All 2 entries tagged Ensemble
No other Warwick Blogs use the tag Ensemble on entries | View entries tagged Ensemble at Technorati | There are no images tagged Ensemble on this blog
April 08, 2009
Back for the second day, the first thing we did was relay to a member of a group who couldn't be there yesterday what we have covered. Two offers that stayed with me were two members of the group describing how inspired, excited and hyper they felt after yesterday's sessions. I think this reflects the power of drama workshops themselves to evoke a feeling of inspiration and empowerment, through providing a fear free space in which participants can explore stimulus and extract meaning relevant to their own ways of knowing/understanding life.
Yesterday we spent some time exploring the idea of language in drama workshops, we continued on this theme today, specifically how language can be used to help create that fear-free space (which for me is synonymous with the concept of the ensemble) which Bomboozle theatre feel is so key.
Chris gave us a list of top ten language tips. Some of these covered the same area in terms of process and effect, so I will group them together in a way that makes sense for me:
1. We/us not you/I
This guideline is something we found tripping us in practical exercises, and it can become inhibative if you get obsessive with it. But although "Today I want you to tell me everything you know about asylum seekers" and "Today were are going to share everything we know about asylum seekers" is a small change, it makes a HUGE difference. Chris pointed out it also gives you a way to guide the group and input without making a value judgement about their input (or lack thereof) because everyone is working in collaboration on a task. For example, teacher's input doesn't reject or 'overrule' young people's input if the group is a 'we'.
2. Pace pace pace and lead
This has connections with the idea of matching - you begin by going to where the young person is at, settling the group into a shared reality "We're here, in the school hall, on a Tuesday afternoon, some of us are a bit fidigity after lunch, but as we settle into our chairs we begin to remember the story we were looking at this morning..." Chris described it as finding a way to be 'with' a group, and then leading them forward to a new exercise/idea. This method is also very representative of Chris's ethic of taking time within the drama until everyone is a space to move forward.
3. Language of Beliefs
I'm grouping together several different techniques here. Again, Chris suggests beginning with where the young person is at: "I know you don't want to... (sit with the group right now, for e.g.) but what would it be like if you did?" or, more firmly: "but what will it be like when you do?" This phrase removes any element of conflict, and so without pressure invites the young person to consider a different experience to the one they are currently having, to explore the possibility of changing their beliefs about their behaviour.
Chris doesn't claim this as infallible, but does report a high success rate of using the language of beliefs in this way, he suggests several other variations, that make connections between belief and imagination. For example:
"If there was a miracle tonight and... what would it feel/look/sound like?" (this focuses on the benefits of changing a particular belief)
"What would have to happen for you to..." (in this example, imagination is used not only to identify where you want to be, but ways of getting there)
4. Persuasive Language
Initially I struggled with this, as it did have a feeling of using 'salespeak' in an educational context. Which for me has all sort of uncomfortable connotations of invisible curriculums. However, in the light of my earlier questions (see Molly Whuppieentry) about ways of maintaining discipline and focus in a classroom I recognise the value of these techniques in encouraging behaviours that maintains a fear-free space for all members of the group. These techniques include appealing to a young person's sense of justice in three steps:
"If... then... does that seem fair?"
The qualification of "does that seem fair?" is an important one, Chris pointed out. If the young person doesn't recognise this as fair, you have to take the time (there it is again) to negotiate what they recognise as a fair response to their behaviours.
Chris also values the use of even small verbal changes, recognising the use of language can effect how our unconscious minds interpret a statement. For example '... isn't it?" makes it more likely the young person will agree with a statement (not that you want them to agree with everything, but useful if you want to take them somewhere in the drama that needs a certain level of shared reality first). While using "Please walk" rather than "Don't run" is more likely to succeed, because the former doesn't involve the introduction of the reality you don't want to exist, i.e. - the young person running.
I shall leave it there, because using language to examin how you use language is something that ties my brain into knots after a while. There was lots of other content at these training workshops I haven't included, but I hope what I have touched on gives a flavour of how the past two days have both inspired and challenged my practice.
March 02, 2009
"the idea of the ensemble as a community reconciles the artistic and social purposes of Theatre making"- Jonothan Neelands (Course Director)
Early on in our course we were introduced to the concept of the ENSEMBLE, and it's importance as an artistic, social and educational construct. The idea of meaning existing between was something I was familiar with from my time as a drama undergraduate, and I now began to expand it - meaning between not only performers and audience, but between teacher and student, student and student, citizen and citizen. For me, theatre naturally inhabits the edges - the grey, dangerous, exciting and taboo borders between supposed opposite or singular entities. I began to understand that this idea encompasses not only what we show in theatre, but the participants themselves - by taking the leap of inhabiting this shared space we achieve what Geoffrey Streatfield describes as "a secure environment without ever being a comfort zone. All of us are continually challenging ourselves and being inspired by those around us."
Our class experienced this during a session with visiting practitioner Brian Lighthill. Brian is currently researching how using Shakespeare can help teach citizenship and PHSE. In a swift-paced workshop, little changed from the ones he delivers in secondary schools, we combined whole space drama games and story 'wooshes' with carefully scaffolded discussion exercises to explore ideas such as 'community', 'blame', 'truth', and 'responsibility' through Romeo and Juliet and Macbeth.
The feeling of ensemble was engendered from the beginning through the agreement on a set of group rules (or guidelines as my inner liberal would prefer to call them) and a simple walking the space exercise that emphasised group responsibility for ensuring the space was evenly filled.
The result was a powerful atmosphere in the room, different from other sessions and more reminiscent of debates in my undergraduate philosophy modules than any drama class I could recall. Students spoke rapidly - international students breaking industriously off into Greek and Mandarin to discover the right English words to explain themselves - agreement, disagreement, questioning, clarification and extension of each other's ideas: never before had we worked so efficiently together in an effort to create meaning between ourselves.
Brian's role in this had been a facilitator in the truest sence - providing stimulus and helping to create a framework within which this sharing and learning could occur. This, I felt, was the sort of practitioner I wanted to be. Able to create that environment that was at once secure, but challeging and inspirational; blur the boundries between theatre and citizentry, art and life - recognising one could not exist without the other and they can never be mutally exclusive concepts.
And yet I struggled with some aspects of the workshop - did I agree that we had used Shakespeare without once directly encounting his dialogue, written or spoken? Did I accept that the language could represent enough of a boundry to some students to justify it's exclusion? Where does the value of working with Shakespeare truely lie - in understanding his stories or his words, if indeed we can make that clear distinction?
Also Brian used the term 'impartial facilitator' - can one ever be truely impartial? What if, in attempting to be impartial, all we do is fail to recognise and therefore naturalise our own partiality? Surely the advantage of the ensemble is not in striving to be objective individuals, but in sharing and learning from each others subjectivities - the facilitator included?