Observations and comments
on the March 2008 Physical Theatre Laboratory in Malpils, Latvia under the leadership
of Sergei Ostrenko

by Martin A. David (USA)

The artist’s life force is a delicately balanced system that needs constant nourishment and frequent renewal. The more mature and productive the artist, the more conscious and direct this need becomes. Just as the younger artist needs training and experience, the mature artist needs revitalization and re-inspiration.

Of course, the daily cycle of life is an abundant source of artistic stimulation. The poet, the painter, the writer, and the musician can all find important visions in the rhythms of the city, the solitude of the forest, or in ordinary interactions with the people and objects of everyday life. The actor, director, and playwright are also inspired and stimulated by the same sources. The observation of gestures, ways of walking, tones of voice, dialogues, and the thousand human transactions that can be seen in an average day, all become resources in the theatrical tool kit.

However, theatre is not a solitary art. Of course, there are solo artists in theatre, but most theatrical productions are collective events. The creation of the theatre artist becomes a team effort. In the same way, the training and practice that goes into the evolution of the performer’s craft seldom takes place in isolation. Observation and meditation may be done privately, but acting is an art form that requires both a sender and a receiver. The exploration of ideas - both old and new -the investigation of techniques and practices are all more useful if they are done with the participation of like-minded theatre artists. After all, these techniques are applied on the stage in the presence of, and with the cooperation of other actors. Of course, the highly concentrated and focused rehearsal period is seldom the place for learning. In order to learn and grow, the actor needs the challenge and the collaboration of fellow actors in a classroom environment.

It was with this conscious need that I approached my first IUGTE event—the International Physical Theatre Laboratory in Malpils, Latvia in March 2008. I learned of the event through a random e-mail. The general information was forwarded to me by some general theatre list. I set the IUGTE page aside with all the other, similar mail I receive. It seemed interesting, but my participation didn’t seem like a real possibility.  I opened the announcement again and again. Something about it drew me like a magnet. The term “physical theatre” is very familiar to me. It is the name I have given to my own theatre work over the past three-and-a-half decades. I have taught, directed, and performed with a central core of what I called physical theatre. Now I was presented with a unique opportunity to join a group of artists in a concentrated study of physical theatre techniques. In the past five years I have been working steadily in stage and film productions—as actor, playwright, director, dancer, dance company leader, and choreographer. My metaphorical artistic fuel tanks were almost completely drained. In addition, several personal losses further clouded my artistic vision. I sensed that the Malpils event could contribute some part of the renewal I knew I needed.

I know that, as a mature artist, I am at an age where many physical performers set their careers aside. I am not willing to do that. We performers spend years learning and perfecting our art. Why should we fade away just as we reach the point when artists such as painters and writers are just ripening into the fullest realization of their skills and visions? The answer is that we shouldn't. Today's improved health perspective, better body knowledge, and enhanced training methods give us the opportunity to go on.

While the body and technique of an older performer may not be the same as that of a 20-year-old, older dancers have a wealth of art to share. What is needed is a redefinition of the concept of technique. A young dancer may be able to leap her own height or touch his toe to his ear. But an older performer may be able to conjure worlds beyond the realm of daily experience, simply by standing on stage and raising an arm. A younger performer may be able to put his or her soul into the work, but an older performer's soul is the work. 

With all this in mind, and with the encouragement of an artist whom I respect deeply, my beloved wife, I decided to accept the implied challenge of the International Physical Theatre Laboratory in Malpils. The word challenge is appropriate in describing the work. At the very first session, participants, many of us still in a daze from thousands of miles of travel, were informed that the days that followed were to be strenuous. In order to reap the fullest benefits from the short span of the workshop, we would need to work hard from morning to night. If the prospect of this demanding schedule seemed daunting, most doubts and fears disappeared after a day. The material and the approach were so invigorating that minds and bodies rapidly gained the strength needed to meet the challenge.

While it was quite clear that Ostrenko was the leader of the work, the intellects and experience of individual participants were given full respect. At every rest session, the floor was opened to our questions. No question went unanswered and the interchange of ideas was constant and thorough. 

Participants were asked to reformulate and analyze the exercises and information in our own way and through the lens of our own experience and understanding. For example, we were asked to write our own interpretation of a complex movement assignment that combined weight sharing moves made with heightened consciousness of aesthetic considerations. My own response to that request follows:

A weight sharing exercise with a focus on a sculptural construct: 

The concept of weight sharing is possibly one of the major bridges between dance and the comprehensive theatre approach known as physical theatre. Weight sharing, as a technical component, is central to many performance dance forms. It is a basic element of formal ballet partnering. It is the essential formative component of the dance form called contact improvisation.

However, in the flow of the physical theatre laboratory, it took on a greatly expanded role. The fundamental pedagogic purpose of the exercise can be seen as the following:

- The development of deep trust between scene partners
- The exploration and development of instinctive and non-verbal modes of communication between scene partners
- The mutual creation and appreciation of a common aesthetic.

The communication and common aesthetic elements help the actors work as scene partners who can together build the dynamic tension needed to engage the spectator. As we discussed in the course of the work, the constant and total focus on the working partner translates directly to excitement of the stage experience. The electric connection between the actors who are active in a scene is a major basis for all interest in the onstage action. It attracts and holds the interest of both the audience and of the other actors.

Approaching Meyerhold

As with most ingredients of any artistic discipline, the work of such innovative giants as Stanislavsky, Grotowski, and Meyerhold cannot be grasped in a single week—or even a year. These studies require an ongoing examination and re-examination process that can—and usually does—go on for an entire artistic lifetime.

Ostrenko’s high respect for and deep understanding of the essence of Meyerhold’s explorations of Bio-Mechanics became a valuable part of the participants’ delving into these techniques.

Participants were asked to re-examine even the name applied to Meyerhold’s work. The term Bio-Mechanics was coined during the darkest days of Stalinist regimentation and repression in Russia. Meyerhold gave his work a science-based name in order to stay below the radar of a regime that elevated the pseudo science of party liners such as biologist Trofim Lysenko, but eventually murdered such artists as Vsevolod Meyerhold.

Digressions aside, the re-examination prompted me to believe that Meyerhold’s approach was indeed scientific and its designation should reflect that. Of course, it is deserving of something far more descriptive than the coldly scientific title “Bio-Mechanics.” It seems obvious that Meyerhold was, particularly in reference to theatre movement, one of the pioneers of the science of kineseology. With this in mind, I propose the term “Kinesthetic Body Theatre” as a new descriptive. The term “body theatre” is one I have used for years to differentiate between the theatre of voice and intellect that stultified our craft through much of the pre-Stanislavskian past and the engaged, active, physical theatre toward which we are striving. The addition of the word “kinesthetic” pays homage to Meyerhold’s role in developing the kineseological discipline.

Four Elements of a Pictorial Exercise

If I may be permitted to end with an observational contribution of my own, I’d like to share some thought on one of the laboratory’s work units. The exercises in question involved the translation of two dimensional images (in this case, paintings) into three dimensional theatrical representations. While watching half of my colleagues perform this work, I was able to analyze and theorize the following:

There are four basic modes that physical actors can adopt when creating either static or moving tableaux on stage.

1. An iconic image or picture—The poses and postures assumed or passed through in this mode have reference only to themselves. The body itself and the creation of a corporal aesthetic are the focus of the iconic image. One example might be a figure facing downstage with arms crossed and visual focus in a downstage direction.

2. A picture or image of a present action—This mode refers to the stage space and its inhabitants. The visual and physical focus are concentrated on persons or areas within the immediate confines of the playing area. The spectator’s attention is held within this space in both this and in the iconic mode.

3. A picture or image that refers to a distant action or interest - The focus is directed to an event, person, situation, or even towards an emotional involvement beyond the boundaries of the performance space. The performers often have an instinctive tendency to expand the given space through the use of gestural references to a distant target. For example, a bodily reaction to an impending danger coming from beyond the immediate space expands the space by allowing the imagination to travel outward.

4. The fourth form or mode for pictorial exercises seems obvious, but it is moderately complex. This is a combination of two or more of the above modes within one pictorial representation. The complexity arises from the potential for this mixture to destroy both performer and audience focus through chaos. If the images and attention points are too diverse, they become meaningless. Preventing this chaos depends upon either the improvisational interaction skills of the performers or the outside guidance of a choreographer or director.

Martin A. David is a widely published Writer and Translator. Actor, Director, Modern Dancer and Choreographer. Founder, principal dancer and choreographer of the groundbreaking Creative Dance Theatre of Copenhagen, the first state-sponsored modern dance company in Denmark. Founding Artistic Director of …And Still Dancing, a San Francisco modern dance company for choreographers and dancers over the threshold age of 40. More than 20 years experience as a teacher and coach of actors and modern dancers.

Pictures by Martin A.David