Speaking Through Movements..

Mark Hill is, from my experiences and impressions, a teacher and a performer who has infused two of his loves - visual art and physical movements - to his passion: physical theatre. He practices and teaches his fervor for Butoh theatre around the globe. He has taught in Asia, Australia and Europe and has performed/practiced Butoh through the companies: Dairakudakan (Japan) and SU-EN Butoh Company (Sweden). We learned so much from Mark this past week, gaining knowledge from his previous experiences and his ideologies that he gained from many theatre practitioners such as Anne Bogart and Tadashi Suzuki. Working with mark has not only been an opportunity, but also a privilege. 

Mark teaching the class about the Japanese Rock Garden.

With this experience of physical theatre with Mark this week, I think you could either say a lot, or extremely little. It is my opinion that what we did or what we felt throughout this week cannot be expressed through words (to a certain extent). So many different emotions and extremities encompassed - I'm sure everyone would agree with me on this - our lessons ranging from utter sorrow to extreme happiness and from placid movements to violently exuberant ones. We were able attain a wide spectrum of knowledge of what physical theatre can be. Throughout this week, however, I would say we focused more on the Japanese (Eastern) methodologies than the western ones. 

Before I really delve into how I felt throughout this process of growth, I really want to review (in brief) all the concepts that were introduced by Mark. I’m sure I am going to miss out one or two things here and there as I did not take notes during Mark’s lesson - which I greatly regret because it would have really helped me phrase my impressions - but I’ll try my best. I would also like to note how difficult it is to describe these lessons as it is an experience you just had to be there for. 

I’ve already shared my thoughts and experiences of day one, but I would really like to emphasize how much more I’ve grown from the inception of these lessons. Our first lesson did not focus very much on physical theatre, but more on building a connection with the IBYR1 class. My perception on what physical theatre can be was limited to dance and flexible/complicated movements that only involved flamboyant expressions through body. My conceptualization of physical theatre has now grown to cover many different types of physicalization and yet, I know there’s more. 

We focused on four things during our first lesson that summed up what an actor must exhibit for a mind grabbing show: fixed/peripheral focuses, an energy level of five, group awareness and physical awareness. We executed an exercise for each of the concepts and were able to really grasp what Mark was trying to teach us. For example, we were to walk around the room displaying different levels of energy in theatre. Level one: almost dead; body drooped on the floor, stumbling to wherever the centre of your body moves you. Level two: like a zombie; still moving wherever gravity moves you to; monday morning walk from your euphoric sleep to your dreadful realization that you have school. Level three: a normal walk; how you would walk around the city perhaps. Level four: you're starting to see things around you; starting to notice what you can use in a production. Level five: excited to experiment with the architecture and space; curiosity. Level six: the most exciting and exhilarating day of your entire life. Level seven: dynamic stillness. The least level of energy to exert in theatre is a level five. We saw as a class, exactly what Mark wanted to portray by taking involvement in the activities ourselves and were able to ascertain the main points of Mark's teachings. 

Mark and I displaying 'extreme proximity.' (Need help with this) 

Next, we learned about spatial relationships and shapes. Spatial relationships consists of many ideas that make a space look interesting such as extreme proximity (kiss or kill), distance, the use of lines and angles, shapes, counterpoints, location on the stage (centre stage), diagonals, levels etc. An activity to exemplify the importance of a space we tried was entitled "Rock Garden." We focused on the space between each other by positioning ourselves in different parts of the room in a fetal rock, sitting rock, standing rock and a jumping rock. We were not able to use our arms or face to portray any emotions, but we were able to create wonderful contradictions and pictures throughout this activity that emphasized the importance of space. We then shifted our focus to abstract and literal shapes. The shapes we show with our bodies had to be extra-ordinary. Let's say we had to become a fork, a literal shape meant that we would stand upright and pointy like a fork. But for an abstract shape, our poses would have to be sharp and cunning and have the concepts of a fork, rather than the exact features of a fork. 

Architecture. We also learned that we can take this literally and abstractly (a door could be a door, but a door could also be a bed). We were able to play with the architecture and see how we could use the smallest features of our space to create marvelous pictures and performances. When Mark was here, we experimented with Poor Man's Blackout - a form of presentation where the audience would have to close and open their eyes to a new tableau dictating a specific part of a story. We were not able to say any words during this performance. We were then given a list of some elements of great theatre (which I will post later on during the day) and we were required to use theatrical poetry, - a non realistic event that reverberates on many layers. It points to truth rather than copying it. Allow the audience to meet it half way and fill in the picture with their own imagination - surprise entrances/exits, the elements: air, fire, earth and water, music/song and sex death and food. Everyone was able to make spectacular tableaus and were able to utilize the space amazingly. The first group's use of light and shadows was mystifying and somber. The second group's use of the floor and the chairs to place the audience was unique and imaginative. Their entire performance was based on sound and were able to find places in that small space to create sound. The third group's use of the balcony and acoustics for Annie's voice formulated a great storyline. And the last group's use of the elements and sound was, in my humble opinion, refreshing. All our groups' were able to find something spectacular about the architecture we were in and utilize that into our performances. 

Then on Thursday, Mark started specifically talking about Eastern methodologies of physical theatre. He talked about how Western culture generally viewed upwards and expressed their bodies to the sun or to God. In Eastern culture, however, he exclaimed how the Japanese did not believe that contorting our bodies in unnatural ways to the sky was their means of expression. He talked about how grounding ourselves and focusing on our centres (hara) was the subject to Japanese movements. Remember, knees bent, back straight, loose torso and arms, but firm and immovable legs. To show how this could be utilized in a performance, we tried Chicago Story which I had experience with in Random Acts, but everything was different. In Random Acts, we were told to walk slowly to the other side of the room and kill our partners. Here, everything was about struggle, about focusing on our haras. We had to stand and walk a specific way and were really put to the test. This was a whole new form of physical theatre that I had not experienced in the past. Rather than fast and exuberant motions, we focused on grounded and slow movements. So much focus and work was put into such a simple routine. The result? An intricate and beautiful performance exhibiting the abundance of work that is needed for this exercise. 

We then moved to an activity where we were to localize our movements. We were to picture in our minds different scenarios (long hair floating in a river; snake slithering up our spines; legs gooey like honey; arms turned into feathers) and then exhibit our picture to a different part of the body. This was extremely difficult because I usually like to move my body all at once and connect my movements. This was difficult, but also cleansing for the mind and soul. I felt rejuvenated and uplifted by the activity we had done. It was an interesting experience and hope to do it again sometime. What felt like 3 minutes, actually was 15 minutes. I was just being in this activity, and my mind was free from exterior stress and pressure and was only subject to beauty and motion. 

The last day, we focused on gestures and Anne Bogart’s viewpoints (space, time and body). But I really want to focus on the stomp which I believe really encompasses what we learned on that day and throughout the week. My peers stomped around focusing on their haras for around three minutes, formed a line in the back, fell and slowly started progressing forward. It doesn’t sound like much. This is what I meant by not being able to express my emotions through words. I could probably use more eloquent vocabulary, but that would only take up my time. I know what I felt, and I think the feeling is much more important than actually describing it because I will remember that performance for a long time. Not much was being done, but so much was being expressed on the faces, the arms, the legs, the torso and every inch of their body was struggling. We all enjoy seeing struggle. Because with struggle comes more expression. If you want to express something well, you have to work incredibly hard to show what you want to say. If you want to be a fork, you can’t have flimsy arms, you must be anchored and sharp to the point of immobility. I also really enjoyed how they were able to use the light beautifully and how they were able to tell an intricate story with such simple (but extremely straining movements). They were all kinesthetically aware of their cast and I’m just rambling now, but I have so much to say about this performance. Everyone was different, but everyone was in sync simultaneously. 

I wrote a lot, but believe it or not, that was only a brief look into what IBTA has done this week. Now I want to focus on the basic ideas that I will take with me from this week. A lot of this you can infer from my learnings, but I want to make it into clear statements. First, I learned that there are so many different types of physical theatre and I am so excited to start this journey of discovery for the next two years. Second, I learned that a lot can be expressed through simple movements, but there must be struggle and effort in that movement to convey the emotions you are feeling. Third, I learned that space and architecture is as vital as the props and the people in the production. At times, the space between the actors can say much more than props or sets can. The architecture of where you’re performing can also speak volumes. The biggest thing I really gained from this course is obvious to a certain extent but powerful and connects through all the lessons with Mark: If silence can speak louder than words, then our movements must yell into our ears. Not much is needed to be said to express what we feel. Sometimes, there are things in life that cannot be expressed through our voice. I kind of understood this after watching Pina Bausch’s movie, but I understand this so much more now that I have experienced physical theatre with Mark. I now even understand that there are different ways of moving that still portray the same story or emotion. 

Will I remember ALL of the terms from this week? Probably not, but what I will remember is the amount of dedication and effort it took, the basic concepts and ideas that surrounds all forms of theatre and the friends and relationships that grew throughout this week. Mark always encouraged us to be with people we never work with and I have made such strong relationships with my class that it is unbelievable. I don’t think there’s any awkwardness anymore which was what I really wanted from this class. But I also got more than my desires. I got the knowledge that has changed my perspective of theatre and has helped mold my artistic perspectives. 

Last words of this extremely long and dragging blog post. 

I want to thank you Mrs. Moon for all your tremendous efforts in organizing this memorable experience for all of us. We learned so much and we will be able to utilize everything we gained throughout this week in the next two years in theatre and elsewhere. I also want to thank Mark for his efforts in planning out our lessons and teaching us not only his viewpoints but that of Anne Bogart and Tadashi Suzuki. You both are prodigiously inspiring. 

Pictures updated but still more to come. 

I shall see you next Friday, or anytime in the week where I feel like I have to write. Au revoir. 

From Mark Hill to PINA

This week started off as a stressful and overwhelming compilation of work then transformed to be a tranquil thought provoking and mind moving process. It has been an odd week as I hated some parts of it and absolutely adored the other parts. Sometimes, I like how life can fluctuate and vary, showing me different parts of the world and how it can change within perception, but when it differs to an overpowering extent, it can be tiring.

Anyways, this week I got the enormous pleasure and privilege to do two things: meet Sensei Mark Hill and watch PINA - a documentary (more like beautyinspirationmentary) of Pina Bausch's work and an insight of what her dancers learned from and thought of her. Both of these experiences were able to spark new ideas and were able to move me in different ways.

It all started on about Wednesday when my week was starting to look skywards (as Joel might say). In theatre class we first started off with a Korean cleansing - Yahooooo - moved to a miming exercise then moved on to a follow-the-leader type of exercise. Other than temporarily injuring myself, I thoroughly enjoyed myself and learned so much (about myself and about others) from this experience. It was like every conscious thought in my mind disappeared into thin air and to be honest, I don't even remember thinking that much when I was mimicking or executing my movements. It was surreal. I'm not going to lie; every time we did an exercise where I had to put myself out there, I would close up and feel a bit foolish, but this class, I was able to let myself go and explore my body without actually thinking about it. I think it was a good introduction to what we would learn throughout this week and the next. (I'm wondering if there are any photos from this exercise as I would really like to see how it looked! And thank you Mrs. Moon for taking me through this process. It was, to me, incredibly fulfilling.)

Then we met Mark Hill. This lesson focused not so much on Butoh theatre itself, but rather on the personalities and backgrounds of everyone in our class. I think this was great because there are a few people that I wasn't familiar with in the class. It served as an ice-breaker and an introduction to our future relationship as artists and friends. I think Mark is also here to build upon our relationships with each other. I'm hoping that after he is gone we will all be a part of a family rather than having different factions that isolate themselves from others. After this, Mark gave us a taste of the strenuous work that we would have to face in the future and let me tell you... It's been a day and I'm already sore. Though I haven't really been able to encompass what Butoh theatre is yet, I'm positive that I will grasp its concepts and intentions by next class. I'm 'dripping with anticipation' as El-Fayoumy might say...

And today, I may have watched the most inspirational/thought provoking/beautiful movie that has come before my eyes. The movie barely had any words, but was able to express so much emotion through the power of dance and movement through the body. The work of Pina Bausch was so avant garde... But it expressed so much at the same time. I just adored how she incorporated so much nature in to her work as you can see from the picture on the right. I also enjoyed hearing her dancers' memories and thoughts from Pina. All it took was one sentence or saying from Pina for them to change their outlooks and learn so much. I remember one woman told us how she had to keep looking (through the instruction of Pina) for something even though she had no direction or idea of what she was searching for. That was very thought provoking.  Pina Bausch, from watching the movie, was a woman of amazing ideas and she was able to implement them onto the stage. Sometimes, the dances were so simple, but they meant so much - like the dance to the bottom. It consisted of men just touching and feeling this woman's nose, hair, and body - playing with her as if she were a toy. I thought that this resembled how many woman are given gender roles. I don't know if I am right, but it was so unique and open to your own views that it was like an open canvas. Another dance had women and men just walk up to the front of the stage and do some simple movements. (Such an interesting dance) I could talk about how amazing this movie was, but sometimes there are those things that you cannot describe and you have to go see for yourself.

What I can take away from this week is the power of movement. So much can be done with our bodies, and yet we sometimes mistake that our voices are the power to the engine. And sometimes, there are those things that we cannot form through words but express through dance. I believe that Pina Bausch said something of those lines in the film. I'm exhilarated by what's to come next with Sensei Mark and am keen to learn more about the realm of physical theatre.

To address the question that you had on your blog Mrs. Moon: Is dance an art or a sport? Only once did that question pop up in my mind during the movie. It was when the woman was trapped by a rope and was trying to escape it running to different corners of the room. At this time, I was thinking dance is theatre. But then I thought about So You Think You Can Dance and thought that maybe dance is a sport. I think it varies with perception... But, sometimes dance/art/theatre can be so engaging that we forget about how to define it. We just watch, big eyed and amazed, by the beauty that it radiates. In this regard, does dance need to be categorized? Can it not be both? Do we even have to care if it is both? Is dance everything/anything? These are a few questions that I'm thinking about at this moment.

Now it is time to go to bed, but I'm leaving this week incredibly inspired by both Mark and Pina Bausch. Thank you both, and thank you Mrs. Moon for introducing me to them.

I would just like to say that what I am feeling right now cannot be put into words. The extent of what I discovered in indescribable. I learned so much from hearing so little, but seeing so much and what I feel is so immense that I don't think I can sleep right now. There are just so many questions that are circulating within my mind!!

For now, I'm going to leave, but I would love to have some further conversation on this topic to anyone who is reading this.

Goodnight for now. :)

The Deadly Theatre: Questions

1. Is theatre nothing more than entertainment?

Everyone is entitled to his/her opinions. Some people call it a whore: impure; taking money and leaving short on pleasure. In my opinion, however, entertainment is only a thin slice of what theatre can extend to. It's a vast field of possibility where anything is possible and everything is expressible.

2. How does the deadly theatre take easily to Shakespeare? 

In the eyes of Brook, the deadly theatre smugly secures itself into the works of William Shakespeare. Considering the renown and reverence of his plays, the work itself is a beautiful piece of work that no one can annul its design and meaning. A good interpretation of any of Shakespeare's work is impossible to criticize. Many of his plays are what "seem like the proper way - they look lively and colorful, there is music and everyone is all dressed up, just as they are supposed to be in the best of classical theatres (Brook 10)." Even with the panache of the portrayal, we somehow find the rendition boring and tedious.

3. Is "boringness" a certain guarantee of a worthwhile event? 

In a certain way, according to Brook, "the right degree of boringness is a reassuring guarantee of a worthwhile event (Brook 11)." It provides the perfect mixture between of excitement and monotony; "too much and the audience is driven out of their seats, too little and it may find the theme too disagreeably intense. (Brook 11)" I agree with this concept because too much excitement can more often than not be too much. I like to think of it as cake. If you put in 9 cups of sugar, it's going to be mawkish and excessive. Boringness, however is not a guarantee of a worthwhile event, as nothing ensures a good turnout. The audience, the piece is all subjective to what the result will be.

4. What role does mediocrity play? 

Mediocrity is a good medium of two extremes. It helps us balance the sweet with the sour, the ice to the fire and too much work with too little work. It's an equilibrium of people's distate and taste that aid us to reach a good means of general amiability.

5. What is the difference between passing down "meaning" and "manner?" 

"There it is meaning that is communicated - and meaning never belongs to the past. It can be checked in each man's own present experience. But to imitate the externals of acting only perpetuates manner - a manner hard to relate to anything at all (Brook 12)." I thought it was appropriate to quote that part of the book. It perfectly answers the question and it gives us insight deeper into the trenches of its intentions. I think Brook is trying to say that meaning is variable (extendable and moldable) and that manner is stuck, concrete.

6. Is it true that "the best dramatists explain the least?" Can you think of some examples from plays you have seen or read? 

In our society today, (especially in an academic setting) we are so focused on nailing the meanings and intentions of others' writings. These people reflect on the past and try to imitate the original creative enactment of a piece and it ends there. There's no further research that needs to be done because it would be useless.
In a certain way, I can agree with this because silence can yell into your ear if used properly. And sometimes just enveloping and encompassing the character at hand rather than elaborately analyzing a text can provide a better result.
I haven't seen very many works of theatre, and it saddens me to say this, but there is no outstanding individual that just pops to mind. I'm sure if I look back at my history at a slower pace, I'm sure I'll be able to find a few, but as of now, there are no actors/actresses that just position themselves to the bottom of my brain.

7. How can you go from Deadly Theatre to Living Theatre as an actor? 

"In a living theatre, we would each day approach the rehearsal putting yesterday's discoveries to the test, ready to believe that the true play has once again escaped us. But the Deadly Theatre approaches the classics from the viewpoint that somewhere, someone has found out and defined how the play should be done." I think this is pretty self-explanatory. Theatre is subjective and can be molded into one's perspectives. To try and find the initial intentions of the play precipitates the oncoming deadly theatre.

8. How did Pekin Opera lose its connectedness to the life of society around it? 

The real Pekin Opera was the perfect example of how its exterior forms remained constant even as time rolled by - like a monument. But as time continued, it was inevitable that the life around the society would somehow affect its state. Now, "few of the attitudes and meanings of the traditional Pekin Opera relate to the new structure of thought in which this people now lives (Brook 15)." This reflects how the state of society somehow impacts how theatre is formed.

9. At the heart of the meaning of LIving Theatre: "theatre is always a self destructive art, and it is alway written on the wind." What is your interpretation of this? 

I think it's trying to say something that has been coming up a long throughout this blog post. I think it's trying to say that a work of theatre always have a single fault that precipitates the downfall of itself. Also, I think it's trying to say that theatre is always changing and moving different directions as wind is never still.

10. According to Brook, what should be influencing theatre at all times? 

I believe he said something about time affecting theatre as with time theatre always changes. Because theatre always changes, it offers us fresh perspectives and ideas that are implemented into theatre. New color schemes, set designs keep our eyes excited and curious for what it will supply us with next.


What is a deadly spectator? 
Is there flexibility in modern theatre?