One Idea – Line
Neuro
This graph illustrates possible iterations of Neuro as expressed through the two variables of velocity of movement and change of shape. Neuro is part of Lower Left Performance Collective artist and founder Dr. Nina Martin's Rewire Dancing States movement technique. This graph proposes that the degree of change of shape and the velocity of the movement are variables for composing along with the predetermination of the next shape.
Complexity of Transitions
This animation deals with the complexity of an ensemble’s shape, or an individual, for that matter, and the complexity of the transition to the next shape. Thinking specifically of the Ensemble Thinking scores, One Idea and Complete the Form, in that they are a similar score, but have different relationships to complexity. What I am proposing with this model is that the transition to the next shape in either score can be complex or quite simple.
One Idea has a low level of ensemble shape complexity, whereas Complete the Form has a high level of ensemble shape complexity. How exactly to measure the level of complexity of transition to the next shape is open. It could be that one person takes a lot of movement and time to arrive at the next location and shape. It could be that everyone shifts a little bit, as with classic and clean One Idea.
thoughts?
Degrees of Freedom
The above animation deals with the degrees of freedom present in a contact improvisation based dance.
Hypothesis 1: The rolling connection between dancers is ascendent because it allows for the greatest amount of freedom for each dancer.
Hypothesis 2: Dancers that focus on maintain the highest degree of freedom in their dance create aesthetically flat dances.
Number Score
These XYZ axes looks at Number Score from Ensemble Thinking through the variables of number of dancers, who the dancers are, and the material that they are working with.
These axes show that it possible to change each of these variables independently from one another. All three can change, only two can change, or only 1 can change.
CI Training
CI Training with Andrew Wass
Wednesdays 14:00-15:30
starting 02.09.2026
Intermediate/Advanced
This weekly class is for people who already are familiar with contact improvisation and are ready to go deeper. Through structured scores, focused repetition, and close attention to the body’s mechanics, we will refine the technical skills that support a seasoned CI practice – multiple muscle tonalities, nuanced movement initiation, solo body clarity. These classes will work towards building greater fluency, range, and physical confidence.
Each session combines individual somatic work, partnering pathways, and improvisational scores designed to sharpen listening and responsiveness. Drawing on Material from Paxton’s work, developmental and somatic work, and classic CI practices, we will investigate how gravity, timing, and anatomical awareness can expand what’s possible in the dance.
Participants should expect both feedback and challenge. This is a space to train, question your habits, and discover new pathways through the known and unknown events of contact.
For dancers with existing CI experience who want more: more precision, more range, more understanding.
Members register here!
Not a member yet? Arrive 10 minutes before class to get your trial session, or use our contact form to reserve your spot!
CI in Performance
“You can have a couple of people who are dynamite dancers together and put them onstage in front of an audience and it all falls apart. Everything that makes them excellent to watch turns drab and self-conscious. They try too hard; they do predictable things.”
– Steve Paxton
from “Why Standing? Steve Paxton talks about how the Stand relates to Stage Fright and Entrainment in Contact Improvisation” edited by Karen Nelson in
CONTACT QUARTERLY JOURNAL WINTER/SPRING 2015
JFK was a CI dancer
A Couple Thoughts onGravity
A brief discussion of gravity on WhatsApp with my Lower Left colleagues in relation to dance styles got me to think about how/if I relate CI to gravity. I do occasionally refer to gravity especially when teaching partnering pathways, of how at the top of the arc a person has no weight because for a moment gravity is no longer acting on them, and how weight lessens as someone goes up and increases as they go down. Making them easier to move on the way up and at the top, rather than down. Also this week in my CI class at Marameo, I referred to the altas vertebra, having people tilt from there to sense the pressure change under their feet.
So one current hypothesis is that the earlier generations of CI practitioners were heavily into gravity because they were looking for an outside source to move and inspire them, rather than predetermined movements. That it was a post-modern move to relinquish agency to an outside source other than the individual’s will to generate the movement, a mode of killing the choreographer.
I tend to focus on the creation, operation, and dissolution of surfaces of contact, i.e., the improvising of the contact surfaces, their number, location, size, degree of pressure rather than gravity.
For me the focus on gravity relates to the first two phases of CI, sensing and mechanizing. Once a dancer is familiar with those phases, they can venture into the third phase – improvising. Another hypothesis is that much of CI teaching remains within sensing and mechanizing, and merely lets the improvising happen as a result of adapting to failed attempts at repeating pathways, at least that is what I would say from a lot of what I see here in Berlin, rather than having the improvising with and in contact be a conscious artistic choice in the moment.
(at some point, I will write more about the three phases of sensing, mechanizing, and improvising)