Although
this was my second visit to the campus, the structure in which the session was
to be carried out would slightly vary to previous in that it was being
participated by students from all three modules of the BAPP Arts programme. As
before, Paula headed the session with Jess, Lily (Module One), James, Irini,
Lisa, myself (Module Two) and Emma (Module Three) in attendance. It was
wonderful to reconnect with those I had met prior and to also become acquainted
with those I had not. I was most intrigued as to how the session was going to
serve all three modules as after all we were at different stages on the course.
The subject of the session was revealed by Paula; to look at reflective
practice and its properties in creating change. Once announced, I understood
its value at this point in time to us all. Module one students would be shortly
beginning their work on part two, the reflective practitioner, beginning to
look examine theorists and research and its relevance to professional practice.
Module two part four revisits reflective practice with an objective to build
and expand upon previous knowledge, refining it, and challenging the existing
with alternative methods for evaluating experiential knowledge. I cannot speak
for module three but I imagine, for Emma, it would have been useful for reviewing
and gaining an insight into any potentially valuable literature not already
considered for inquiry.
Paula
started with a phrase that was to become a recurring theme for the duration of
the session and that was ‘agency’. When asked what our first thoughts were
after hearing this term, a number of us collectively answered what a lot of
performers would commonly associate with it, the agency that will seek find
work for their clients much like we experience ourselves. Paula pointed out we
were describing the noun by one of two definitions. Upon a Google search, we
took note of the second description.
We were then given a minute to think what the word now
meant to us in relevance to our professional practice. Irini likened the phrase
to her own practice in that she believed only feels her career and the people
who help sustain it around her such as her manager, marketing team, booking
agents for events, will only move as fast as she does. To spin an analogy on
agency within the context of the example given for its definition as featured
above. If Irini’s networks are the ‘canals’, she is the ‘running water’. Paula
then introduced a number of practitioners to help us understand what
constitutes effective agency and what this means within our professions.
Anthony Giddens has been a leading practitioner in
helping develop social theory and within that the concept of agency. In his book
‘The Constitution of Society’ (1984) he incidentally refers to non-specific
individuals as “actors” and suggests that knowledge naturally invokes
reflection. He goes on to discuss the idea that reflection aids awareness of
self and in turn the ability to be reflexive, the act of looking to change
something about an action that has taken place. Giddens recognises, however,
that ‘self-consciousness’ is perhaps not the best term for the individual to
focus on when assessing action as “Human action occurs as a durée, a
continuous flow of conduct, as does cognition.” The diagram below demonstrates
an illustration of Giddens’ proposed system that agency undergoes.
Giddens’ theory draws a remarkable parallel with some acting
practitioner’s impressions on analysing action in an attempt to provoke change.
It is worth mentioning at this point that there are now two meanings of
‘action’ within my professional practice. The first is as an actor. An action
is a transitive verb that is sought out by the actor in order to support a
character’s objective being played. For example, the objective may be to ‘seduce’
another character, but by what means? To seduce does not have to necessarily
carry romantic connotations. One way it can be achieved is in a threatening
manner. The actor may play ‘I terrorize you’ and it will still inform the
objective. The point is to persuade the other character by any means in an
attempt to achieve the objective. A character will quite often fail in achieving
this to provide discourse and intrigue for the narrative. It is therefore the
job of the actor to change their action or even objective to try to rectify
their circumstances.
“To
free ourselves from having to decide whether something is effective, beautiful or germane,
we ask the question ‘Is it essential
to the action?’… In doing so, we choose not to manipulate the audience, though we might; we choose not to
manipulate the script, though we
might; and we find, by so doing, that the audience, the script, and ourselves
function better. What we are doing is eschewing narration. If we devote ourselves to the punchline, all else becomes clear.” (Mamet, 1998)
David Mamet has largely been regarded as a touch
‘method’ when it comes to character preparation. In the cases of Uta Hagen and
later Stanislavski work, they believed that an in depth research of character
and scenrario was required in order to aspire any sort of plausibility to
performance. Mamet, however, argues that this knowledge can lead to a lack of
decisiveness and ability to commit to choices in the moment. He believes the
immediate and non premeditated action is the most effective as it is spurred
from what the actor perceives as a stereotypical response and in turn the audience
will also.
The second interpretation of action is within the work
being studied as part of the BAPP course. I have at times been confused by how
I should perceive this term as my prior training as an actor has lead me to
believe it is not always but often a conscious or deliberated decision. The
work as studied last module introduced the idea reflection as a product of
experiential learning. The theories presented by the likes of Jennifer Moon
presented a framework for reflecting on action after the event had taken place.
This was at times difficult for me to comprehend as acting relies on an
attention to your opposing players. Loss of this leads to block and
self-consciousness, taking the actor out of the performance and tempting
introspection. This can be a damaging experience for actors and sometimes stump
creativity. Giddens’ theory, however, seems to compliment that of Mamet’s
views. He states that “motivation is not as directly bound up with the
continuity of action as are its reflexive monitoring or rationalization.”
Giddens rejects the theory that action is the consequence of an objective and
that it can be a subconcscious decision employed as an effect of agency. All
the same, he does accept that action cannot be improvised in all circumstances
but as a result of knowledge gained through experiential learning.
“I do not intend the distinction between discursive and practical
consciousness to be a rigid and impermeable one. On the contrary, the division
between the two can be altered by many aspects of the agent’s socialization and
learning experiences. Between discursive and practical consciousness there is
no bar; there are only the differences between what can be said and what is
characteristically simply done. However, there are barriers, centred
principally upon repression, between discursive consciousness and unconscious.”
I have found two separate and interesting diagrams that
help distinguish the difference in thinking between the actor’s technique of
action and that of Giddens’. Developed by practitioners Marina Calderone &
Maggie Lloyd-Williams (2004), they present a process for actors in applying
actions into practice.
“One thought. One Sentence. One breath. One action…
-
We choose an action for each whole
thought.
-
A whole thought is comprised
within a whole sentence.
-
This sentence should be spoken
with one breath.
-
And each thought should contain
one action.
… One thought. One Sentence. One breath. One action.” (Calderone &
Lloyd-Williams, 2004)
The clipped and staccato nature of the text suggests a
rigorousness in its execution. It could be likened to the ‘mirror-signal-manouevre’
technique for drivers in that one stage must be followed by another and they
not interchangeable. The process is laborious and must be planned before being
instigated. Giddens own diagram presents that change can be achieved by an
agent during action and take a number of different forms during this process.
“Between discursive and practical consciousness there is no bar; there are
only the differences between what can be said and what is characteristically
simply done. However, there are barriers, centred principally upon repression,
between discursive consciousness and the unconscious.” (Giddens, 1984)
Giddens expresses that practical action does not need
to be spurred by pre-assumed thought and can be later influenced by a change in
subject, though this is normally a result of the agent becoming interested in
something else that is happening around them. He also believes that physical
movement need not be influenced by thought. Giddens does argue, however, that whilst
agency can take effect out of discourse and a lack of interest in current
activity, it cannot be performed whilst supressed by the individual and hence
will not be noticed by others.
After examining the concept of agency and how it
pervades our professional practice, we looked at practitioner Tony Ghaye’s
(2006) view on reflective practice as a catalyst for change. He believes that “failure,
or fear of it, can be a powerful catalyst for change” and that it can be a
gateway for continued evaluation. He drew up a series of questions that could
help in this;
1.
What are we trying to accomplish?
2.
What practical action can we take
that might lead to success?
3.
How we will know that something is
a success?
The first two questions can be conventionally
straight-forward with regard to the circumstances but the third is often
difficult to assess in its value to who exactly. Who had achieved the most out
of the change in agency? The individual? Other human subjects involved?
Reflection is not an exact science and will continuously be re-worked and shaped
to fit the individual’s purpose. Ghaye’s thinking has been in part influenced
by previous practitioner John Dewey. In several of his articles, Dewey mentions
a variety of ways in which the individual’s receptiveness to reflection can be
enhanced. Ghaye ties the following three ideas together for thought which were
then examined in the session:
“Open-mindedness includes an active desire to listen to more sides than
one; to give heed to facts from whatever source they come; to give full
attention to alternative possibilities; to recognize the possibility of error
even in the beliefs that are dearest to us.” (Dewey, 1910)
“Positive Responsibility.—In this way the individual is made aware
of the stake the community has in his behavior; and is afforded an opportunity
to take that interest into account in directing his desires and making his
plans.” (Dewey & Tufts, 1908)
“Wholeheartedness,
also called single-mindedness… indicates a genuine, no holds barred enthusiasm
about one’s subject matter.” (Rodgers, 2002)
The
last quote, taken from Carol Rodgers, was written as an adaptation of Dewey’s
findings. He compiled separate investigations and channelled them in order to
cite reflective learning in his later work (as covered in module one). As found
with previous research into practitioner knowledge, the above are skills
required of an actor. Beyond this, however, these are skills that individuals
from all backgrounds can look to implement into their working lives. Being open
to these ideals and evaluating a change in circumstances as a result is proof
of agency working effectively.
Taking
this forward we participated in another exercise. Developed by practitioner
Mary Hartog, the exercise is designed to provoke reflective practice by
developing a sense of self-evaluation, much like BAPP students have been with
their journals. The difference here, however, is that we were given only five
minutes to recount a memory. I chose to focus on one that I hope to explore
further within my current idea for inquiry. I will not go into the specifics of
the particular memory, however, as it is something I may want to discuss in
further tasks (maybe not even the memory itself, but the concept that drives
it). We were also asked to create a 'headspace'. Although events charted are my general leisurely goings on outside of the course, they do inform a thinking as to where we are at and how these seemingly separate activities govern our trail of thought. The results for both can be seen below.
Afterwards, Paula asked that we circle three keywords from our texts that
we felt important to our practice. Mine were as follows:
Truth
Emulation
Death
of creativity
The
phrases I plucked from my text were important in explaining my current practice
with regards to preparing for an acting role but more broadly, and in relation
to the BAPP course, they can signify my work ethic. Truth in accuracy when discussing
my current practice. Emulation to be avoided in being inspired by others but
respecting the work as theirs and an understanding for developing my own ideas
on a subject even if crediting other influences. This is all to avoid a death
of creativity (a phrase that sounds slightly strange on its own but is taken
from Mamet’s teachings). If the first two cannot be met, I fail to offer
anything new for an external reader. It can be difficult at times to stick to
these terms but I feel it makes for the most fulfilling results in practice.
This brought a close to the session. Since its end, I have continued to examine
literature within and outside of the course’s reach. At the time I was unsure as
to whether my potential inquiry would hold any real value but after an extensive
look into reader four I believe I have a strong line for further investigation.
I will, however, remain open to other possibilities and feel confident that my
work through the rest of this part of the module, and indeed the others, will
provide me with a larger scope for gauging ideas.
Bibliography
Calderone, M, Lloyd-Williams, M (2004) Actions: the actor’s theasaurus, London:
Nick Hern Books
Dewey, J (1910) How
we think, Massachusetts: D.C. Heath and Company
Giddens, A (1984) The
constitution of society, 1986 re-print, Cambridge: Polity Press
Mamet, D (1998) True
and false: heresy and common sense for the actor, London: Faber & Faber
