In response to our performance on Wednesday 11th December, I feel  that the experience as a whole went alright. However, it was difficult for me to personally judge how the experience went as I didn’t get to see the reaction from the participants or feel what kind of atmosphere had been created in the room as journeys were made. It wouldn’t be right of me to discuss the performance as a whole because I would just be making assumptions so I can only really discuss how my own station went and the feedback we received afterwards. The setting up of the performance was pretty easy and simple, I feel as though I achieved my goal of making it a comfortable atmosphere to walk into and one where you can relax.

Throughout the process I had been debating whether to make a set list of questions that I could have asked the audience member however I decided against this because no two participants would respond in the same way. ‘The actors are likely to improvise large portions of the performance based on their individual impulses or audience response’ (LaFrance, M (2013) p.514). I found that to be true with my own performance as I created a list of basic questions which could lead to other topics of conversation. It was then up to me to improvise and think on the spot as to which direction I wanted the conversation to move next. I could have easily had a set list of questions and followed these through without straying from them. I gained some interesting responses to my questions. One participant in particular became very annoyed that he didn’t know who it was that they were talking to. Time and time again they kept saying ‘Who am I talking to?’ to which I couldn’t give them my name as this would have changed the whole dynamic of the station and could have easily become a personal chat if the participant or I revealed who we were. I had to think of a response on the spot as this is something I hadn’t predicted might happen. I ended up saying I am just a person who wishes to get to know you a little better. This seemed to work for a few lines to which the participant then asked who I was again. This time I replied I am somebody, who is nobody important but who wishes to become your friend. They seemed to accept this and the conversation began moving, they still seemed reluctant to give any information at all away so I took it back a step and shared more about myself to which they seemed to start to relax. During feedback in our little group at the end this one participant was discussed because every time they moved to a new station they would ask the actor whether it was them that they had been talking to. This was a really interesting response because it felt as if they had to know who it was, they couldn’t accept that they wouldn’t find out.

This station was only 10 minutes long, which was great for the conversations where the participants didn’t seem to want to give anything away no matter how slow I took it. It was also a negative thing because there were times when I felt like the conversation was just getting somewhere and I would be looking at the clock and thinking Is this the end? I really wasn’t ready for the conversation to end. At some points when they had said goodbye I was even tempted to write ‘No please don’t go just yet’ but I knew we had to stick to the 10 minutes otherwise our system wouldn’t work. I wasn’t ready for that conversation to end I wanted to keep getting to know the person more. I personally felt sad that they had to move on to another station. I feel like at time I should have pushed harder to get information from them however I didn’t want to push too quickly and scare them back to giving me no information.

I feel like this was a good experience for me as well as the participant because it really made me think about myself. I learnt a lot about myself through the performance and I hope that the participant learnt about themselves too. I am not sure how the mix was between me trying to get information out of them but at the same time giving them information at the same time. I went away with a lot of questions going through my head, some created by the responses that they participant had given me. It made me question things I hadn’t really thought about before.

I feel that if we were to do this again it would be a lot different. I think the stations would be kept the same however it would be nice to turn it into five separate one on one performances without time limits. That the performance should last as long as the participant feels it should last.

Another thing that I really liked with our performance was that fact that our last station was a live stream, we had been able to make this work on the TV that was situated in the café downstairs as well as a link on our blog. The response of some of the passers by was interesting as they tried to figure out what was happening. There was some people who walked y and second glanced at the screen and them came back a few minutes later to see if anything ad changed.

Overall I feel like this was an exciting project and we did well to work around the challenges that we had faced and as a group this made us even stronger and even more determined to make this successful, which I think it was.

 
Works Cited:
LaFrance, M 2013, ‘The Disappearing Fourth Wall: Law, Ethics, and Experiential Theatre’, Vanderbilt Journal Of Entertainment And Technology Law, 15, p. 507

Throughout this process it seems that Adrian Howells has been a key influence to our development and has directed the path that our performance has taken. Researching into Howells’ own work I can see clear connections between his own work and our work. Howells has been a big influence on our piece ever since we explored him in one of the Contemporary workshops. The next group meeting we looked further into his work which then inspired our ‘hug’ station and this idea of intimacy throughout our performance.

Adrian’s work is based on Autobiographical performance which ‘engages in complex negotiations with reality and fiction’ (Govan, E 2007 p. 71). This is because as a person you choose what information it is that you wish to share with the individual or individuals that you are with. I can relate this to my station because it is up to the participant what information they are willing to share with me, there isn’t anything to clarify what they are saying is true. The issue with not being able to see the participant means that I have to rely on what they are saying to be the truth, I can’t see their reactions or thought process.
Another thing that I can relate to our piece when looking into Adrian’s work is the fact that he was ‘interested in giving the people the opportunity to alleviate shame and guilt, release it and to lift it from themselves.’ (Howells A, (2010)) I can again link this to my station in which I am going to offer the participant the chance to confess if they feel the need to. This is interesting to me because it is going to allow them the chance to have a chat with a complete stranger; it is offering them the chance to share whatever they feel comfortable sharing.

Adrian Howell’s practices can be linked to other stations. His notion of ‘learning through touch’ (Howells, A (2010)) is similar to that of our ‘hug’ station in which the participant is held for an excess amount of time. It is designed for them to possibly learn something about themselves through this process such as the participants in Howell’s Foot washing for the sole would have learnt about themselves through Howells touching their feet.  We have also taken his idea of the audience having agency and showing this through our ‘greet’ station in which we tell them that they have the right to say no at any moment if they feel uncomfortable in a situation.

Works Cited:
Govan, E., Nicholas, H. and Normington, K. (2007) Making a performance: Devising Histories and Contemporary Practices. London: Routledge

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLwD3APw2F8 Interview with Adrian Howells part two

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7btf8Tdg_s Interview with Adrian Howells

Being slightly technical minded I wanted it too not only be practical but also to look good. I have to say I was initially panicking because I thought that we wouldn’t have enough flats to be able to make the spaces that we wanted. However I am pleased with how quickly we managed to figure out our preferred configuration. We worked pretty well as a group, making the decisions between us, and with a little help from the tech guys we put these ideas into practice.

Our technical aspects are pretty simple as we didn’t feel the need to overcomplicate because we felt it would have taken away from the performance rather than adding to it. The space being divided by the flats was necessary to create all of these intimate stations that we wanted. They allow us to create different sized spaces for different effects. The chatting station is pretty enclosed whereas the greeting station is in the open space in the centre of the space.

Lighting is key to making some of our stations feel more intimate and allows us to create a nice atmosphere for each scene and helps which area of the station the action should take place. We need to adapt the lighting for station one Greeting but this will be easily sorted. It is a case of adding couple more lights to brighten up the space and a couple of pink or red gels to make it feel happier and a cosy place to be. We need to figure out some different lighting also for the Body station because at the moment something is missing.

The technical rehearsal allowed us to see how some stations are reliant on media. This could be a possible issue on performance day and we will need to keep an eye on these and check that they are working properly. The technical rehearsal was really helpful for us as a group because it allowed us to get a feel for the piece and now it is just about adding the finishing touches and tidying up the greetings to each station. Overall I feel really positive about the way that it looks and that each scene will create the necessary atmosphere when we add in the finishing touches. I am really pleased with how we worked as a group and this shall continue until after the performance day because we will be there to support each other throughout the rest of the process.