Collaboration
kəlabəˈreɪʃn/
A Collaboration can be defined as ‘the action of working with someone to produce something.’ Although this definition may appear to be simplistic in its wording, it cohesively encapsulates what collaboration is. To transpose this into the context of theatre, it is possible to state that the ‘something’ could be a performance. Whilst the ‘someone’ could be fellow collaborators in the company or even the audience. It is the questions I will consider when reflecting on my collaborative process.
This performance was devised by myself and fellow collaborators Ashley Marshall and Joshua Thompson. As a trio, we have collaborated before as part of a larger company and collaborated by giving each other tutelage on solo shows and individual pieces of work. This prior experience of collaborating aided us greatly in the process. Upon reflection, keys to a successful collaboration is not only a shared end goal, but also similar ways of working, both professionally and personally. As a collaborative, we understood our individual ways of making work and our own unique abilities as Theatre Makers. Meredith Belbin alludes to these unique traits with her work Belbin Roles
The flowchart has nine roles, all of which deemed necessary for a successful collaboration. This model greatly aided my understanding of collaboration and, at times, allowed me to be pragmatic in the process – deciphering what I thought the process needed and what role I would need to become to allow this to happen. The roles were a great aid to the collaboration but only when used cogently. To place oneself in such a rigid role and perform it so religiously wouldn’t allow for all aspects to be covered and may result in a poor process, giving a poor outcome. It was through treating each role as something fluid, as opposed to binary, that we were able to cover all grounds. As previously stated, we all have our unique qualities as theatre makers. It was through our fluid use of these roles that we were able to adapt to the collaborations needs. There were moments where a shaper was needed to refine fragments of material which were introduced by a member taking on the ‘plant role’
‘A true community is a consensual community, not one in which everybody is in agreement, but one in which sense is ‘in agreement’ with sense. The consensual community is a community in which the spiritual sense of being in common is embedded in the material sensorium of everyday experience’ (Ranciere, 2010)
The performance and creative process was heavily inspired by the work of the Theatre Company Forced Entertainment. The work is created by six key collaborators with assistance from outside artists and practitioners. A key aspect of their process which I deemed inspiring was their ability to create work out of seemingly nothing.
Each project is different but of course there are things we come back to. With a few exceptions we don’t work with a ready-made text so making a show usually starts with us in a rehearsal room – discussing ideas, raiding the dressing-up box, trying a line of dialogue, playing a soundtrack, improvising a scene until something starts to stick. Then we keep developing the material – we experiment with it, debate it, videotape it, watch it, adapt and edit it before trying it on an audience which can open up a whole new set of questions. The last weeks of rehearsal often see us focused on being able to control and effectively repeat material that was developed during early improvisations. Getting something that perhaps happened by accident the first time to happened again and again convincingly calls for some serious skills. The same final stages of rehearsals also often involve us trying to fix a sequence or structure for the various sections of material we have developed – trying to get the journey of the piece to feel right. There might not be a story but there is always a development across the timeline of a work, a set of tensions that are established, thickened, contradicted and perhaps even resolved. (Etchells, no date shown)
Upon reflection, we used these techniques greatly when devising the performance. A member of the collabortation would introduce something small – a song, a line of poetry or a short video and, as a collaboration, we would respond to it. We would respond by initially improvising our responses as individuals and then perform them back to eachother. Then we would see what overlaps in our responses and attempt to combine them, into one cohesive fragment. This process allowed us to have three separate opportunities for something to ‘stick.’
It is this musing from Forced Entertainment and Meredith Belbin Roles which underpin my experience in this collaboration. A collaboration which thrives when my role oscillates depending on what is best for the collaboration. It allows for the collaborative discourse to thrive and to constantly evolve.
‘…the achievement of productive collaborations requires sustained time and effort. It requires the shaping of a shared language, the pleasures and risks of honest dialogue, and the search for common ground.’ (Vera John-Steiner, 2000:204)
Bibliography:
Etchells, T. (No date shown) https://www.forcedentertainment.com/how-we-work/ [ONLINE] Accessed on 12th December, 2018.
John-Steiner, V (2000) Creative Collaboration, Oxford and NY: OUP.
Ranciere, J (2010) Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics, London & NY: Continuum.