danctp-blog

[danctp-blog]

Performance photography, courtesy of Paul Anthony Wilson.

[danctp-blog]

Evaluation of ‘Scratched’ by 7 EVEN

‘Scratched’ began by the group looking at a selection of cult films, and extracting material from these films in an attempt to deconstruct a selection of these cult films. It then became evident that the trailers of these films were more interesting than the actual films themselves. The trailers were fragmented and the material in the trailers was very jumpy, fast and often misleading when connecting it with the actual film. 

We wanted to look further into this confusion and misleading that a film trailer can give, and turn it into a performance. Along the way, we found that the logistics of a film trailer often had relation to the performance we created. The ‘what you see is not always what you get’ often related to our performance, as our dance-esque performance became further separated and fragmented from the performers who created it. The material that we originally created all came from images and areas from the cult film trailers that we had viewed, and this material was extracted most literally. This ‘literal’ aspect of deconstructing became further void as we continued the process, and often the material became so blurred and fragmented that our extraction was no longer a deconstruction. This was all part of the process, and we continued to realise that our performance also had a basis of dance, and that we portray ourselves as dancers more so than performers, or at least would-be dancers. 

Scratched still kept some elements of a classic cult film, as well as elements of a classic film trailer yet these elements do not have to be recognized to access the performance for what is really is. The movement created within the piece is so ambiguous that the audience takes control of the performance - the ambiguous movement allows for an audience to create their own journey and relate themselves to the performance in whatever way they wish. 

This leads me to glitch art. We soon came to realize that our performance was starting to look more like an error, damaged or messed with and therefore was appearing glitched. Glitch art allowed us to understand that we can further glitch our work but in a purposeful manner and show this through the glitching of technology such as lighting and sound which, in turn, glitches the performer - the technology now also has the control as well as the audience. This leaves the question ‘are the performers ever really in control’?. 

[danctp-blog]

This is the video of our final performance of ‘Scratched’ by 7 EVEN.

[danctp-blog]

Feedback from Preview Performance on 15/05/18 and Rehearsal (16/05/18)

We recieved some important and useful feedback from our preview performance on 15/05/18. Mole Wetherell from Reckless Sleepers stated the following...

‘Was quite a brilliant performance, thank you it was worth nearly missing my flight for’ @recklesssleepers

We spent time with our supervisor for the project, Kevin, who went through his list of feedback that would help us in adapting or changing the piece ready for the final performance on Friday. We also discussed what some audience members said about our performance. All of which feedback is below...

Is there a rule? - It appeared that audience members were noticing the rules that were taking place on stage. Funnily, a lot of the things that the audience were noticing weren’t actually rules that us, as performers, had created on purpose and some of the rules that we had purposely made had not been picked up on. It might be interesting to play with this more going forward, to give the audience a sense of comfort in finding these rules as a way of rewarding our audience.

Soundtracks are emotive - Almost like a film trailer, the soundtracks mirror the way we move and the way we present ourselves on stage. This is interesting as it takes the audience on a journey through different emotions using both the music and our physical presence.

Audience laughing - The audience appeared to laugh at certain points but the points of comedic value were not neccessarily points in the performance that we expected the audience to laugh. Once again, these moments give a reward to the audience for ‘waiting’ so long and being so patient in the repetitive and monotonous stages of the performance.

Lack of physical contact - It was mentioned that it might be possible for the performance to be read as being 7 completely seperate solo performances, but we don’t deem this to be an issue as this is just one stance an audience can have and we are open to opinions on how an audience can recieve and understand the piece.

Signalling wrong movements or gestures - When we make a mistake or we place one of our body parts in the wrong position, we could address this. For example, if my foot was not positioned in the way that it should be then I could awknowledge this physically and then find a way to change this to the way it should be.

After the feedback was delivered to us, we spent the afternoon watching back our piece that was recorded on video and discussing with each other, as a group, the things that needed changing. Kevin made it clear that spending as least time in the performance space as possible would be a good idea as the majority of improvements and feedback that we got can be addressed without being directly in the performance space and being physical. We also spent a small amount of time editing tracks, which was a simple task and did not take long but was a positive thing to do in relation to the technological process of our work. 

[danctp-blog]

Rehearsal (14/05/18)

This session was spent preparing and altering the small details in the performance. Although the details were minute, it was important to address these issues so that our performance can be conveyed by an audience how we want it to - we want our material to be accessible for an audience, but the hidden themes (for example, the reminisence of the rehearsal process) does not have to be explicit for an audience to understand our piece as a whole. It was suggested in a previous rehearsal that the ‘tapping’ noise that occurs at the beginning of the piece could be used again in the piece. We found the final section of the piece a rather suitable area to place this tapping again. During the song ‘Patricia - Static Scene’ at the end of the piece, we have decided to place the tapping sound over the song at the very end of the track. This means that this is the last thing an audience hears, along with the heavy breathing of the performers. We also came to a group decision that using sound monitors, like what we used at The Waterside Theatre in Manchester, would really improve how the sound is heard within the performance. This not only makes it a much more enjoyable and immersive experience for an audience but also makes it easier for us as we are using the sound as a score throughout the performance to know where our next position or movement occurs. We used two sound monitors which were placed on either side of the stage just in front of the audience. We deemed it necessary to end the session with a walk through of the performance as this gave chance for any questions to be raised about each particular section. Fortunately, no major questions or issues occurred during the walk through and it was successful in its running. 

[danctp-blog]

Conceptual Understanding of ‘Scratched’ by 7 EVEN.

Why does our piece relate to that of film trailers?

The piece is fragmented

The piece is ‘not a whole’ and it is does not particularly flow from start to finish.

The performance has a lack of substance and a lack of combination. The performance fluctuates between different stimuli.

The cutting and the jumping of the performance

The ‘glossy finish’

Framing

A ‘stand in’ for the real thing - almost as though it is a preview.

Withholding information, context or a story.

Dance

Lack of ability and skill

Out of context

The inconsistency of the ‘how to’

Reaching but not achieving

Imperfections

Abstract movement

Technique

Glitches

Out of our control

Handing over the control over to the audience

Loosing control

Responding to external actions

Images out of chaos

Change of improve

How to make a trailer:

Establishing

Introducing conflict

Introducing the protagonist

Introducing the antagonist

‘Scratched’

Skill

Inconsiderable

Jumping

Control/no control

Remove

Deliberate

Damage

[danctp-blog]

This is a copy of the conceptual understanding of our piece. We spent time with Kevin understand our piece conceptually and then wrote this down on paper. We felt that this would not only be a positive way forward in terms of improving and adapting our piece, but also for our post performance discussions when we have to critically discuss our performance and what it meant. You can see a full list and explanation of this conceptual understanding in the blog post ‘Conceptual Understanding of ‘Scratched’ by 7 EVEN’.

[danctp-blog]

This is a copy of our show programme. The programme consists of the following...

An ‘glitched’ image of all of the performers on the front of the programme. The image is edited in relation to glitch art. 

A process description of the rehearsals - a description of our process and how what exists within the performance is a result of a particular process. 

A scrapbook-type theme. We quite liked the idea of making the programme look quite scrapbook-esque especially as it has a relation to our process. A process is a time in which ideas are ‘scrapped’ and new ones are made so the scrapbook links in with this idea of representing a process of the creation of a performance.

CD’s fitted into the CD case. These CD’s are scratched and link with the idea of glitching material. We are not aware of whether or not these CD’s will play or not which is part of the notion of a glitch.

[danctp-blog]

Rehearsal (10/05/18)

We began the session by reflecting on our performance at The Waterside Theatre on Wednesday 9th May 2018. The group felt that, as a whole, the performance went well but the reception that we got from the performance was rather unexpected.

 It was interesting to see an audience respond in such a way. Most of the sections of our piece seemed to have a comedic value to them - for example when Mark first emerged from the curtains at the back of the stage the audience seemed to be in histerics, which was something that we did not think was funny or would add a comedic effect to the piece. The same happened during the bowing and grunting sequence, which made us wonder whether the grunting noise that is being made during this section may possible be a little overaggressive.

The fact that we performed this piece without all of our tech did not seem as much of an issue as we anticipated, yet we do find that the booms (side lighting) sometimes give us more confidence in our position on stage and so we know exactly where we are standing. The side lighting almost acts as a safety net for us as performers, as we are always aware of where we are on stage when recognising the side lighting.

The audittorium at The Waterside Theatre was a very steep one, and one rather different to the room that we have rehearsed and performed in before. This meant that the show had a different appearance than it would if you were to be sat in CCA-0-24 (our usual rehearsal and performance space) when the piece is performed - this was, however, expected prior to our performance at The Waterside Theatre.

After those discussions were had, we found it neccessary to concentrate on the administrative elements to the project. For example, the creating and editing of the show programme was something that needed to be done. The group had an idea that the programme would situate itself inside of a CD case along with a scratched CD. The notion of a scratched CD obviously links with the name of our piece which is ‘Scratched’. You can view the blog post ‘Scratched - Why the name?’ for a reason as to why we decided to name the piece ‘Scratched’. The afternoon was spent creating and editing the programme.

[danctp-blog]

Rehearsal (09/05/18)

This was the rehearsal before our performance at Launch 2018 at The Waterside Theatre in Manchester. Although this performance wasn’t academically related to the Final Projects as a unit, it meant for us to gain a reception from a fresh audience for the first time. Until now, only Kevin (our supervisor for the Final Projects unit) has seen the performance in its entirety. Because we could not take all of our tech with us, it meant that we had to slightly adapt our piece so that we didn’t have our boom stands. Although this meant that the performance would look significantly different, this was easily adaptable and was something that wouldn’t take a long time to change. The session was more about looking at the tech in the performance and how this could be changed once we arrived at The Waterside Theatre in Manchester. We agreed to keep exactly the same lighting state but without the side lighting. We then spent the remainder of the afternoon ensuring that all of our costume was prepared and that any tech that we were taking with us was ready for our departure. 

You can read reviews and feedback on our performance at The Waterside Theatre in Manchester in the blog post ‘Performance at Launch 2018′.

[danctp-blog]

Performance at Launch 2018

On Wednesday 9th May 2018, our group had the opportunity to perform at Launch 2018. Launch 2018 was created as a collaboration of contemporary theatre performers from different academic institutions. Fortunately, we had the opportunity to be one of these performers. We performed this piece at The Waterside Theatre in Manchester and were fortunate enough to receive some feedback on the piece. Feedback that was given is below...

I loved the new performance from 7 EVEN #Scratched tonight as part of the contemporary performance showcase #Launch2018, a mesmerising mix of choreography and confusion, looking for patterns on the dancefloor @CelineKutevu @libbywallace @neilkmac takes me back to @flarefestival

Written by @QuietManDave from www.twitter.com

The second piece before a short interval came from MMU called 'Scratched'. My companion was delighted and enthralled by this piece, which saw 7 performers stagger their entrance on stage as if they were a crab or some such animal. A wordless, almost dance piece, which saw these seven 'crabs' make monotonous and repetitive movements interacting with each other. These 'crabs' then at some point changed into a various array of bottom-feeding sea creatures which again, performed a whole routine of strenuous, repetitive and monotonous moves. For me this signified the cycle of life and the mundanity and futility of it. It is also where I felt the piece should have stopped. However, to the delight of my companion it went on for a further 15 minutes or so, but we had now changed to 'humans' and 'robots' and the music, mood and the moves had changed too. It ended with all of them panting - no need to actually act there! - in a unison move which seemed to go on forever. The pictures created were interesting, but for me I lost interest in the piece quite early on, and failed to be able to connect to it in any meaningful way.

Sourced at http://reviewernumber9.simplesite.com/438815376

[danctp-blog]

This is a video of our 45 minute showing. You can view a full description of this session as well as all of the feedback that was given as a result of the showing in the blog post ‘45 Minute Showing (02/05/18) Feedback’.

[danctp-blog]

45 Minute Showing (02/05/18) Feedback

The 45 minute showing was the final time that we could show our piece before our dress rehearsal. This meant that this was the final time that we could recieve any long term feedback for our piece so that we have enough time to adapt it and work on it before we show again in our dress rehearsal. Of course, things are subject to change after our dress rehearsal however the 45 minute showing is the last point where any large issues or improvements can be addressed so that we have enough time to address them. This showing was also the first time where we could spend some time with our technicians - we had to find people exterior from the group as, obviously the group will be performing on the day. We managed to liase with our friends Casey Shortt and Harry Higgins and they both agreed that they would be technical assistants for our Final Project piece. We made sure to run Harry and Casey through the whole piece so that they were aware of the cues and the programming that had been made prior to their introduction. Making our technicians aware of the lighting and sound is crucial for the success of our piece and, considering our piece is very high tech, this needs to be done sooner rather than later. Spending time with them prior to our 45 minute showing meant that Kevin, our supervisor for the project, was able to see the piece in its entirety and without any disruptions. 

Kevin gave the following feedback after we performed our 45 minute showing. I have also included how we will tackle each piece of feedback...

The audience should be able to observe the glitch. The glitch does not seem to be very accessible for an audience so we need to look at ways to do this so that an audience is aware that a glitch is occurring. This will be done by looking at lighting and sound again and looking at how the lighting and sound can be ‘messed up’ or ‘faulted’.

The tapping behind the curtains is working but gets too loud too quickly. The tapping just needs to become more progressive rather than getting loud in a matter or seconds. We will work on this in due course and this is something that is simple to change and will not take a lot of time.

The tapping sounds a little like gunfire so maybe we need to find another way of tapping to make it sound less like this and more like tapping, like it is supposed to. This is just a case of lowering the volume of the tapping and making the tempo slower.

The audience are able to see the feet behind the curtain before we are revealed. We have decided to address this by clamping the curtains together as well as using black flats behind the curtain that performers can step behind before they reveal themselves on stage.

Tapping needs to be in time with the music once the music comes on. The tapping in the song ‘Buddy Holly - Everyday’ needs to be in time with the tapping that we, as performers, create. Kevin suggested that we connect headphones to the sound system so that 1 performer can hear the song before it comes on - these headphones will be behind the curtains and not visible or audible to the audience.

It works well when we look at the audience and this needs to be done more throughout. Having this relationship with the audience is crucial and acknowledging them is very important. 

It has been recommended that we record the ‘tapping noise’ and overlay this noise on a different track. This adds an element of foreshadowing and can create an ongoing element existing throughout the piece.

The grunting needs to be more significant - maybe this is a case of finding more reasons to grunt. For example we could make our movements throughout the piece a little more strenuous and aggressive so that they then give us more of a reason to make such an aggressive grunting noise.

The sides of the stage still seem to be a problem. People standing on the side when they are not part of the main performing seem rather redundant. We need to give people reason for standing on the sides of the stage. We will look at the idea of acknowledgment and decision making once more.

There could be one more element of costume that gives us more uniformity. At the moment we do not have a lot that connects us as performers. Even though the uniform is rather connected is doesn’t have a specific uniformed element to it. Kevin recommended a bracelet or a piece of jewelry that is the same on all of the performers. We will definitely look into this further. 

Seriousness needs to be eliminated a little more. The acknowledgement needs to make us look a little more relaxed rather than the whole performance having a very serious element to it.

There are points, such as the bowing sequence, where we could drop in and out of sync with each other. This ‘dropping out’ just needs to be more explicit so that it looks purposeful and less of a mistake.

Think about where we end - do we end on or off stage?

[danctp-blog]

Photography (Glitched)

As we were still remaining with the notion of glitch art and the idea of glitching material, we wanted to ensure that this aspiration was shown in our photography. Fortunately, Celine (a member of the group) knew someone who had a hobby in making glitch art which meant that we could send the photos of our choice to be ‘glitched’. This glitching could be making the image look scratched, faded, foggy or out of place. The images below show the result of the glitching of the images...

[danctp-blog]

This is a video from the rehearsal on 30/04/18. You can see a full description of what happened in this session and any issues or problems that we addressed in the blog post ‘Rehearsal (30/04/18)’.

[danctp-blog]

Rehearsal (30/04/18)

The grunting that we make within the bowing sequence needed to be looked at in this sequence in multiple different ways. The first way that we need to look at this is by looking at if the grunting needs to sound more naturally humane. Kevin, our supervisor for the project, previously mentioned that the grunts seem rather overpowering or exaggerative of the sound that we would actually make when bowing. We needed to take this one of two ways - we either needed a reason for the grunting to sound so exaggerative or we needed to look at calming the sound and making it sound more natural in conjunction with the movement that we perform while this grunt noise is being made. We decided that both would suffice so we worked on making a difference between calming the grunting down and then making it more aggressive. Our movements of the bowing would also get calm and aggressive depending on the forcefulness of the breathing. This means that the lighting, the grunting and the movements are all simultaneous in their aggressiveness and calm states. 

[danctp-blog]

This is a video from our session on 29/04/18. The session was spent altering our lighting whilst following a list of improvements that needed to be made to the lighting. You can find a description of this session in the blog post ‘Rehearsal (29/04/18)’.