What does Intimacy on Stage Look Like after Corona?

Well, that’s a really bold question, as we have no idea what just being on stage looks like right now!

But, in the past week I’ve had a couple of conversations about this, and I do have some thoughts.

1. Even if we’re “back to normal”, there are going to be performers, directors, and administrators that are more wary of intimacy, especially if those intimate moments would cause a meeting of soft tissues like kissing. I am already in the habit of choreographing a “Plan B” for kisses that can be done in case of actor illness, and understudy stepping in, etc. A good intimacy director/choreographer should have been providing these all along, and they, the director, and the actors involved should all feel just as confident about the story-telling involved in those moments as they do with the kiss. See my earlier post about Plan Bs.

   It is possible that bringing on an Intimacy Director/Choreographer is part of a company’s safety plan. This was raised in a conversation hosted by Directors Lab West yesterday with Ann James of Intimacy Directors of Color and Carly D. Weckstein, an independent sex educator and Intimacy Director (check out the convo here). Bringing in an ID could be a way a company says to their community that they take the physical and mental health of their performers and production crew seriously, and are hiring people with specials skills in doing that.

   Both of these thoughts lead me to #2.

2. Intimacy Directors/Choreographers are Movement Specialists. And movement is still going to be on stage, even if physical contact is not.

   Intimacy Directors/Choreographers are movement specialists (or at least they should be). They have been trained in movement for the stage. Sometimes this aspect gets lost in the more “news-worthy” part of the job- gaining consent, establishing boundaries, hopefully avoiding lawsuits for the company, etc. I came to this work after 10 years of choreographing. I have a Bachelor’s degree in dance. I have studied movement at an even deeper level by obtaining my Laban certification. When I train with IDI, IDC, or TIE, we are given feedback not just on our ability to put best practices in communication into use, but in our choreographic abilities. My job is make sure the story is told, and told well, and that the director and actors feel confident in the performance.

   I believe my in-depth knowledge of movement will make me more of an asset to confident story-telling on the stage, even if the actors must remain apart or not fully physically engaged in the intimacy.

I do believe my role will still be necessary when we get back in space together. For safety and for the sake of the story, I think it will be even more necessary! We’ll see if the industry agrees!

I’d love your thoughts- whether you are a performer, director, producer, or audience member- what would seeing this role in a playbill mean to you pre-Coronavirus? Would it mean the same, or something different after? Leave me a comment!

Movement Analysis of the Creature in The National Theatre's "Frankenstein"

The Making of a Monster

One cool thing to come out of this time of physical distancing is all of the recorded/broadcast theatre being made available. This is especially awesome for shows I would not typically have the opportunity to see, like ones in London! So last night, I watched both versions of the National Theatre’s much-talked about new Frankenstein, starring Benedict Cumberbatch (BC) and Johnny Lee Miller (JLM). These broadcast recordings are available on the National’s Youtube channel until May 7 and 8, depending on the version.

What’s so talked about in this play, you ask? Besides Sherlock on the stage, of course. Well, it’s that the 2 leading men would swap parts, one night playing The Creature, another night the creator. Handling 2 parts of this size, at the same time is pretty amazing, in and of itself. And as a story-telling device, the interchangeability of creature/creator is an interesting concept, especially when you remember that in Frankenstein, the word “monstrous” is used to refer to the Doctor, not his experiment. But, as a movement analyst, I’m going to talk about the specific movement choices made by the actors when they played The Creature, and what that brought to the production.

What is important to know about Laban/Bartenieff Movement Analysis is that this is an observational technique. That means that the observer (me) still has all their own preferences and interpretations about what they are observing. I have reasons for believing that my observations are correct, however, until I actually speak to the actors and their movement director about the choices made, I have no way of knowing if I’m “right”. This production did have a movement director, Toby Sedgwick, who is an incredible master of movement (A movement director is a position I don’t see a lot of theatres employ, and he is a great example of what having one can bring to a production!). I’ve never spoken to him, so I’m not sure how much of a “score” he gave the actors, or what that score was.

***SPOILERS AHEAD***

I started watching the version with BC as The Creature first. In the first 6 minutes, my movement analyst brain was freaking out! Once The Creature is out of “the womb”, he moved through Irmgard Bartenieff’s Patterns of Total Body Connectivity. Bartenieff gave names to Patterns she saw humans move through to achieve what is considered healthy, coordinated development. These don’t happen linearly, so much as overlapping and intertwined, and the ones that come before underpin the ones that come after. The PTBCs are:

1. Breath

2. Core-Distal

3. Head-Tail

4. Upper-Lower

5. Body-Half

6. Cross-Lateral

It is in Cross-Lateral that humans have access to the full 3-dimensionality of their bodies, and coordinated movement. Significantly, in terms of analysis, JLM’s Creature gets to Cross-Lateral movement about a full minute before BC’s Creature does. It is my guess that this is why I, and several of my friends “like” BC as The Creature more. His Creature spends more time discovering himself before moving out.

While he does explore all 6 PTBC’s in his opening scene, BC’s creature spends much of it, and much of the show, in Upper-Lower. This Pattern is where we “get work done” and builds our sense of “personal power”- an incredibly resonant movement choice for The Creature. Upper-Lower helps us push and pull, towards or away, in order to achieve a goal. There is a developing sense of intention. This is why I think BC’s Creature works so well- he is working to achieve a goal, and it is hard work! But, the movement is able to be upright and obviously human-like, without being fully what we identify as human. He only hits the full Cross-Laterality of his movement in moments of extreme (I’m thinking of his spiraling leap in the Scotland lab, in particular).

BC makes really clear choices in the Body category. JLM work in the category of Effort, particularly his choices as regard to Time. The Time element relates to our decision-making, and JLM embraces the Sudden side of the polarity, which totally works for a Creature acting only on impulse. There is no reflection, research, or weighing of options. This gives a sense of urgency to his Creature. The show with BC in The Creature role feels like a developing power struggle- the Doctor losing it as The Creature gains it. The show with JLM in The Creature role has a sense of urgency to it, when it all gets resolved feels more important. I believe this choice drives the scenes he’s in as well, picking up the pace of the entire show.

JLM demonstrates incredible flexibility and fluidity. Which doesn’t quite resonate for The Creature, for me. However, Frankenstein’s line about “balance” when he and The Creature interact after William’s death does better fit this version of The Creature. JLM’s Creature’s movement being more fully developed as Cross-Lateral, with fine motor skills, makes his Act 2 lines about “assimilation” ring even more true. And, therefore makes his following actions even more heinous.

If you want to continue to analyze: A place to really see these different choices (Upper-Lower v. Time Effort) at play, besides the opening, is the fight between The Creature and Frankenstein after Williams’s death: BC over-powers, JLM out-maneuvers.

So. Is one of them “better” than the other? Totally subjective and relates to your preferences. They each embody their character from what I would call a “different category of the system”, and each actor’s choice gives us a very different Creature and story. I’ve set out why I think each actor’s choice works, and I do have a preference! I’d love to hear your thoughts on these 2 versions of the characters and production. Please leave a comment!

April News Stories about Intimacy Direction, Intimacy Choreography, and Intimacy Coordination

25 April 2020. Sexy Beats: How “Normal People”' ‘s Intimacy Coordinator Works. by Sian Cain for The Guardian.

21 April 2020. Claire Warden Receives Drama Desk Awards Special Award for Intimacy. See list of all nominees and awards at the link.

12 April 2020. The Stake Were Really High: The Stars Bringing Sally Rooney’s ‘Normal People’ to Life. by Claire Armistead and Johanna Thomas-Corr for The Guardian.

4 April 2020. Creating Scenes of Intimacy Safely, Seamlessly, and Convincingly on Stage. by Aaron Krause for Theatrical Musings.

Consent and Intimacy in Dance

Please check out the guest post I wrote for the Consent Awareness Network!

Momentum Stage is pleased to be an Ambassador for the Consent Awareness Network.

March News Stories about Intimacy Direction, Intimacy Choreography, and Intimacy Coordination

Times-Union. Choreographing Intimacy for a New Era in Theater by Tony Pallone. 24 March 2020.

HowlRound Theatre Commons. Intimate Reform. by Ann James. 19 March 2020

Denton Record-Chronical. The Look of Love. by Lucina Breeding. 19 March 2020

Provokr. Creating Initmacy. by Amanda Jane Stern. 9 March 2020

The BBC. The Women Helping Hollywood Shoot Safer Sex Scenes. by Valeria Perasso. 7 March 2020

The New York Times. Review of “The Hot Wing King”. by Ben Brantly. 1 March 2020

Intimacy in a Time of Distance

Tonight should start the 2nd weekend of 2 shows for which I had the honor of creating the intimate moments. Island Song at Measure for Measure Theatre Company and To Fall in Love at Theatre Lab. Both are currently postponed, due to coronavirus limitations in Florida. 

But, I wanted to take this moment to talk about Intimacy Direction/Choreography, because this outbreak raises questions that may not be considered when it comes to staging or performing intimacy in shows. What happens if a performer is sick? Can we still tell the story effectively and well? 

Whenever I choreograph intimacy that includes a kiss, I always choreograph a Plan B. As one of my mentors, Tonia Sina reminds us, “Kissing is the most dangerous thing you can do onstage.” Unlike stage weapons, the soft tissues and bodily fluids are quite real. It’s my job as the Intimacy Choreographer to develop this, not the actors’. It’s my job as the Intimacy Choreographer to rehearse, to make sure the actors are confident in it, and that tech knows what to expect if we go to Plan B. Last week, in one of the shows, we had to employ our Plan B. It took 0 extra rehearsal time, because it had already been set. All it took was a check in with the actors and stage managers at call time. 

I also had a significant case of NOT having to employ plan B, because of how I staged the intimacy. (I hope Island Song reopens, and you get to see it, so I’m going to remain slightly vague about what happens.) Island Song has a number in which every member of the cast is involved in intimacy, in some way, except for 1. Most of them with another member of the cast, some of them alone, but they are all onstage, in various states of undress, involved in various acts of intimacy. What is significant about this number and it’s staging is that not only is the sex simulated, the kissing is too. All of it—  and there’s a lot. 

There exists currently only 1 review of the show, and I don’t know that it will ever be published. But NOTHING in that review makes me think the critic felt it was “fake”, “inorganic”, “inauthentic” or less than. 

I created that scene to look like a lot of people enjoying physical intimacy—  while keeping my actors safe. Part of my decision making was purely creative choice. I wanted the couples to all start the same, and then diverge into various acts. Part of my decision making was time related. I had a lot of people to choreograph, so having something repeatable cut down on my teaching time, giving me an efficient rehearsal. Part of my decision was safety- if I can make actors and the story look good, while keeping them safe, why wouldn’t I?! I don’t give them real swords so “the audience believes the story”. Staged correctly, I don’t need to give them real kisses either. 

Now, not every stage nor every story allows for that. This one did, and I took advantage of it. And on Thursday night last week, I was very, very glad. The actors were able to do their choreography confidently, with no changes. And they looked awesome. Again, I really hope Island Song is able to come back, and you can go see. Then you can tell me if you agree!

If you are a director or an actor that has never worked with an Intimacy Choreographer/Director before, I hope this gives you a different perspective. It’s not just about harassment or abuse. Directors, we really can make your job easier. Actors, we can help you stay healthy. We can help the people who want to do a good job confidently go out and do their jobs. 

When we’re all able to get back to making art together again, I hope you’ll think about hiring an Intimacy Choreographer/Director, even if it’s “just a kiss”. 

And, just in case you hadn’t heard, currently, Theatrical Intimacy Education is recommending that NO shows go forward with intimacy, in rehearsal or in performance. 

February News Stories About Intimacy Direction, Intimacy Choreography, and Intimacy Coordination

Medium. Setting the Stage for Sexual Abuse. By Randy Ginsburg. 27 February 2020.

Montana Kaimin. Intimacy coaching: Keeping actors safe behind the scenes. By Maghan Jones. 26 February 2020.

The Edmonton Journal (Canada). Special Director on Hand to Manage Scenes of Intimacy. 21 February 2020.

The Mail Tribune (Oregon). The ‘Sacred’ of OSF’s Intimacy Director. 17 February 2020.

Oregon Live. Oregon Shakespeare Hires First Full-time Intimacy Director ahead of 2020 Season. 17 February 2020.

CBS Sunday Morning How intimacy coordinators oversee romantic movie, TV scenes. . 9 February 2020.

The Pulse (an NPR Podcast). How Movies Move Us. The segment with Alan Yu includes an interview with Intimacy Director Colleen Hughes. 7 February 2020.

Intimacy Coordinators on Set in Israel. 6 February 2020.

The Lyric Stage (Boston) interviews their Intimacy Director to learn more about the work. 4 February 2020.

The Age (Melbourne, Australia). Rules of engagement: How actors and directors create intimacy on stage. By Louise Rugendyke. 1 February 2020.

Art and Apophysis

The post was originally a discussion paper for an elective theology class in my MFA work.

One of my favorite things about theatre and dance is their evanescence. They are fleeting. No moment will ever be the same again. An actor may deliver the same line the next night; the dancer may dance the same step. But the moment is never recreated. S/he is bringing more experience to it the following time around. Each audience is comprised of a new collection of people, each with his/her own expectations. Live art is a reminder that everything in our lives is happening for the first, last, and only time.

In a way, live art is its own apophasis. As soon as it is experienced, it is gone. It can only be recounted or remembered but never re-experienced. As we recount or remember the act, we are connecting with ‘a quality’ rather than ‘an object’ (Miller, 138). A quality, or as Miller calls it, ‘adjective’, is what fuels the imagination (139).

Miller uses poetry as an example in his essay for the apophasis of the body. Theatre and dance seem to me to be better examples, as the body is a necessary instrument for their full execution. The body is the instrument of both the actor and the dancer. Each repetition of a performance etches the character, the movement, deeper into the muscle memory of the performer. Ideally, it becomes instinctual, unconscious. When it does, it ceases to be a performance.

In becoming fully embodied, the actor and dancer have ‘said away’ the acting and dancing. Rather s/he has become the character or become the dance. It may be for only that line or step. It may be for a scene. It may even be for a whole evening. But eventually, the performer must come back to his/herself. While their bodies and minds may allow them to ‘say away’ their actual reality for the world of imagination, it is only momentary.

Dancers and actors constantly confront what they are not. They allow audiences to suspend their disbelief and to stay away from the world around them for a few hours. Those audiences are left with only the qualities that have enlivened their imaginations as souvenirs of the moment they were able to find transcendence, led there by artists. Dance and theatre are apophasis in practice.

Miller, David. Apophatic Bodies: Negative Theology, Incarnation, and

    Relationality. Edited by Chris Boesel and Catherine Keller, Fordham UP,

    2010.

Intimacy Direction / Intimacy Choreography Video Series

In my effort to update my website, I realized that this series of videos that I created last summer was living only on YouTube. So here are 8 videos about:

• what is Intimacy Direction

• why you might or might not hire an Intimacy Director

• how I got into Intimacy Direction

• what the scene is like in South Florida

• and more.

  The first video in the series was produced by David Nail and Cliff Burgess. Enjoy!

January News Stories About Intimacy Direction, Intimacy Choreography, and Intimacy Coordination

HowlRound: The Art and Craft of Intimacy Direction by Holly Derr. 30 January 2020.

SAG-AFTRA News Alert about Intimacy Coordinators on Set. 29 January 2020.

NYT: Oregon Shakespeare Festival Hire Resident Intimacy Director by Laura Collins-Hughes. 24 January 2020.

NYT Magazine: The Sex Scene Evolves for the #metoo Era by Lizzie Feidelson. 14 January 2020.

SF Chronicle: A Case for NOT Talking About an Actor’s Sex Appeal by Lily Janiak. 7 January 2020.

CBC News. How is a love scene like a stunt sequence? Both need safeguards, say intimacy co-ordinators. By Jessica Wong. 4 January 2020.

The Time’s Up Foundation. The Time’s Up Guide to Working in Entertainment. 4 January 2020.

Consent Isn't About Sex.

Consent isn’t about sex. It isn’t about touching, or feelings, or legal liability. 

Consent is about seeing the other person in the conversation with you as a full person, with boundaries, agency, opinions, and rights.

In the performing arts, saying “yes”, whether we really mean it or not, has been reinforced over and over again. Especially for those on the performing end.  We need to see “yes”, “no” and “I need more information” as equally valid answers.

Theatres are starting to incorporate consent work into scenes of an intimate nature. The work of Intimacy Directors International and Theatrical Intimacy Education has been to establish these practices. But what about other moments where consent should be requested? 

• Auditions

Theatres who hold auditions without disclosing the productions to be staged, and/or the characters available in those productions. I get that sometimes you are waiting for your rights, and you really need to have auditions. However, consistently holding auditions without telling performers what they are auditioning for is telling performers that their time, preferences, boundaries, and ability to ask questions that matter to them are of no importance to you. That you, as the producing entity, have the right to know what you are looking for, but they don’t. This continues traditional power structures and removes personal agency from your actors.  This may not be what you’ve intended, but it is what happens; and it’s dehumanizing.

• Teaching/Directing

A lot of choreographers and dance teachers especially, instruct with corrective touch. It’s a time honored tradition. However, with 1 in 6 women having been a victim of sexual assault, and approximately 60,000 children assaulted each year, touch from a stranger or authority figure may not be one of the best ways to teach groups any longer. Yoga is doing a better job with trauma-informed practice, and dance and theatre would do well to consider some of their solutions. At the very least, teachers/directors/choreographers should be asking before we touch anyone on any given day. 

Somatic movement pioneer Irmgard Barteniefff said “Tension masks sensation.” If you see a student tensing before you correct them, is your touch even going to be useful? Could your corrections actually be more applicable to more people, if given with evocative language, rather than personal touch? 

Check out this free resource about teaching with a trauma-/touch-informed lens. Purchase Touch card templates here. 

• Being an Audience

Does the audience know what they have agreed to when they enter your space? If your show is “immersive” or contains content that may offend someone, is your audience aware of that before they buy tickets? As they buy tickets? Enter your space? Or only after it has happened? And are they clear on whether or not they can interact with the performers, and the consequences of violating expectations? You may assume your audience has consented, simply by being in your space. But consent requires specific and clear information, and if that hasn’t been given, neither has consent. 

How are you (or is your organization) approaching consent in artistic work? Leave a comment!

Creating a Class or Cast Contract

I have found this practice to be incredibly useful in alleviating behavior issues within classes or casts.

Why have a class or cast contract? 

• Decentralizes Power

  • This is a big one for me, especially when it comes to dealing with young people in the arts. They are dealing with a dual power structure of director or choreographer/actor and adult/youth. Young people often feel they cannot say “no” or ask questions because of this. By creating a contract, the power shifts to the group as a whole shaping the expectations they have of each other, not just what the person in charge wants to see.

• Promotes Buy-in and Accountability

• Clarity of Expectations

  • Safety

  • Participation

  • Attitude

  • Attire

• Success is Built in

Recommendations for creating a class or cast contract:

• Use a posterboard that can hang in your room or a corner of the board that can remain dedicated to this, or post in Classroom or Group Page.

• Stay Small. 5-7 points should be sufficient. Draw connections whenever possible to an existing point. 

• Include:

  • Consequences of Contract violation

  • Chain of Communication if the director/choreographer/teacher violates the contract

  • Any Departmental or umbrella organization expectations/requirements. 

• End with “Have fun!”, “Have a good show!” or similar. This should be just as much an expectation as respect or wearing appropriate footwear. 

• If a hard copy, have every member of the class or cast sign it.

Do you have questions regarding creating or maintaining a class or cast contract? Nicole Perry has experience in using these documents with students as young as kindergarten to adult professionals. Set up your Creative Practice Consultation now. 

How I Became an Intimacy Choreographer

Following the Broadway World press release about my upcoming work with Measure for Measure Theatre company, I got a question about how I got into intimacy choreography. And it seemed like a really good 3rd installment to the intimacy series on this blog.

Vol 1: What is Intimacy Direction? Published in July.

Vol 2: Why do we have/need intimacy directors/choreographers? Published last week.

Vol 3: How did I get become one? Published now.

Past

I took my first intimacy for the stage workshop from Laura Rikard of Theatrical Intimacy Education in the summer of 2018. I searched out intimacy work, not because I had had a negative experience with a scene partner, director, or choreographer. Rather, I wanted to make sure that I, as a teacher and creator, had the best practices available, to do the best job, telling the best story, in ways that served my performers and audiences, that I could!

I had recently choreographed a musical for high school students in which one student was distressed about the onstage kiss, because this student had never kissed anyone, ever. And the director didn’t set it or offer any thoughts or even seem to want to rehearse it with them. Which I do understand, as intimacy with minors is a difficult thing, complete with legal issues on top of power dynamics and teenage hormones. So as the choreographer, I set it- mainly to ease the anxiety experienced by the students.

In doing this, I thought, “It is so weird that there is no standard for doing this!” So, I started looking to see who else was experiencing this and working on these types of encounters. I found TIE and Intimacy Directors International online, and read everything they had in the free resources. Shortly thereafter, the South Florida Theatre League brought in Laura.

I went to the workshop expecting it to be packed! This was amazing, relevant work, that people in all levels of theatre, not to mention dance and opera, would benefit from. It wasn’t. I mean, there was a good group. But for a topic I thought was so important, I expected more humans to be interested.

In that first workshop, I realized how much my own choreographic and performance experiences, and particularly my work in Laban Movement Analysis supported the idea of choreographing intimacy. I also realized that this was a skill that needed more learning and practice.

So, 6 months later, I enrolled in a 3-day workshop for performers, choreographers, and directors with Tonia Sina and Alicia Rodis, 2 of the co-founders of IDI. We learned about the Pillars of the IDI Method, the history of the work, and I even got to practice choreographing.

So, a little on the history. Tonia wrote her Master’s Thesis on Intimacy for the Stage in 2004. This work is not new, nor is it reactionary to the #metoo movement. It has, however, shown its relevance and importance even more as performers are speaking out against the abuses they’ve experienced in their respective rehearsal rooms. And again, this affects not just theatre, but dance and opera as well. But, Tonia was drawn to this work because she saw a need- we choreograph dances and fights. We coach text and dialect. But what do we do to prepare, protect, and professionalize intimate encounters on stage? And she found the answer to be “nothing documented nor consistent”. So, she set out to change that.

After my 3 days with IDI, I was interested in using and pursuing intimacy choreography as part of my creative work. In order to certify with IDI, one needs to have a certain number of hours of training with them. So, my next step was to apply for their 9-Day Choreographers’ Pedagogy Intensive.

I did, and was accepted! I got to train with intimacy choreographers and directors from literally all over the world in May. We were coached by the women leading this field in theatre, from regional to Broadway, and on TV and film. At the conclusion, I felt ready to take this work back to South Florida.

Present

Now, I’m hoping to apply for their apprenticeship program and earn my certification. I’m also going to Salt Lake City in November to work with TIE again. The two organizations have different approaches to the work, and I appreciate what each one has to offer me as a learner and a professional artist.

I’ve also been adding to my learning by taking classes and reading books on mental heath and trauma, conflict negotiation, and ethical issues surrounding touch and intimacy. This is definitely not a field that one can just learn a movement technique and call it a day.

Just this week, a press release went out on BroadwayWorld announcing me as the Intimacy Choreographer for the season at Measure for Measure Theatre here in Fort Lauderdale. I’m so excited to work with this company- they’ve shown a sincere dedication to offering relevant stories to audiences, while honoring the humanity of their artists. That they would be the first South Florida company to have an IC for a whole season fits their values!

Future

My company, Momentum Stage, is bringing in IDI for 1-day workshops in October. Registration will open after Labor Day, so pop over to the website and subscribe to our newsletter so you are the first to be notified!

As I complete my Laban Movement Analysis certification, I’m doing my final project on Intimacy Choreography, and am excited to carve my niche in this work and in South Florida.

I am actively pursuing other contacts, and would love to work with any dance, theatre, or opera company that finds this work valuable! Contact me! As I said in last week’s post, I got into this not because I think the performing arts are full of predators. There are some. But, rather, I believe our arts organizations are full of people who want to do the right thing, and tell meaningful stories. This work, and me, are resources for them.

Thanks for reading all about intimacy! If you found it informative or helpful, please share this blog series with your co-workers, artistic leaders you know, etc. And leave me a comment! Do you still have questions about intimacy- what or why it is, my story? Leave them in the comments! I love talking about this!

Why "Intimacy Direction"?

About 6 weeks ago, I posted about what “intimacy direction” is. But, even knowing what it is, some people don’t know why it is. So, I thought I’d share my thoughts on that, based on some of the things I’ve been told about why intimacy direction is not necessary.

1. Our director has been doing this forever, so we don’t need one of those.

2. It’s just a fad, it would not be a good use of the company’s money.

3. Actors should be able to do their jobs, and this is part of it.

4. Our director is a woman, so we don’t need one of those.

1. Our director has been doing this forever, so we don’t need one of those.

I’m not going to make you hire me, nor will any of my colleagues. I’m a resource; just like a dance or fight choreographer, or a dialect or text coach. I’ve had specific training for this work. I built it onto my dance degree and over a decade of work as an actor, choreographer, and director. I’ve added to it with my own studies in Laban Movement Analysis, the ethics of touch, and trauma-informed teaching. I take my job seriously, and I think it’s a worthwhile field. If you need me, hire me!

2. It’s just a fad, it would not be a good use of the company’s money.

I recognize that most theatre companies do, indeed, operate on small and tight budgets. People donate to non-profits because they believe in the work they are doing, and/or the humans doing that work. For companies that hire an Intimacy director, it likely makes sense for who they are as a company, and their donors will get that, because they already believe in their mission. Also, if it’s just a fad, it will fade away, and then you won’t have to worry about this any more.

3. Actors should be able to do their jobs, and this is part of it.

Yup. It absolutely is. And our jobs, as members of creative teams, is to make sure that the actors have the tools and supports necessary to do their jobs safely and well. We have dialect and text coaches. We have choreographers for dances and fights. And now, we have intimacy choreographers.

There is another version of this comment that goes something like, “Well, they already know how to kiss/have sex/get out of bed in their underwear because they do that in their real life.” Maybe, I don’t know, that’s not really my business. Actors also sit, stand, and talk in their real lives, and we still think it’s important to make them rehearse those things in specific ways!

Also, acting is not their real lives. It is their job. The job of those of us in charge of steering productions includes creating a professional working environment, that our actors can walk away from at the end of the day and return to their real lives, without entanglements, trauma, or even a nagging “I wonder if that was really what s/he was looking for there”?

Audra McDonald worked with an intimacy director for Frankie and Johnny in the Clair de Lune. She didn’t feel like having an intimacy director was redundant or insulting. And, if it’s good enough for Audra, it should be good enough for all of us! Read what Audra had to say to Variety here. Check out my personal FB profile for a ton more links on the experiences of her and other professionals in working with intimacy directors.

Also see this guest post I wrote for Unknown Playwrights.

4. Our director is a woman, so we don’t need one of those.

Oh. Good. Phew. Women don’t abuse their power and privilege. They also know all the things about all types of intimacy, inherently, simply because…estrogen. Done and dusted. Except, no. None of that is true.

RAINN does not offer statistics regarding the gender of sexual predators, but we can rest assured the number is not 0. Likewise, the abuse of power or privilege imbued in a leadership position is not specific to the male gender.

And, being a woman does not, in fact, make you knowledgable about all things sex/love/romance related. It’s like saying, “Our director is a man, so we won’t need a fight choreographer, because…testosterone.” My friend Yarit Dor, who does both intimacy and fight at the Globe in London (yeah, that one), just wrote about this today on her Facebook profile. So this is a global issue we could all be better at.

It’s also a very ridiculous sentence that reinforces the binary and gender norms. Don’t do that.

Pushback like the above comments comes from 1 of 2 places:

1. Complete misunderstanding or a simple lack of knowledge of what intimacy direction IS and what it can bring to a production.

2. Fear

The answer to the first is easy: knowledge. Besides the websites for Intimacy Directors International and Theatrical Intimacy Education, there are many, many articles regarding the use of intimacy directors for the stages of Broadway and off-Broadway and intimacy coordinators on set, particularly at HBO. For those who are members of SDC and/or SAG-AFTRA, those unions have published statements as well. I even wrote a quick hit on this for my blog last month.

The second however likely has no answer. Maybe these people are afraid that others think they are incapable of doing their jobs well. Or are afraid of losing power. Or are afraid of looking weak if they accept help. Or are afraid of being exposed as someone who has abused their power in the past. Or maybe they just fear change. Knowledge will help, but it likely won’t be enough. Until they look deeply at what they are afraid of and WHY, and deal with that underlying cause, fear will continue to make them reactive and negative about intimacy direction.

Part of the reason I was drawn to this work is NOT because I think the theatre and dance worlds are full of abusive predators trying at every waking moment to take advantage of the people they work with. On the contrary, I think our world is full of good people, who genuinely try to do the right thing and a good job. And having procedures and practices in place to help them do that makes their lives easier, and protects them from being lumped in with those who do abuse their power.

So, I’ll go on, doing my job, for whichever companies would like to hire me. Change, as they say, is inevitable. Or as Imgard Bartenieff said, “the only constant is change”. And I’m excited to be a part of it.

What is "Intimacy Direction"?

Just over a year ago I began my exploration of Intimacy Direction. Which means that over the past year I have had a lot of conversations that start with the question, “What exactly IS intimacy direction?”

Initmacy Directors’ International defines it this way: “Intimacy Direction is the codified practice of choreographing moments of staged intimacy in order to create safe, repeatable, and effective storytelling. “

Theatrical Intimacy Education says that one trained in the art: “empowers artists with the tools to ethically, efficiently, and effectively stage intimacy, nudity, and sexual violence.”

So, what’s intimacy? Intimacy is usually immediately thought of as sex. However, intimate moments could happen between grieving siblings, or with intense eye contact across a room. Intimacy is personal vulnerability.

And, why choreograph it? This question also comes up, usually with a concern that it would look “forced” of “inauthentic”. However, fights are choreographed, and this is not often a concern raised with those moments. When something is choreographed, it means there is a level of accuracy to be achieved and maintained. Just like with fight choreography, personal safety is a mandate. Similar to dance choreography, in intimacy choreography, a person with training has created movement for the moment that: makes the performers look good, that furthers the story, that fulfills the director’s creative vision. Additionally, choreography is repeatable.

All of these elements make for story-telling that is safe for the performers, clear, and consistent. Communication with the audience is part of the goal of any performance, and intimacy choreography makes that possible.

Just like a dance choreographer has extensive training in various genres of dance and fight choreographers are trained on weapons and hand-to-hand, intimacy choreographers should have training in creating these moments for the stage. The two organizations linked above are doing that. I have been lucky enough to train with both.

The more training I do, the more I want to train and learn. And the more I see the importance of this work, in everything from youth theatre to ballet companies to professional theatre to ballroom dance competition teams. All of these instances require a performance of authenticity and vulnerability, for the communication of a story to an audience. A performer’s personal safety and professional integrity should never be compromised for that. Nor should the story or the audience suffer because intimate moments weren’t crafted with the same deliberation as the rest of the performance. And that is what an intimacy director or intimacy choreographer does.

This blog post is by no means comprehensive or definitive. For more information on this field, please visit the websites linked above. Also check out my Twitter timeline, as I regularly share the latest news on intimacy on stage via that platform. The button is below, or on the Contact page.

Call for Help!

Hi all!

I am a Doctoral candidate at Ocean Seminary College and am conducting a research study on spirituality and the performing arts, titled "Encountering the Other in Theatre/Dance: a Model for Body Theology". I am inviting YOU to participate in my work!

Your answers as a director, choreographer, dancer, or actor will really help me create the bulk of my dissertation! I need your experiences! To join, just think of a time that you, as a performer or someone guiding performers, encountered the Other in: THE AUDIENCE,  A CHARACTER, YOUR DIRECTOR/CHOREOGRAPHER (While this is geared towards performers, directors/choreographers/designers should feel free to adapt the questions to their own experiences.), YOUR SCENE PARTNER/ENSEMBLE, or YOUR OWN BODY.

I have easy links to Google forms that you can complete! Just drop a comment here or a DM about which form you would like and I’ll send you the “official email” with all the “official language”, and the link!

Thanks in advance for all your help!

My 4 Least Favorite Words....

“It’s only a show.” “It’s just children’s theatre.” “It will be cute.”

As someone who has been creating theatre with and for young people for almost a decade, those sentiments, and many more like them, are not just a pet peeve of mine- they’re fighting words. Much like other adages and practices around pedagogy that I have taken issue with in the past (read: beginning dance teachers teaching beginners alone, women only being able to teach children in many churches), these make zero sense. I find them irresponsible and dangerous.

Yet, these are things I get told when I hold my students (and other children’s theatre productions, I’ll be honest, I’m judgey) to professional standards. Not in terms of performances, although there are some VERY talented children out there. I mean in respect to color-conscious casting and culturally appropriate show selection. Actually, I hold them to a higher-than-most-professionals standard, because there are some theatres and theatre professionals who do a TERRIBLE job of this. I hold them to a formational, educational standard.

In children’s theatre, we are encountering these young humans while they are still learning. Heck, I work in a school.  My job is literally to be an educator. As such, I want my students to learn as they are involved in theatre. And, not just theatrical skills. Rather, I want them to learn the traits theatre and the arts are so uniquely suited to develop: perspective, empathy, collaboration, ensemble attitude. Unfortunately, when we tell stories that are not ours to tell, what we teach is that other cultures are here for our entertainment; cultural appropriation is okay, as long as it’s cute; and/or that the performing arts are exempt from the standards we hold for culturally responsive teaching and pedagogy in our classrooms.

As theatre teachers, it’s really time to do better. Because, the arts are underfunded, under-appreciated, and usually just seen as outlets for self-absorbed humans.. When one of us does something that is irresponsible, questionable, harmful, or just unprofessional, you put all of us under that label with you. For the sake of our own field, we have to do better. For the sake of our students, we have to do better. As Tonia Sina told us in our IDI training, “when you know better, you do better”.

This mentality, this lack of ethical art, in the name of kids just having fun, is harming all of us- as educators and artists, and our communities. Can we please find a way to have integrity AND be creative? I really don’t think it’s impossible. I do think it will take some work. Some diligent planning of rehearsal time to be sure to include dramaturgy on the culture, time period, social issues of a given show. Some hard choices being made when a show will pigeon-hole certain actors into caricatures of their race/orientation/gender. Some long discussions with students on why we can’t, in our population do certain shows. Based on this past weekend’s Twitter explosion of a high school performing Alien, a discussion on copyright and creative ownership is needed as well….

When I allow “it’s just a [children’s] show” or the entertainment factor to be my driving force for selecting a show, I ignore my responsibilities as an educator AND as an artist. Now, I don’t think any children’s theatre director (particularly one in a school) sets out to explicitly teach children these things. Nor are they explicitly taught. However, our choices set these examples for our children and their families, and will help them develop their own approach to the consumption of art, as participant or spectator. We also inform their approach to Others who are different from them. We can teach them openness, inquiry, and to find common ground while enjoying differences, as art is a common expression of humanity searching for and expressing meaning. Or, we can give them Other as Spectacle, as entertainment or caricature.

When we, as the as experts in children’s theatre or theatre education, make irresponsible choices we undercut the power we purport theatre to possess. When we make a choice based purely on cast size or title recognition, we make it all the harder for arts educators in every discipline (not just ourselves in theatre) to be taken seriously. We fulfill the outside world’s stereotype of “Oh, you teach theatre? That must be fun…”. We denigrate our ability to do our actual job of shaping the minds and lives of young people.

Responsible, ethical choices are not always easy to make. It is probably easier to do the show-in-a-box. It is probably easier to do a show you’ve done before, the way you’ve always done it. But easy isn’t always right. Easy doesn’t always carry the integrity we know we are capable of.

This world needs truth-telling theatre. This world needs audiences who recognize the power of the theatre, and artists capable of wielding it. We don’t need “just a kids’ show”.

Announcing: Momentum Stage!

Momentum Stage is a professional development and education company supporting theatre teachers, dance educators, directors, choreographers, actors, and dancers, at all stages of their careers.

Sacraments and Symbols- Embodiment and Empathy

This post was originally a discussion paper in my Feminist Theology 2 class in my PhD coursework.

Did the woman say,

When she held him for the first time in the dark of a stale,

After the pain and the bleeding and the crying,

“This is my body, this is my blood”?

Did the woman say,

When she held him for the last time in the dark rain on a hilltop,

After the pain and the bleeding and the dying,

“This is my body, this is my blood”?

Well that she said it to him then,

For dry old men,

Brocaded robes belying barrenness,

Ordain that she not say it for him now.

The poem, written by Frances Croake Frank, that begins Susan Ross’s chapter, is a beautiful example of embodied theology intersecting with art. The refrain of Jesus’ words, “This is my body, this is my blood” put into a woman’s mouth, in specific situations where we know women were present in his life, create vibrant, breath-catching images (Ross, 185-6). The final stanza starkly contrasts the role of the women in Jesus’ life to the role of those who follow him today. This entire chapter has helped me hone my own vision for my work, and raises interesting questions in the meeting of art, body and theology.

A theology of embodiment is at the heart of Christianity, and of a feminist approach to it. Feminist theology holds women’s experiences critical to its formation, and these experiences cannot be separated from the body which has them. Ross names this as a “feminist approach to sacramental theology: the incarnation, the centrality of embodiment and all that it implies, women’s lived experience, gender roles and ‘real presence’’ (186). Sacramental theology is typically identified with the latter through the use of tangible symbols: bread and wine, water, oil, hands, etc. All of these symbols are received and processed by a physical body. Ross, based off the work of Schillebeeckx, beautifully calls them “places where human beings live out in a symbolic way the life of the gospel” (191). Christ is the ultimate form of God becoming real as he took on a human body, to live in community with us. Sacramental theology is an embodied theology, and therefore is a feminist theology.

Ross writes of the women in the Middle Ages, “But most found in the Eucharist a confirmation of the sacred significance of the body which, to some extent, ran counter to the denigration of women’s embodiment taught by the church” (189). The Eucharist is a reminder that, even as it is a symbol, the body is also a symbol of the holy, of the redeemed, of the creation and the Creator. The Eucharist is a reminder that everything God created was named “good”, and that includes our bodies. It is a reminder that without a body to show love, and without a body to take it in, the sacrifice of Christ would not have happened. Embodiment is key to the Christian faith. And yet, many Christians try to deny their bodies and physicality. They particularly try to deny the agency of the bodies of others- by legislation, by judgement, by manipulating scripture.

These moments of judgement and dismissal come from an ancient Greek dualism that still rules in the Western world, the body is less than the soul. And yet, nothing in Christian theology shows that to be true. Ross writes, “A Catholic feminist perspective bases its critique on these dualistic conceptions on a retrieval of the Incarnation, seeing God’s taking on the condition of humanity as God’s own self-expression” (195). She goes on to state that, “Sacramentality grows out of human embodiment and its connection to the natural world, not in contrast to it” (195). As a language of symbols and practices, sacraments must be given, experienced and interpreted through bodies. Therefore, a feminist theology of sacraments “...argues for a closer connection between nature and history, body and soul” (Ross, 195). In this way, a feminist theology of sacraments could defeat not just patriarchal relationships in the church, but also current practices of disparaging science and destroying the Earth that often occur there, under the guise of “Creationism” or “trusting God to take care of it”. If we see ourselves and equal to and connected to the other, it becomes much harder to hurt them.

In education, we call this seeing “empathy”. It is one of the great gifts of practicing theatre and dance. When you take on a role, you put yourself in someone else’s shoes. You gain a different perspective. And often, that practice changes you. Seeing the world through someone else’s eyes, considering the issue from a side that you are not on, or even considering an issue you didn’t even know was an issue makes that person who is different, that opinion you do not agree with, not quite so easy to dismiss. Ross likens this to a process Freud identified in young girls, called identification. She writes, “But women’s sense of ambiguity, reluctance to make separations, and tendency to identify with the other are closer to the heart of Christian sacramentality than the strict separations that have become pervasive in much sacramental theology and practice” (Ross, 199).

A feminist Sacramental theology is possible and sensible. In creating such a method, we value the experiences of the bodies that give and receive the sacraments. We value both genders, and all abilities, races and ages. An embodied theology sees all as created, all as good, all as equal. Ross writes, “A feminist theology of ordained ministry takes seriously human embodiment, in all its various forms, as the place where humans encounter God” (203). This is why we must have bodies, and this is why those bodies are holy. Which calls feminist theologians to broader fight than church practices: “The challenge of feminism to Christian theology is the expression of the full humanity of women and men, not only ‘in Christ,’ but in society ...” (Ross 198).

Ross, Susan A. (1993) "God’s Embodiment " in Catherine Mowry LaCugna, ed. Freeing Theology. New York: HarperCollins.

The Bible as Literary Construct and Art

This post was originally a discussion paper for my Feminist Theology 2 class in my PhD work.

The Bible has long been called “The Word of God”. Often included in the discussion are descriptors such as as “infallible”, “divinely inspired”, “perfect” and “only”. But for Christian Feminists, accepting the Bible as the only word of God, or the infallible record of those divinely inspired causes pain and exclusion, and raises more questions.

The Bible has often been used to oppress women. Ranging from exclusion from church leadership to domestic abuse, certain selections are held up in defense of androcentric and even evil choices of the human patriarchy and tradition in the place of power. We have, in our churches, decided that the passages dealing with multiple wives and slavery are clearly no longer applicable in today’s society. However, these same churches struggle to deal relevantly with homosexuality, violence, and the role of women. The Church must stop assigning cultural acceptance or dismissal to only certain parts of the Bible. Either we interpret it all through the lens of what is freeing, loving and life-giving, or we do not. Either we state that all of the Bible is the product of the world that it reflects, which is not the world we live in, or we do not. Many modern Christians are trying to pick and choose the passages that defend their positions, as un-Christlike as they may be, while dismissing others on the basis of history. This double-standard of Biblical reading and interpretation cannot be allowed to continue in our churches.

Sandra Schneiders reminds us in her essay that language is a “human phenomenon” (38). And as such, the Bible is inherently human. She writes “Because the text is human language giving voice to human experience of God in Christ, as well as to the experience of the early community in all its weakness and sinfulness, the text, even though it is inspired….is as capable of error distortion, and even sinfulness as the church itself” (49). The modern Church’s and modern Christians’ inability to recognize the above leads to harmful teachings and beliefs on women in leadership (in the church and civic lives), the gender (or lack thereof) of God, and the inferiority of women. This continues into oppression of other groups, including homosexual men and women and minority races.

As a language construct, Word of God is a metaphor. Much of what happens in the Bible is a metaphor, or a parable. That is, words or stories spoken to impart meaning and message, rather than to be taken a literal truth. Many Evangelical Christians hold that the Bible is literally, rather than metaphorically, true. Schneiders writes “The idolatrous result of this literalization can be traced through church history in the patriarchalization of Christian faith” (39). She reminds us that “Obviously, God does not literally speak, but the metaphor word of God certainly intends meaning. Its referent, what it points to is the entire domain of reality that we call divine revelation that is, the self-disclosure of God as it is perceived and received by human beings” (39). Revelation requires interaction between God and people. It is again this human element that cannot be considered untainted or infallible.

All language must also be interpreted. We interpret, as I often tell my students in choreography, based on what we bring with us. The audience’s own past experiences and biases influence what they see and hear. Even what they ate or didn’t eat, and the events of the day, before coming into the theatre influence what they view and, ultimately, what they interpret. Every audience member sees a slightly different dance, a slightly different play. It is tied up in their own personal, embodied experiences. No playwright or choreographer can ever fully know how their work will be received, a point that Schneiders makes about Biblical texts (48).

Schneiders writes, “Essentially, interpretation is a dialectical process that takes place between a reader and a text and culminates in an event of meaning” (47). It is this evanescence that I love about live art. No performance is ever the same. It is why actors and dancers can continue to “do the same thing” for 8 shows a week- it is never the same, because the energy shared between audience and performers is always different. In the same way, we encounter texts differently. We can reread the same passage at different points in our lives and discover different meanings, based on personal experiences and experiencing it with the people around us. Schneiders reminds us that this is important because “...it implies that a text does not have one right meaning…”  and that “...meaning is not ‘in’ the text, but occurs in the interaction between text and reader…” (47). Importantly, “the reader makes a genuine contribution to the meaning rather than being simply a passive consumer of prefabricated meaning” (48). It is this act of interpretation that gives hope to me as a Christian feminist. The meaning of the texts lie with us. We are responsible for researching, communicating and embodying meaning from the Scriptures that is inclusive, life-giving and freeing. We can accept the Bible as a human construct of communication with the Divine. In it we can see other human interpretations, and bring our own. And we can, ultimately, determine its meaning in our lives.

Schneiders, Sandra M. (1993) "The Bible and Feminism: Biblical Theology" in Catherine Mowry LaCugna, ed. Freeing Theology. New York: HarperCollins.