Merce Cunningham Beach Bird Analysis

Discuss the unpredictability of chance procedures and how the movements discovered are often unusual and away from your comfort zone. Does the fact you are leaving everything to chance make you not a choreographer, or is it still choreography because you are creating?

Merce Cunningham produced Beach Birds using his chance procedures. Vaughan (2013) stated that “Cunningham dissected the human body with a computer mouse, breaking down the simplest gesture into composite parts.” Suggesting that the choreography would be completely unpredictable even to the choreographer himself.

It is debatable that chance procedures could have changed the identity of the work for example; the sharp movements could become soft giving the performance a complete change in appearance. However would Beach Birds become so popular if it was a different

set of movements selected by chance?

In my view Merce Cunningham is still a choreographer, on account of he created a chance method of his own making it original to him. For instance Curving of the spine movements were something that he wanted within his work and his chance procedure allowed this to become an option.

Furthermore Cunningham stated that we should “explore beyond the constraints of our imagination” Vaughan.D (2013) I oppose this statement, I n my opinion imagination does not restricts us but the preconceptions of how dance should appear that has been embedded in us does.

It is evident that Successful choreographers produce choreography solely from their imagination. In my experience work that is made in this process has better audience connection . Lucid Grounds choreographed by Tamsin Fitzgerald was filled with emotions keeping me engaged. On the other hand work made with chance procedures such as Yvonne Rainers Hand movie can become mechanical,as the focus of the work is on the process not the end product. I become intrigued as to how they got to that outcome more than with the performance its self.

Having discussed this point I still do consider that Tamsin and Yvonne are both choreographers as both choreograph though with different intentions.

The effect they have on an audience fluctuates on what the audiences themselves are searching for to be entertained or to be shown a work process.

William Forsyth’s definition of choreography: Speir.S (2011) “Organising bodies in space”… “Organising bodies with other bodies”... “Organising a Body with other bodies in an environment that is organised” He is supportive to the fact that both approaches of choreography are relevant, as they both abided by the above statements. The only differing factor being one outcome will be known and the other will be unpredictable.

I don’t believe that one method makes a creator more of a choreographer than another, but it is what you do with the movement material you accumulate. Also how you choose present it that determines how well you choreograph. In the past my personal experience I would of only used material that I came up with in my mind, however since being introduced to chance methods I now choreograph using a mixture of the two

approaches.
Myself I particularly like the Locus cube that Trisha Brown developed with the letters giving you direction and the numbers a movement. By having both numbers and letters it makes it difficult to cheat the score in affect the outcome of the choreography is often unique and interesting. After this process I tweak my material to my personal tastes. In my reflective blog I stated that when I use chance “It expands my movement vocabulary “Hodges.N(2016) This demonstrates that the unpredictability of the movements created, have pushed me out of my comfort zone. It allowed me to discover new movements ,showing that chance methods are a good choreographic tool to use and a lot can be learnt from them.

I do not see proof why the two processes of choreography cannot be used in harmony or why one method makes a better choreographer but it is what works best for the individual. It is unpredictability contained in chance that keep choreography fresh by pushing choreographers out of their comfort zone, they will always be pushing the boundaries finding something new.
Imagination of a choreographer becomes important as what is the interest of pushing the boundaries if you are not engaging with the audience.

Other creative arts allow creation through chance so what not within dance. This does not make the painter any less of an artist than the painter who paints a still life scene. Brenneman.K(1964) encourages chance procedures stating that ``Yes, these abstractions, randomized as they may be, constitute Art,"