneity as you get on stage and improvise a scene, there and then and even after 7 years of training, there are times when I still struggle with complete spontaneity and my mind still has a part in the thinking of what I am going to do next.
Posted by Emily Cookson
(14) Blog
On doing the workshop with Improbable we found that trust was a key issue because as Lee Simpson said, "in improvising you have to learn towork with people you like, hate, sleep with and sleep with badly." In other words a complete release of inhibitions is necessary to produce the most authentic sponteneity. One exersize to emphasise this, and help develop an ensemble within the group, was a trust exersize where you had to lead your 'blind' partner around the space whilst holding their hand. Different variations of this consisted of a subtle swapping of partners and letting go of their hand for a brief time to encourage independence and develop an invisible bond between the two participants. On stage this is important when improvising as an understanding between performers is vital.
Simpson also expressed the need for an ability to "notice things" that happen when performing and establish a perifieral vision. For example, when reacting to being lead round the room 'blind' he encouraged us tonotice our responses, as they create a strong basis to work from when developing a narrative in an improvisation. In effect it was almost as if we were developing our own personal outside eye, analysing the things we were doing. This made us think of working on Chekhov's movement qualities which we worked on in Monday's lesson and how through this a character or narrative can emerge. As a small group we worked on this during the week and devised a short scene with each character evolving from a certain movement quality, i.e. moulding, floating, radiating and flying. On watching Improbable's 'Sticky' we were both impressed yet intrigued to find out how this may link to our own work.
Posted by Laurence Brasted and Helen Hudson
(15) Workshop
After attending the workshop on Wednesday I feel that I have more understanding into the work of Improbable. When I first heard that we would be spending the whole workshop working on word at a time I didn't think this was possible, however once we had done a few exercises I started to understand why. We explored the idea of working with a partner and how trust is developed with that partner. We also explored the fears that we have of the unknown in theatre. This was achieved through us walking around in pairs with one half of the pair with their eyes shut having to trust their partner to guide them. This links with improvisations of having to trust the people that you are working with to achieve the best results.
Posted by Louisa Hagan
I hope some of the concepts I introduced last Monday (which were not very accessible at that point) are becoming a bit clearer by now. If not, then you shouldn’t worry. As it takes time for clarity and understanding to happen in the case of such devising tools as the Quality Exercises. So don't rush results and take your time. Everything will make more sense as you go on with your practice... so DON'T LOOSE FAITH IN YOURSELVES!
Nesreen
(1) Blog
Has anyone else found this week's reading (Michael Chekhov) almost entirely derivative? I can't help but feel that it is an entirely simplified version of Stanislavsky and not an entirely good one at that. His "realm of qualities and actions" constantly reminded me of the method of physical actions, and his views on stage space and the emotions one can draw from it simply emotion memory provoked from outside the actor's own heart and recall. The only difference seems to be a call to gain inspiration from empty space, which does have merit, otherwise his methods seem to offer nothing new.
Posted by Gemma Moran
(2) Qualities/Atmospheres
This week's class was primarily based on different movement qualities and atmospheres (introduced by Michael Chekhov). To be quite honest, I'm not too convinced that these exercises will help me being spontaneous and original. The movements (to me) seemed to be pretended and forced. I felt like doing eurythmy or some esoterical stuff. Until this point, I don't see any connection to the actor's profession and skills. Anyway: I might be wrong and will be happy to change my opinion, if someone can convince me otherwise.
I also think that atmospheres are always 100% related to the person feeling/experiencing them. An "empty" room, with no person inside can hardly have any atmosphere, because there is nobody there who could possibly sense it. But if someone enters a room, he/she will always be reminded of something (probably on some unconscious level). That "something" can be a certain smell or light or sound,… . So, the atmosphere is always related to previous experiences. True: there is an atmosphere to everything, as long as there's somebody to perceive it. And this atmosphere is unique to every single person. We create it on our own. I believe that there are never two people in one room who share exactly the same feelings or thoughts about it.
Posted by Mirjam Frank
(3) Wednesday's Workshop
I have just returned from the workshop with Lee Simpson, and now having spent some time seeing how he works, and seeing how Improbable work, I now understand the topic a lot more! It was interesting that as we spent two hours on the same exercise, the principles we have been exploring became much clearer. Going from it just being a game where you held your partners' hands and led them around the room, it suddenly became about what you went through whilst you were in this position. He kept telling us to notice what we were feeling, and what we were doing, and what the experience reminded us of. This in itself gave a completely new level to theatre games. Playing a game, and making what you wanted of it, without it being under any pressure and without there being any problem if it went wrong, made the experience much more relaxing. It also was insightful being in a situation where people were making mistakes, and things were occasionally going wrong - and the worst thing that happened was that people laughed. Being partnered up for such a long time also gave you confidence - you were working in such a tight pair and going through any problems with this other person, so it took away much of the pressure. I realise now that as different stages of the exercise were added, he was adding levels of spontaneity to what we were doing - this should have been so scary! But I didn't even realise what was going on, and this is exactly the same for the word at a time game. This was a very interesting experience, and has now changed the way that I see improvisation - it can be incredibly simple and easy!
Posted by Emma Fielding
(4) Progress through Practice with Trust
At first I found Monday's lesson fairly confusing, although I had read the Michael Chekhov reading for week three, I was unsure the aims and purpose of the movement qualities exercise, when we tried it out in class. However, after watching the short extract clip of Phelim using the exercises with others, I was able to familiarise myself with the exercise and understand the benefits of doing it. As Phelim stated, this exercise is another way of saying yes to something and being able to explore your bodies, as well as being aware of what the audience can see. I found it interesting watching other people undertake the exercise, as I was able to have a better understanding of it, as well as how Improbable use the four movement qualities within their work.
I found the Improbable workshop extremely useful and was able to get a better understanding of the company itself. Firstly we undertook a key trust exercise, whereby one partner had their eyes closed and the other partner lead the 'blind' person around the room. As this exercise progressed we added in different elements such as letting the 'blind' person walk alone and swapping partners, trying to do it so the person with their eyes closed was unaware of the transition. Lee Simpson stated that in Improbable's work they use this exercise as it helps to progress your practice when you are on stage. He mentioned how you have to be able to trust others that you are working with. Although you will never trust everyone fully, you need to have some sort of trust relationship, or you won't be able to work with this person.
We also undertook the 'word at a time game' that we have been looking at in class. We focused on the tenses that we use when playing this game and tried to stick to the present tense. We then discussed how difficult (or in some people's minds easy) this was. Lee mentioned how making mistakes was all part of the progress and that in order to progress and form new ideas you had to 'fuck up' (in his words)!
I feel that I am more comfortable with the exercise and I feel that spontaneity is easier than I first thought.
Posted by Charlotte Harvey
(5) Chekhov's Exercises
Personally, I enjoyed the Chekhov exercises that we practised on the four elements. At times I felt overcome with different atmospheres especially when we were told to radiate- I felt strangely powerful! Although it seemed a lot of people found it hard to focus, but this may have been because many of us had never done anything like it before!
I think that it is important to go into things with an open mind and work hard as an ensemble, however often this is more easily said than done. I feel that it is important to explore different ways of portraying characters through mood, setting & emotion rather than just 'acting a part'.
I felt that it might even be possible, with enough practise, to build up a bank of various atmospheres which an actor could inhabit when playing various parts that coincide.
Posted by Faith Brandon-Blatch
(6) Authenticity and Michael Chekhov
This week's lesson was very challenging and highly thought provoking. I thoroughly enjoyed discussing the concept of Authenticity. Is the work of any company or artist ever truly authentic? Or has all their work been influenced by other people?
I believe that most of our work, and the work of Improbable, has had some sort of influence on them. Whether it be other practitioners or simply past life experiences. Improbable's work often reflects this. 70 Hill Lane portrays some events of Phelim's life and Improbable use many of Keith Johnstone and Michael Chekhov’s techniques to formulate new ideas and plots for their shows.
I also enjoyed learning about Michael Chekhov, and his influence on the work of Improbable. Although his writing is hard to grasp at times, as he is dealing with some highly abstract concepts, his words do hold some truth. The idea that every place on Earth has its own unique atmosphere, which can affect us as people, and also affect our work in a dramatic sense, rings very true with me.
It was very enjoyable participating in some of Chekhov’s exercises. Although it was scary, venturing into the unknown, I believe techniques such as those can really help improvisers to develop characters quickly on stage, which obviously is a very necessary talent.
The Improbable workshop, with Lee Simpson on Wednesday was brilliant! At first I though that concentrating on 2 exercises for the whole of the workshop may become laborious or even boring, however, I was very much mistaken. Although only 2 exercises were involved in the workshop, concentrating on them for so long, gave them a new depth and meaning, and demonstrated how very useful they can be for actors and improvisers alike.
Posted by Ella Rhodes
(7) Workshop with Lee Simpson
I found the Improbable workshop with Lee Simpson both enjoyable and informative. It really helped me to understand Improbable's key ideas, particularly being able to observe our reactions and understand why these occur. Lee kept drawing our attention to our responses to each exercise, prompting us to observe our emotions and thoughts and use these in performance. For example, in the 'word at a time' exercise in pairs, I noticed that I was consistently using an exaggerated tone of voice as I spoke each word in an attempt to indicate to my partner were I wanted the story to go. This observation allowed me to understand that our brains are constantly wanting to predict the future by knowing where the story is going, thus I was trying to lead my partner to follow my brain's idea of the story.
Similarly, we did an exercise in which we held hands in pairs, one person with their eyes closed being led around the space by the other. When it was safe to do so, the leading person would let go of the person being led and let them 'coast' until it was necessary to begin leading them again. From Lee's instruction to be conscious of our own responses I was able to note how I felt more scared as the person being led when my partner re-took my hand as I knew that there was a potential danger in front of me which I needed to be led away from. By noticing how my brain was reacting to certain experiences I feel I gained a greater understanding of how to achieve spontaneity and how to use my responses in Improvisation.
Posted by Fran Smith
(8) Week 3 Blog
I have just got back from watching Improbables performance of 'Sticky'. If I'm honest, I was a little disappointed... even though the pyro-technics were amazing and the structure of the insect to a clock tower was phenomenal, I found myself thinking that even though this is amazing to watch, there was nothing to do with improvisation or any of the things we have learnt that improbable stand for. I do suspect that I'm just looking at the video in the wrong perspective, but if you could explain their intentions I would greatly appreciate it.
As for our week 3 seminar, I struggled at the beginning of the lesson with the understanding and reason for exploring these 4 'qualities'. However, after participating in the exercise where we used those qualities to create characters, I began to understand that those qualities evoke different emotions in the actor which is linked to the way you move depending on the element you are in. I can see how this would be useful in terms of improvisation as a way of categorising certain stereotypes, and just in the different postures that are developed by each quality, helps you to instantly be able to think of locations and situations that that particular character would be in. At least that was my interpretation of it!
I'm meeting up with my group on Sunday to rehearse the devised piece. But I have already been brain storming some ideas to work with.
Posted by Emma Bilton
(9) Blog
I just watched Sticky. For the first 5 minutes i was quite intrigued as to what was going to happen. Although the visual effects created were quite astonishing, sadly that's all the piece seemed to be to me; A visual spectacle. There wasn't really a story that seemed obvious to me, granted a piece of theatre doesn't necessarily need a straight story, but i feel the aim or point of the piece was lost in the visual aesthetics. This lack of aim to me, made the play quite uninteresting, as after ten minutes of looking at fascinating sculptures made of sellotape and more, I wanted something new to grasp my attention. Due to the slow moving nature of the piece as a whole my concentration lapsed from this point on. Although i stress i did love the idea of the piece, and the work and effort that Improbable put into sticky must have been immense, i still felt it lacked a key ingredient somewhere along the lines.
Posted by George Islay Calderwood
(10) Sticky
I watched Sticky today and I was quite confused. Maybe I completely missed the point but i could not see how it related to Improbable's ideologies. It seemed to me that it was aiming at being more of a spectacle than anything else. It was a shame because so far i have really enjoyed Improbable's productions but i just couldn't get into this one. If anyone can tell me what I'm missing it would be most appreciated.
Posted by Fiona Allison
(11) Blog
I found using quality of movements in a scene quite difficult. In our scene I'm 'radiating' and I'm angry at Gemma. Being angry, my natural instinct is to cross my arms, but that doesn't fit in with the 'radiating'. It was easy to begin with, but it got harder throughout the scene.
Posted by Emma Berge
(12) 'Word At A Time' Workshop With Lee Simpson
Overall the ‘Word At A Time’ workshop with Lee Simpson increased my curiosity regarding ‘Improbable’ and their methods of work. I wasn’t entirely sure how I felt about the prospect of four hours structured around one or two exercises upon arrival but now am grateful that I had this time to really experiment. During lessons we have a limited number of hours to get through the necessary number of exercises so have less time to get a sense of your reactions to individual exercises. The first exercise we did was one I have done many times but there are many variations of it. I shall name it the ‘Blind Trust’ exercise as it involves one person closing their eyes whilst their partner leads them round the room holding their hand. This variant of the game involved the steering being subtle. The person with their eyes open held their partners hand gently (never gripping or steering through just the hands). This meant that a relationship formed between the two people. If both partners trusted one another then the relationship was often similar to that of a parent/ child relationship. However where there were cases of mistrust people voiced feelings of anger towards their partner. We evolved the exercise so that we had periods where the blind person walked unaided but this only happened if the chance turned up (i.e. there was space ahead). Then we played a version where the leaders could switch partners during the exercise and the final version encompassed all previous ways of playing the game but had the additional rule that whenever Lee shouted ‘change’ the person with their eyes open closed their eyes and vice versa. I noticed that I would be thinking of quite mundane thoughts whenever I had my partner holding my hand but whenever I walked unaided my thoughts were dreamy and I felt free. I also noticed that whenever I switched partner I would have a sudden rush of panic. Worrying about things such as ‘who is it holding my hand now’, ‘can I trust them’ and ‘I hope they don’t think that my hand is sweaty’. I can see how these feelings could be used to make a piece of theatre that interests an audience. All the feelings we experienced were real and the fact that they were fresh and alive could bring a performance to life. The second part of the workshop focused on the ‘Word At A Time’ exercise. This was exactly the same as the exercise we did in class but involved re-trying the exercise with different people to see what different kind of narratives could be created. We also experimented with different tenses to see how our experience varied when doing this. I remember one point where I became so engrossed in a bizarre story that I felt angry towards Lee Simpson when he halted the exercise. The reason I became so engrossed was that my partner seemed to accept and enjoy whatever bizarre twists I added to the story. We ended the workshop by creating performances out of this exercise. It required two people to put their arms around one another and perform the exercise whilst acting out what they were saying in whatever ways possible. It became clear that the audience loved the more vulnerable moments. It caused far more laughs for a pair to say a sentence such as ‘I think this exercise is a bad idea’ than for the pair to create a story that could be award winning. There was no way to do the exercise correctly and it was ok to be honest or to screw up. By the end of the workshop I found myself aching with laughter and can see how an audience is interested in theatre that feels real and raw. I feel more confident in using the kinds of exercises we have been learning and would feel more comfortable in using them during a rehearsal process now. I am unsure whether it would be possible to make a performance purely from this type of exercise. I also still wonder whether it is better or as good as making theatre from texts. I love reading and watching scripted theatre and I have been exposed to this kind of theatre for much longer so I want to put this newer approach to the test.
Posted by Sylvie Barlow
(13) Week Three Blog
I found the discussion in this week's lesson on spontaneity interesting. Spontaneity is a key point in improvisation and if you’re not used to the quick-fire nature of being spontaneous, it takes a while to become accustomed. I find that a big factor in letting yourself become spontaneous is loosing all inhibitions. People are less likely to do or say the first thing that comes to them if they have a lot of inhibitions. Feeling silly or fear of being judged is a big factor in people being unable to be spontaneous and it takes a lot of time and work to train your self and your mind not to think but simply act, do or say. Once inhibitions are lost, people become more comfortable with being spontaneous and doing the first thing that comes to their mind. It become almost as ifyou do not care and are no longer restrained by social ‘norms’.
Training yourself to be spontaneous can take months, if not years and needs a lot of practice. I have been doing ‘Comedy Sportz” for 7 years and this is a kind of improvisation similar to ‘Theatre Sports’ and is linked to the comedy store players. Doing ‘Comedy Sportz’ takes a lot of spontaneity as you get on stage and improvise a scene, there and then and even after 7 years of training, there are times when I still struggle with complete spontaneity and my mind still has a part in the thinking of what I am going to do next.
Posted by Emily Cookson
(14) Blog
On doing the workshop with Improbable we found that trust was a key issue because as Lee Simpson said, "in improvising you have to learn towork with people you like, hate, sleep with and sleep with badly." In other words a complete release of inhibitions is necessary to produce the most authentic sponteneity. One exersize to emphasise this, and help develop an ensemble within the group, was a trust exersize where you had to lead your 'blind' partner around the space whilst holding their hand. Different variations of this consisted of a subtle swapping of partners and letting go of their hand for a brief time to encourage independence and develop an invisible bond between the two participants. On stage this is important when improvising as an understanding between performers is vital.
Simpson also expressed the need for an ability to "notice things" that happen when performing and establish a perifieral vision. For example, when reacting to being lead round the room 'blind' he encouraged us tonotice our responses, as they create a strong basis to work from when developing a narrative in an improvisation. In effect it was almost as if we were developing our own personal outside eye, analysing the things we were doing. This made us think of working on Chekhov's movement qualities which we worked on in Monday's lesson and how through this a character or narrative can emerge. As a small group we worked on this during the week and devised a short scene with each character evolving from a certain movement quality, i.e. moulding, floating, radiating and flying. On watching Improbable's 'Sticky' we were both impressed yet intrigued to find out how this may link to our own work.
Posted by Laurence Brasted and Helen Hudson
(15) Workshop
After attending the workshop on Wednesday I feel that I have more understanding into the work of Improbable. When I first heard that we would be spending the whole workshop working on word at a time I didn't think this was possible, however once we had done a few exercises I started to understand why. We explored the idea of working with a partner and how trust is developed with that partner. We also explored the fears that we have of the unknown in theatre. This was achieved through us walking around in pairs with one half of the pair with their eyes shut having to trust their partner to guide them. This links with improvisations of having to trust the people that you are working with to achieve the best results.
Posted by Louisa Hagan
Friday, 12 October 2007
ABOUT IMPROBABLE WORKSHOP
Lee Simpson kindly offered some explanation about the workshop's content that will take place on Wednesday the 17th:
"The workshop I will be doing is focused on and around one particular impro exercise that we have used a lot in Improbable. The reason why I am focusing on just one exercise is a combination of our tendency to spend a long time on each exercise and there being a limited amount of time available for the workshop because of difficulties in finding a space.
The exercise is an old and much used one. It's a Keith Johnstone exercise called "Word at a time". Basically 2 people put their arms around each other and speak as if they were one person, each person speaking in turn, taking alternate words.
Person A: "I..."
Person B: "...am..."
A: "...on..."
B: "...a..."
A: "...train..."
... and so on.
Like all great exercises, all of impro is contained within its deceptively simple parameters. Which is why we are still doing it after all these years."
"The workshop I will be doing is focused on and around one particular impro exercise that we have used a lot in Improbable. The reason why I am focusing on just one exercise is a combination of our tendency to spend a long time on each exercise and there being a limited amount of time available for the workshop because of difficulties in finding a space.
The exercise is an old and much used one. It's a Keith Johnstone exercise called "Word at a time". Basically 2 people put their arms around each other and speak as if they were one person, each person speaking in turn, taking alternate words.
Person A: "I..."
Person B: "...am..."
A: "...on..."
B: "...a..."
A: "...train..."
... and so on.
Like all great exercises, all of impro is contained within its deceptively simple parameters. Which is why we are still doing it after all these years."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)