Expectation, and how to handle it when your expectations do not meet with those running the show.
Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
Education work, for an artist, is somewhat a commission in my mind. Unless you are devising an education programme to support your own professional work you have to meet the remit of your employer and more importantly the remit of those attending your class. Even at that if you are devising your own education programme you must meet the requirements of those you are selling the programme to.
Therefore, how do you address a situation in which all expectations are different yet all equally ''correct''?
I have been in situations previously where I know the expectation compromises my professional integrity and as a result have been told by corporations that they no longer require my services.
Apologies if I refuse to perform services that are out with the role of a tutor, are actually extremely serious and more so that I am not trained to do: for example feeding an individual at a high risk of choking or restraining a powerful young man who has extremely challenging behaviour.
Further apologies to the establishments who feel cramming forty under tens in a small carpeted space with only myself and a volunteer from a local dance school is perfectly acceptable. I simply won't do it as it would be no fun for anyone, let alone be productive or creatively stimulating.
These situations are easy to negate as they are arguably wrong on the grounds of (I hate to say it) health and safety which means I don't ever have to venture into the grey area of artistic code or unwritten social expectation to terminate a contract.
However, what happens when something is 'wrong' on the grounds of artistic code and expectation. How far should you be willing to bend or should you bend at all? Is it a case of stating that some elements of practice are more beneficial than others? Or is it a case of letting this be led by the commissioning body?
It is extremely difficult to answer in general terms as each case is so specific.
For example, with new learners in science we lie. Certain physical equations are over simplified to the extent that they don't actually reflect the science of the matter at all BUT if we did not over simplify in this manner it would be impossible to introduce the subject matter to a new learner in the first place.
Therefore, can we over simplify in participatory settings without compromising the art form we deliver?
Personally I feel that yes we can depending on the expectation of the client, however I don't think that other artists agree. In certain situations the client does not agree which makes the matter even more complex.
If working with a group of aspiring professional dancers then yes, I believe a professional company ethos totally mirroring the professional practice of the company should be used. No argument from me, BUT the majority of dance enthusiasts do so at a recreational level.
When dealing with young children I revel in the balance of creative and 'technical' work however many parents and employers criticise this creative play in spite of my thorough explanation and reasoning behind it (which can be backed up by screeds of research FYI!!!!). This brings in to question, who is the client? The parent or the young dancer? In my experience more often than not the parent which is very sad considering that some of the strongest structured improvisations I have ever seen have been performed by five year olds who grasps the concept of an improvisational score as naturally as they play with Lego!
In additional support needs work I have often received feedback from the support workers of non verbal dancers who claim to 'know' the individual they care for but when this support worker changes the feedback changes. GREAT!
Furthermore, in a team teaching environment I have received feedback from peers. This, I feel is extremely vital and a great experience to learn. However, this is not always a bed of roses and can create a platform which questions everybody's expectations (and as ego becomes involved can become an underhand slanging match about artistic integrity) in spite of detailed planning.
Finally, what if the entire group are satisfied with the exception of one individual. How far do you change your approach and faith in your approach to suit that individual? At what point do you simply let the client know that their expectations were wrong and point them in another direction?
In many commercial settings NEVER but surely this is detrimental to the art form as well as the other dancers in the room? Of course contemporary dance can be taught to motown music and if it creates a greater response from the dancers in the space (although in the eyes of some this is horrifying) then fine. But, at what point does the art form become neglected and misunderstood to the point that the expectations built over years of its; evolution become lost?
'A camel is a horse designed by a committee'
Wednesday, 5 October, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
At a recent meeting of the artists in Dumfries and Galloway, where there has recently been another atrocity in the mismanagement of the arts, a gentleman used this apparently well known proverb and I genuinely had to stifle my inappropriate laughter! Yet, a truer word has never been spoken.
In my short artistic career I have seen many situations in which arts organisations have been closed or individuals have been removed from key positions in what can only be described as a haphazard manner with potentially devastating effects.
I don't wish to dwell on the politics of any individual circumstance but recent events in Dumfries and Galloway have brought the complete misunderstanding of the management of the arts to light once again.
D&G Arts Association was in many respects the key link in Dumfries and Galloway between artists, the council and funders. I do not wish to comment on their successes or failures at this time because the decision has been made to liquidate the company as stated on their website:
The directors have decided to cease all trading activities of dgArts from 30th September 2011, due to the company's financial position. They are taking advice and are in the process of commencing the procedure to wind up the company.
You will be contacted by the company over the next few weeks with details of a meeting to appoint a liquidator.
Patricia J Smith on behalf of the Directors.
My great concern, having spoken with artists and various representatives in the area is the manner in which an arts association has so quickly been liquidated, in turn not only leaving staff jobless at short notice but leaving all of the projects they had been working on and towards in turmoil. Therefore, directly impacting on the artists in the region and those who would have been visiting the region to support these projects.
Dumfries and Galloway is a creative region, in spite of not truly advertising this at present, it is a cultural hub especially in terms of Visual Art and Craft. DGAA played a fundamental role in building some of the great things that contribute to developing the creativity and creative reputation of the region. As we all know, as artists, it is from prior investments that new projects evolve through weeks - if not months - of painstaking discussions.
We often rely on the promise of our investors until things are tied into a contract, usually not far in advance of the project start date by which point much of the research and development for the project has already taken place. Or, has indeed occupied our minds and usually marked out a chunk of our diary (the money maker) in order to ensure that when funding decisions are made we are available to complete our side of the deal.
Business minds don't get this, or if they do their procedures do not reflect this. When losing an individual or an association such as DGAA you do not only lose the knowledge these associations have built of their sector and region. You vitally lose contact with the artists of the area and more importantly you lose the hooks upon which many of these artists had already hung their future plans.
It takes years to become a recognised and valued competitor in the arts sector. I use the word competitor as sadly we all have to be to earn our crust and, although I do agree that we each as artists are responsible for finding our niche in the commercial sector from where we can support ourselves, we have to compete on a regular basis for limited funding.
However, the years we spend building a reputation are quite blatantly thrown away when liquidators or committees overturn the networks that have taken so long to forge by simply deciding something/ someone is no longer viable in their eyes.
How many people are from an arts background who make these decisions? And by background I mean, who has honestly struggled to achieve what they are intrinsically inspired to create whilst paying the bills? Current systems do not assure me greatly that any of these people are.
What I find more alarming, and what is possibly at the root cause of these atrocities still taking place, is that we as artists are also reflective of 'committee decisions' lacking effect.
Especially in regions such as D&G, but inclusive of even inner city arts, we are so secluded in our work through scheduling, location, inspiration and trying to fit a life in occasionally. This in itself gives the business minded a distinct advantage as by the time we organise ourselves enough to meet to discuss lobbying for what we know is artistically best we have missed the boat.
However, even if we do manage to get together (such as a truly impressive number of artists did in D&G on Monday of this week - sincerely hats off to such a spread out population of artists getting together in one room and more so applause to the individuals who got us all there: you know who you are!) we are not particularly good at getting anything done! Sorry, but it's kind of true.
We talk a good game, we are likeminded in many respects but without the administration to carry our thoughts forward in a succinct manner to our ''superiors'' we may as well not meet at all.
A committee of artists is equally as difficult as any committee, more so in fact because we are all trying so hard to balance our general career that lobbying is just another thing on the to do list.
How do we overcome this?
In an ideal world there would be a dedicated arts enthusiast who would take the administrative strain allowing us all to input our feelings but who would then have the passion, time and business acumen to create strategy and impact. However, if these individuals existed would we not all have voluntary managers who, often as we do, were involved and worked with us without the promise of a pay cheque?
Perhaps a union? A union that understands us BUT as freelance artists would we really strike?
Firstly, as a performer, choreographer or tutor I can list twenty names off the top of my head who would jump right into my shoes leaving me on a picket line skint, soaked (I'm in Scotland) and in doubt of my future.
Secondly, I hate to have to say it but would anyone really care if we all stopped creating? Many of our 'audiences' don't miss our work per se but only notice the obviousness of its distinct effects after the event; in a parallel to the Black Swan Theory (hence, the name of my company, so named BEFORE that bizarre movie).
As per usual I don't have an answer. However, I openly call out to anybody with one because if we don't find one soon this kind of thing is going to continue leaving too many casualties to count including lost projects, lost artists and lost development of our arts sector.
Funding systems are not for artists!
Tuesday, 20 September, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
I am not a martyr to the cause and would never make out that I am hard done by in terms of support but of late I have been snowed under filling out funding grants for next year and am sick of feeling inadequate.
This inadequacy does not come from not having answers; ever since I was a child I've always had an answer! But in terms of the said forms I do not have an answer yet....
Opportunities and artists, from my experience, tend to work in three monthly blocks however the latest application wait is 12 weeks. Therefore I find out on the day I'm supposed to fly if I receive the funding or not. It's an opportunity I cannot turn down but come December I may be getting on a plane (flights will have to be booked now or will cost the entirety of my grant) without a penny to my name. Eeeek!
I know many artists feel the same and although I do not have a definitive answer surely there must be a simpler way of letting us know if we stand a chance.
It takes five minutes to read an application and put it in the 'no-hope', 'maybe' or 'looks like a winner' pile. Could this work systematically? It would make life easier for the artist anyway and surely we are the people being served.
It's either that or I start planning years down the line by which point both passion and capacity to learn become confused by over planning and logisitics.
The other issue comes in that the arts is a gamble and I feel that many of these forms ask you to predict an outcome before the project has started. Research and development is just that, you don't know where you're going until you've been on the journey. i'm not saying you should give out money willy nilly but really, surely funders a scent for a winner!
Maybe we could give presentations and find out on the day.....eeeeek!! Express it through dance, ha! Obviously for large amounts it needs to be more official but for development could someone just turn up with a cheque book???? Imagine!
WHAT DO YOU SEE??
Wednesday, 24 August, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
Apologies once again for the lack of contact but August has been a whirlwind. Not only does Edinburgh erupt with every form of art and some forms less arty but I have also had the joy of sporting two cracked ribs, visiting the Impulstanz festival, performing with two wonderful projects and entering a bboy competition (YES, I believe I may be going insane but it was an epic moment in my life).
IMPULSTANZ is a must visit and when in Vienna I had the joy of meeting many people from all over the world who had turned our for the festival. Literally from all over the world (Australia, New Zealand, Uganda, Mexico, Turkey, France, Hungary.... the list goes on). It offers too many opportunities to discuss, please check their website, and last year truly changed my life.
It cost me very little to get there, live there and dance there (considering what I got out of it all) however what is most concerning is that I was the only Scottish bred dancer who is still fully based in Scotland to be there. Aside from the wonderful Norman Douglas and Penny Chivas Scotland was long forgotten and there were few and far between English, Irish or Welsh reps either.
This is very worrying in my mind. I don't believe we should move directly along the same artistic route as Europe or the rest of the world but surely to feed ourselves we must develop on a parallel with them? Why are more artist not leaving there bubble to fuel themselves?
Just a thought.
Speaking of fuel, I will be visiting the cracking Dance City in Newcastle next week to begin work on a new project. I am extremely excited as for once I a wiling to admit this may be a year in the researching and that there is no rush to complete the work, only an urgency to ensure we don't miss anything during the development of the piece.
As such I would like to ask what you see when you dance? Literally, spiritually and in any other form. Answers on a postcard..... or just private message Black Swan Dance Theatre on facebook (under products and services). Many Thanks!
Got to have a sob story??
Monday, 25 July, 2011 | Comment | Make A Comment
I have been off the radar for so long it's quite remarkable yet I am quite pleased as the entire time has been spent dancing amongst one of the most diverse casts I have ever experienced. Talk about learning from people... it's been so much I could do with a week to recover.
Sadly amongst all the joy there is the terrible reality of realising what dance has become. The enthusiasm of people concerning dance is growing immensely and this is exciting however the lack of knowledge being bred by so called 'dance reality shows' is making my life a misery.
Since when, as a contemporary dancer, is it customary to use pop music and bust out the odd back flip? Whatever happened to R&D and an art? So it is, the definition of my trade lies somewhere between this and my mum telling people I pretend to be a tree. Oh dear!
What is worse is this growing belief that all dancers (who are remarkably similar in slight frame) are represented by a small minority which is strangely 50% male? Last time I checked my personal statistics I spend half my life throwing females around for the lack of men in the trade. Although I do, heaven forbid, lift men in works where the lady plays a greater role than a simple weak woman in a short dress possibly looking for love and being manhandled by a topless, oiled up hunk.
Not to mention the fact they can turn their hand to any dance style...... what do you mean you don't tap Emma? Ehhhh, does a joiner fix cars?
Promotion is great but are audiences coming in to theatres? If they are, are they leaving disappointed because their television coaching leads them to believe three minutes is an ideal length for a work and everything should either be funny or about love whilst playing on traditional gender roles?
There has to be a better way of getting people involved in the nitty gritty of the artform?
Oh and finally, I may as well say what most of us think, since when did having one particularly flexible hip make you a dancer qualified to judge all styles like you know what you're talking about?
Entertainment 1 - 0 Art
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." - Buckminster Fuller
Thursday, 23 June, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
I love this notion, all great innovators (not necessarily consciously) have taken this on board. However, when consciously trying to tackle an existing reality it is not always that easy. If logic steps into the process you can find yourself beaten before you have began.
All of the areas you procrastinate over replacing exist because they serve a purpose. To replace these you must identify what their purpose is and then fulfill it in a new, more successful manner. The real catch 22 with the arts is that everything is so dependant on subsystems and counterparts there sometimes seems to be no way to break the cycle.
Therefore, maybe the innovators are those who are bold enough to take their first steps blind? For example, the emerging choreographer who just goes ahead without any financial support but then evokes interest and creates opportunities for themselves; the first individual (she's a lady and great lady) to stand up and demands that they undertake a PhD in Hip Hop because people are interested in the research; the aspiring dancer who, without sufficient funds, jets off to New York to discover more about training and themselves as a dancer yet they find a way to survive and return a stronger person.
Due to the dreaded CV update, flurry of current audition notices and short contract applications I have completed in the month, I have been reflecting upon how naive I must have appeared to do many of the things that have became the foundation of my developing career but also the headway I made through this naivety (not to mention through a hard slog of work!). Now, I find myself questioning taking on tasks as I am aware of how much work will be involved and I sometimes wish I could be that naive again.
My favourite artists are those who are no longer naive but crazy enough to do it anyway (of which there are still many they are just less commercially known!). In a way I wonder of they are the REAL artists as their compulsion overrides their logic?
If anyone can point me in the direction of more of these artists please do as these as the next round of people I want to hunt down and learn from.
How do you teach a plie???
Tuesday, 24 May, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
Having a discussion with a dear physicist friend last night the topic of conversation arrived at a conference she had been to where a Harvard lecturer had stumbled upon a fantastic new means of teaching. Instead of using lectures to regurgitate a text book at students using power point (or other similar available presentation software) he suggested that the students actively engage in their learning, firstly as a whole , then in pairs and finally through a discussion with their lecturer.
My friend was shocked that this was nothing new to dancers.
This in turn shocked me.
To watch each other, discuss with each and to use a million different forms of repetition is the basis of all good dance training. If I was left to read a ballet manual I would in no way ever be a prima!
This led us to discuss the way in which we both learned physics at school. In short, everything you are told you discover is a lie when you reach a more advanced level. For example at Standard Grade Speed equates to Distance divided by Time. In Higher you are told that Speed does not exist as Velocity is a more accurate representation of what we believe to be speed as it takes in to consideration rate and direction of change. It turns out that as you go on to learn even more physics that everything you have ever been taught was a variation of the factual truth.
I suppose this is life all over (and definitely choreographic academia, but that is another discussion). It is only natural that we oversimplify things to ensure novices are not overwhelmed by the knowledge we give them.
Therefore, does it take a very special type of teacher to teach a novice?
I know, as I'm sure we all do, many wonderful dancer who are rubbish teachers for many reasons. I utterly disagree with the phrase 'If you can't, TEACH' and think more 'If you can't teach, don't teach' as for some it is sharing of knowledge that drives them.
The more we discussed the more it appeared to me that the most difficult teaching can be at novice level and not because there is so much to be taught - this widens out the playing field. Hell, everyone can leave learning something new if they knew nothing to begin with! BUT it is more difficult as you have to be selective of your knowledge. You must be so knowledgeable that you know what knowledge is superior to other knowledge, even when all of the knowledge relies upon the other knowledge that you have to miss out. You know?!!
That does not even get in to the fact you must be able to communicate this knowledge well with your students.
So, my question, how do you teach a plie?
It's such a simple yet fundamental move.
Do you being in posture? This is a nightmare to correct once bad practice begins?
Do you bend the knees past demi plie before you discuss weight placement on the feet? This will lead to weak ankles.
Do you use the arms or just forget they're there?
Parallel or turned out? Do you then go into detail about rotation?
I could go on.....
The more we discussed it the more we came to the conclusion that without the ability to simplify things we would never do anything but just discuss doing things and novices would never get to dance! Therefore, as hard as it is, until some students have a grasp of one thing you must relax about other details. It is not turning a blind eye but giving them time to digest before overloading them.
This, I know, seems obvious but for at least three hours last night fascinated us as the more you simplify the world the less there is to worry about.
With that in mind I am off to simplify the new Creative Scotland funding system for myself... wish me luck!
Lost for words
Wednesday, 20 April, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
I feel as if I should write something spectacular.
I have spent the past month analysing my methods as a choreographer and creating work, my body was the fittest it had been in a long time. My mind was creatively stimulated and my thoughts were starting to make sense.
This was all until last week when the week off I have been waiting four years for came to fruition. Now instead of feeling inspired and refreshed I just want to sleep and don't really have a great opinion of much.
Currently I am tempted to curl up on the sofa with David Foster Wallace and get even more mentally stressed at his fascinating writing style.
Therefore I apologise for the pointlessness of this blog however I am assured that such droughts are needed....
Hopefully I'll be back next week with something mind blowing to say!
Fat Cats On Caviar?
Wednesday, 9 March, 2011 | Comment | Make A Comment
In a recent email I was sent details of the pay grades of certain Creative Scotland directors. I have done no research to see if this is true however I don't have any reason to believe an artist would sit and make it up as most of us are busy rushing to our second job, filling in funding applications or, heaven forbid, dancing.
In light of the fact I haven't done my research all I will say is that the average salary (taking into account six positions with a range of £60 000 - £130 000 per annum) is between £74 167 - £78 332 per annum.
I don't want to state the obvious, but I will. This year there were applications totalling £117 365 to the Creative Development fund with an available fund of £31 241. That is a short fall of £86 124. Divide this by six and that would entail each of these directors undertaking a £15 000 pay cut: some people don't even make £15 000 a year to have it cut from their salary!
I am nobody to rate the job that is being done in any of the funding institutions, I don't dedicate enough of my time looking at the systems to offer a true critique of them. I also know it is not as simple as taking from the rich to give to the poor but since when did everyone deserve so much money? When the Prime Minister is taking a salary of £142 000 per year for trying to run the entire country (I make no comment on the way in which he is doing so...) surely running the arts sector isn't quite so stressful or deserving of lump sums?
The general issue I have with our country at the moment is that there are far too many 'fat cats on caviar' everywhere. Why, why, why as there been no salary cap introduced? Why are those at the bottom of the ladder once again getting bumped when directors are making a pretty pocket? Why, why, why does nobody rate job satisfaction over money? Why, why, why are local football academies closing down everywhere when Wayne Rooney makes £160 000 per week? Why are people being made redundant right left and centre yet the boss is still driving a swanky Audi with all the trimmings? I could go on and on as I am sure you all could but seriously WHY?
Eurgh, GREED is horrible.
Neuroesthetics: Please no????
Thursday, 10 February, 2011 | Comments | Make A Comment
Neuroesthetics is the study of how and why we respond to art. It's a relatively new phenomenon which takes into account how the brain is stimulated neurologically when brought into contact with many artistic elements.
According to Semir Zeki (Professor of Neuroesthetics at University College London) as quoted in Stylist Magazine (Issue 63) states that 'The artist is, in a sense, a neuroscientist exploring the brain with different tools'.
Amplification, isolation, problem solving, tricks with our peripheral vision, emotional play: These are just some of the tricks which have been utilised to make iconic pieces of art dating back centuries. When you read into the science of it all it makes perfect sense as to why these pieces are iconic and why we are attracted to them BUT I don't care.
I love science generally but this is one step too far. Have you ever seen a child discover that Santa is not real? Okay, so that's horrifically cliché but remember how it feels to lose the illusion.
If science like this continues then art will no longer be creative but will become formulaic. With all the hypocrisy of our formulaic funding systems and entertainment sectors surely we should be trying to allow for actual creativity not more a more strategic understanding of what exists.
I hate to be a stickler but it also means the end of the world for actual artists. Intellects will be in a position of power as they follow the formulas and use the tools. Obviously I know that the 'actual artists' have developed systems and have an understanding of what makes a great piece but this is sacred.
The knowledge comes from investment in the art, practice and instinct. Occasionally something comes along which blows everything that went before out of the water and this reinvents the formulas which exist.
It's exciting, cannot be conquered and is sometimes impossible to articulate. Surely that is the essence of real art? Once we understand it in a scientific manner it will just become another controlled element of our society. I will no longer express in my choreography but will problem solve neurological pathways. The element of nervousness as the audience enter the theatre will be numbed.
With the best of intention I will avoid the research and formula but as the knowledge evolves creative practice will naturally become obsolete as other practitioners can work faster and as a result at less cost.
I really feel that our quest for knowledge has gotten lost along the way. Enlightenment does not come from dissecting everything but experiencing everything. Art is all about experience and if we over analyse it we will take that away. If that is taken away I know that I'm not going to be the only one who is completely lost.
