DANZ QUARTERLY Issue No 13 - October, November, December 2008
Maximising Potential
By Susan Jordan
In 2002, Creative NZ initiated mentor funding and DANZ became an agency through which it was disbursed. Since 2003, we have supported over 60 artists/groups with mentoring of all types, including business and producing as well as choreographic/artistic.
Mentoring has been around for aeons, ever since there were artists and apprentices, and in fact was the main way of transmitting knowledge before formal training programmes were put in place. However, in this decade, "mentoring” has become a bit of a catchword, without artists really knowing what to expect or mentors knowing how to go about it. While there have been good business models around for a while, these have not easily translated into artistic mentoring.
As the DANZ mentoring programme has become increasingly accessed, we have been keen to define the process more accurately. A perfect opportunity arose last year when Tarin Chaplin was visiting from USA, and so DANZ Tamaki created Maximize – a day to investigate choreographic mentoring - at which she was guest presenter. (See article on Chaplin’s choreographic practice in DANZ Quarterly #10).
Then earlier this year, Larry Lavender was on sabbatical at Otago, and DANZ took the opportunity to invite him to take Choreographic Mentoring workshops. There was a three day intensive workshop in Wellington in May, with chorographers from the lower North Island and South Island. DANZ Tamaki took the opportunity to hold another Maximize event where he was guest presenter. Lavender’s approach complements Chaplin’s, but also differs in some aspects. Chaplin prefers not to hear about the work before she actually views it for the first time, whereas Lavender often only mentors outside the rehearsal studio, assisting the choreographer to clarify and verbalise their ideas.
Before he left New Zealand, Lavender was interviewed and asked about his approach to mentoring.
What is your definition of mentoring?
I define mentoring in terms of the outcomes I seek as a mentor and try to link the choreographer’s ideas and concepts for a work with specific methods for creating it. I want the artist to gain the insights necessary for clear artistic choices and to find effective ways to push forward in creating. Mentoring is an open-hearted attempt to fall into step with a choreographer and to facilitate their realisation of a vision.
What are the ideal qualities a mentor should have?
A mentor needs a mature understanding of historical and contemporary trends in dance and art, but should not impose preferences of style. One must be sensitive to the artist’s direction and try to expand their understanding of that direction and ways of coping with the challenges of creating. A good mentor listens carefully and uses non-judgmental clarifying questions and “What if…?” suggestions to maximize the artist’s control over the work. The mentor does not have an emotional stake in the outcome, and exercises critical judgment sparingly; never as a tool to re-make the artist’s vision in accordance with the mentor’s.
What are the various approaches to choreographic mentoring in particular?
I use four integrated techniques. “Creative process mentoring” involves dialogue with the artist held away from the studio. The focus is on ideas for the work and ideas for creating it. “Rehearsal criticism” involves observation, analysis of the social dynamics of rehearsal and the methods used by the artist in creating. Rehearsal criticism helps the artist to link their in-studio actions with the characteristics of their dance. “Provocative work-shopping” is playful exploration of material; while the choreographer observes, I prompt dancers to experiment with the work’s structure and performance, and to re-combine aspects of the material to yield unforeseen results which may be springboards for development. Finally, I offer “critical feedback” on the work, if I am asked. I follow the artistic logic of the work to help it more vividly express what it is trying to express.
How can critical feedback be given without demolishing/degrading the choreographer?
I use this method only if it is needed, for there are other, possibly better, ways for artists to gain the insights that critical feedback seeks to impart. I often ask a choreographer to “imagine the perfect audience member who sees and understands your work just as you wish, and say what that viewer may experience in your dance.” By taking the role of outside viewer they are often led to stunning realisations about how the work appears, and about the ideas and meanings that it presents. The artist often discovers ways to revise the work, so they serve as their own critic.
Sometimes I ask the choreographer to “voice the dance” by describing how the dance sees itself, what it likes and dislikes, and what it hopes the choreographer will do next. Again the choreographer realises things that might not be realised even if a critic mentioned them. These techniques depend on the mentor’s sincerity; nothing can stop a mentor who wants to impose points of view, or “fix” someone’s dance. Some artists seek mentors to “fix” their dance, and that is fine if it is done consciously. The artist may develop an over-dependency on others, but their works may be more successful in the marketplace. Artists should question their motives for seeking a mentor as carefully as mentors should question their motives for working with artists.
What is the research beyond dance that has led you to your current approach?
I study creative cognition research to keep abreast of findings in human problem-solving, insight development, and the ways people use intellectual and intuitive capacities to advance their work. I regularly make new works to apply what I learn from the research.
In the professional realm, what shifts have you seen in choreographic practice with your mentoring approach?
In the Montréal Danse “Choreographic Research Workshop” I am on a four-person team of facilitators. The choreographers spend a week exploring ways of setting up artistic questions, creating and using ideas, and dealing with surprises that may offer promising directions. “The Workshop” differs from product-centred approaches that highlight conventional dance-making “tools” and preparing dances for presentation. Such approaches often inhibit creativity. In contrast, “The Workshop” gives real freedom to push in untried directions, and to probe deeply into ideas that otherwise feel just “out of reach” due to market pressures, and lack of time/money.
Choreographers experience a shift in the kinds of control they feel they must exert to make headway. They learn to act calmly during what used to be moments of panic and doubt. They discover ways to dialogue more clearly with dancers, to use dancers’ creativity more fluently, to generate more options before making decisions, and to claim the artistic territory in which they want to live.
It is an exciting challenge to maximize the potential of all our choreographic endeavours and DANZ will continue to seek further opportunities for mentors to grow their understanding.
|
