Confidence, Trust and Dependance

Confidence is a word that gets used a lot stage combat and especially in acting.
The idea of trusting fellow actors, so as to let the best working partnerships to develop etc. Whatever one thinks about this, I honestly don't believe that most actors find this level of rapport with other actors, if they do it happens with specific people and/or over a long time .
However acting is a collaborative effort, I know stage combat is to. however if someone screws up in a piece of physical work, especially a fight, there can be more serious results than "the scene doesn't work".

So trust? Trust, trust in what? If someone is attacking me, they should be doing so with some layers built in to make sure that if I fail to do what is necessary, they will not hit me.
Do I trust them to do so? No! What I should have is confidence that they are going to do all they can can to insure it is done properly. When they attack me, there are certain things I should do to for my own safety. Do they trust me to do those things? No! However they should have confidence that I will be endeavouring to do all those things.

So we shouldn't trust anyone?!? Well yes and no. I should trust in my ability to the appropriate things based on the situation. I should have developed my skill to a level where I am confident that I have layers built in so that if something is off there are others to insure the actions are done safely, even if I or my partner/s screw up in some way, that I have the control to modify or change my action to insure that and/or that we are doing the actions at a pace where we can control the flow and movement.

Our issue is that when one considers trust and when this trust seems to be full filled then we start to become dependant on the "other" doing what needs to be done, we start to let our guard down and that is when things become dangerous because someone doesn't do what they should in the moment.

A common "trust" exercise done in acting classes is to fall backwards and have another or others catch you. Now I have heard of these things going wrong, the person being caught getting whip lash etc. so even when it works from one angle it may not be from another. However it is a) an extreme example, you are really wholly at the mercy of the person/people catching. There are few times in my opinion when you are this much at the mercy of others in a "real" situation. b) the situation is set up to push a boundary, but it generally can be done in a very controlled way, there is little chance of things going wrong. As such it would in most cases be as hard for someone to fall backward on to a crash mat. As such it is wrongly labelled a trust exercise in my opinion, really it is a letting go exercise.

Trust is something that is built up over time and through developing of confidence in all involved, including one self . When a dancer for example, literally takes a leap of faith to be caught by another/s they will do so with more surety after a large number of repetitions, where things have not gone wrong, than they will on the first couple of attempts, even with people they know.

However, even then I should not recommend whole dependence, both parties should maintain awareness so that if things change they have the opportunity to modify the behaviour, to catch themselves or tuck and roll, have the confidence and the trust that they can look after themselves as and when it goes wrong.

Otherwise we would be left with what I would is an untenable situation. Do you as a river going out on a journey on the road, trust all the other road users around you? Do you depend on everyone else doing exactly as they should? Or rather do you maintain your level of awareness and your skills to make sure that you keep yourself and those around you as safe as possible.

Master at Arms

I was reading the BADC paper work and see that I am officially able to call myself a BADC Master at Arms! The top teaching title in the organisation...

La de da me! ;)

Worlds Conferance

I have become involved in a meeting that intends to discuss bringing a recognition and a form of unity across the certification of the major Stage Combat organisations around the world.

 

Representatives from the BADC(UK), SAFD (USA), FDC (Canada), NSFS (Scandinavia), and SAFDi (Australia), There are a couple of independent representatives, of which I am one.

 

The exact details are to be ironed out during this coming meeting.

 

My hope is that this will lead to recognition, officially, between the organisations when students have been

certified and then take that certification  to another country and wish to continue training.

 

This is an issue that students of ours have had in the past, having trained with us and been certified by the BADC they return to their home country and wish to continue to training. However they then find that they are expected to only only recertify in weapons they have already done but also go through the minimum hours of training with those weapons. In some countries they expect you to go through 30 hours for each weapon.

 

This makes no sense to me, someone who has already trained with a weapon and been tested it, is expected to spend 30 hours with a weapons they have already done exactly the same as someone who has never handled the weapon before.

 

That is a baseline. I can understand that on a case by case basis, some people will need more training especially when they have achieved a low grade level in in the training, but to make it a blanket necessity and requirement makes no sense to me.

 

On a related theme, a minimum of 30 hours per weapon before you can go in for certification?! An advanced process of 5 weapons? 150 hours. How many hours do most people get to train a week? 1 1/2 a week? That's 100 weeks! 2 closer though with breaks etc, closer to 3 years. Now we aren't talking about a martial art, we are talking about a performance skill. Not including the time that would have been spent on the level 1 exam, around 3 weapons, or level 2 weapons, and other 3.

 

Again this doesn't make sense to me. Teaching a Principle based system then improvement in one element or style, should improve the skills and competence in another, so in general the more training one does the quicker and more proficient one should become with newer styles.

 

It occurs to me that the minimum requirement for the hours in organisations that have no grading system in their certification process. With grades you can show the "skill" demonstrated in the exam. Without a stratified level system, the mandatory hours goes someway to insuring that everyone one is at a standard.

 

Anyway we will see what happens and I'll keep you posted.  

Richard III

FInished the London rehearsals of the fight for Richard III last week. Everything has shifted to New York for the tech'.
It was good to work with Mark Rylance and Tim Carroll again, last time was Richard II, also good to work with Kurt Egyiawan for the first time since he left Guildhall a couple of years ago.

New Year....

The new academic year has begun, met all the new students now or at least the ones that we will teach on a regular basis. All seem nice and by and large a little older/more mature.
Looks like it will be a good year ahead....

Also coming at the work in a slightly different way. Looking at making more rounded basis in technique before teaching/developing set forms to the students.

This has partly been due to an ongoing observation that despite all the success that we have had in getting more students through the combat exams and achieving higher grades. However when working with people in final year shows etc. we have noticed gaps in their skills and understanding. The things that they need to be able to use when they are using their skills in the ultimate task, performing on stage and developing the scenes etc. needs to be stronger.

So we have been looking at ways to change our approach to how we parcel the work for the students. Of course the Principles stay the same and some students a harder to teach or uncommitted regardless of how we parcel the information. However the goal is always the same, make the students the best they can be in the time we have them for.