‘We diminish or become fearful and so do not teach and learn with touch, we devalue one of our most basic and informative sensations.’ (Bannon and Holt, 2012, 219)
This week we looked at the idea of being under and over. Our attention once again focused on this idea of touch and the value of it when connecting with someone else, ‘touch that stimulates awareness’ (Bannon and Holt, 2012, 216). We spoke about it in relation to this week’s reading (Touch: Experience and Knowledge) and agreed touch is needed in contact improvisation for ‘affective communication’ (Bannon and Holt, 2012, 220). It was also brought to our attention the trust and support we need to have in each other and the value we need to have not on just our own bodies but on the others around us.
The class began with an exercise that involved us connecting with other bodies. Similarly to last week the task incorporated this idea of pushing and pulling. We began by moving around the room which slowly progressed into a jog. We were encouraged to go up to another person and touch them on the shoulder, this contact initiated them to ‘melt’ to the floor where they would just lie still in neutral. Another body would then come along and pull them up off the floor for the process to start again. About 15 people were doing this at one time. While this was going on we were urged to think about the intention behind the touch, ‘the quantity of touch’ (Bannon and Holt, 2012, 216), and how it resulted in the other person melting to the floor or being lifted from the floor. For me I tried to make sure my contact on the shoulder was strong and forceful and when lifting people from the floor I would use my pile so I had a strong base in order for me to be able to lift the other dancer up without requiring their help. This task helped us prepare our bodies for taking other people’s weight.
Another task which got us thinking about how we would take another person’s weight, as well as how we would distribute our own weight onto another person, was when we experimented with a move which involved two bodies, one lying on top of another. This task also introduced us to this concept of the under and over dancer. The under body would have all of the over bodies weight on top of them. The under body then had to roll causing the over body to roll off them. I felt very self-conscious about putting all my weight onto someone else, so I somewhat held back from doing so. This actually put more stress on the under body than if I just let my weight go.
Finding new points of contact with each other we moved on to our next exercise which involved us being back to back with another body and improvising using this idea of under and over. We did this numerous time with different pairs. I found that automatically one individual in the pair would somewhat take control and lead the improvisation and this would go back and forth throughout. Initiating the movement using under and over as the stimulus meant you and your partner would have to decide who was going under and who was going over without verbally discussing it. In an improvisation how do you decide who’s the under dancer and who’s the over dancer? I personally prefer being the under dancer because I would rather take someone’s weight, so I would always manipulate the improvisation to make sure it moved in the direction that meant I was under. This sort of meant I was trying to control the duet and for a duet to be successful it has to be a conversation, involving two bodies and two minds. When I was with someone who preferred being the over dancer, the improvisation came a bit more freely without disruption and dispute, whereas when we both wanted to be the under dancer there was a conflict of interests and ideas of where this improvisation was going.
Like last week, in pairs, we would observe one another looking out for habitual patterns. Once this had been done we repeated the exercise however this time we would randomly shout stop, your partner would pause and you, using their body as a structural starting point, would find moments of contact. You could lean, balance or even fully rest yourself on the other person. We then switch roles. When I was initiating points of contact I was hesitant to put my full body weight on another and this meant I held back in what I was doing. Therefore I found myself doing similar movements which weren’t far out of my comfort zone, how do I gain the confidence to give my weight to someone else and be more adventurous in my movement?
Our last exercise, once again, involved us taking and having someone else take our weight, but this time it was in the form of counterbalances. I found for these to work you needed some individual muscular strength. We did these back to back, moving forward and backwards and sideways, as well as doing side by side counterbalances. I really struggled. I found the back to back one moving forward and backwards, when I was the one moving backwards (with someone behind me) the easiest. Probably because, once again, I was semi in control. How do I let go and allow another person to lead? The other counterbalances either I physically didn’t have the strength to continue with or I couldn’t synchronise the balancing with my partner.
This session really made me question my contact improvisation abilities, for me to improve I have to remove this mental block which is stopping me from giving my weight to another person. Is this a lack of trust? The reading highlights the importance of trust in relation to being touched, ‘Touch allows you to connect with another, from my experience it has helped me engage with my group member to a higher level of trust.’ (Bannon and Holt, 2012, 221). It also speaks about touch as a ‘vulnerable commodity’ (Bannon and Holt, 2012, 219) and I believe this is the issue. I feel vulnerable when resting my weight on someone. Maybe as the week’s progress this will become less of an issue and I can begin to experiment more when moving with others.
Bannon, F. and Holt, D. (2012) Touch: Experience and knowledge. Journal od Dance & Somatic Practices, 3 (1/2) 215-227.