Access all areas

The project was very well received by the students involved, and received generally good feedback afterwards. Everyone found the project to be relevant both to their own artistic development and to topical issues. They also gave feedback identifying areas for improvement. For example, they asked for more time to be able to work with musicians and dancers, more time together in the studio, and more time to try out music and movement in real time.

We also identified these issues during the project itself, as the musicians joined the project at a later stage than the dancers.Many of them had limited opportunity to participate full-time due to other commitments planned by the jazz section. We would like to stress how important it is that the institution schedules sufficient time for those participating in projects like these so that they all start on an equal footing. It can have an adverse impact on the feeling of ownership of a project if this is not done.

Both we and the students found the situations where both dance and music students worked together to be useful for driving the process forward, e.g. when they discussed ideas in smaller groups or collaborated in the recording studio.

The dance students highlighted how they appreciated being able to work individually and thereby both shaping the ideas and executing the project themselves.

In response, we can say that we gave the students a considerable amount of freedom and trusted them to complete the project. We touched base at various stages along the way in order to keep track of how the projects were taking shape, and we made ourselves available if the students needed assistance. As it happens, they were incredibly good at helping and supporting each other with both practical challenges and developing the artistic content. We found that the group were driving each other forward and that we eventually became surplus to requirements in the process – which was what we hoped for in our teaching strategy.

The music students said they appreciated being able to work in the recording studio using composition techniques and music production to manipulate space and time as additional tools for creating improvised music.

In terms of the course on dance film given to the dance students, the feedback was that they wanted to spend more time working on their own films and less time on theory. Some found the aspects of this course to be less relevant. As an example, the students were given an introduction to camera functions, but almost all of them wanted to use their own smartphones for the filming. In the future it could be interesting to design a course programme more closely linked topractice and the students’ own video projects.

The music students would have liked to be able to edit and compose soundtracks for the films.

In response, we can confirm that we ended up having only a day left to edit the soundtracks before screening. Yet the music students did say they appreciated the time spent recording soundtracks with the dance students present in the studio, where the latter could provide input and ideas about how they wanted the soundscape to complement the film they had created. Although the music was mostly improvised, they were able to discuss between them what the films should convey by way of emotions, contrasts or qualities – both visually and in terms of audio.

The students say the project was relevant to them. Learning about dancing for camera and completing a project on their own – turning it into a finished film – was seen as an educational process. We also want to add that the completed films, with both video and music, were artistically sound and of a very good technical quality. We believe that this happened because every student was given the room and trust they needed to develop their ideas and decide for themselves when they wanted assistance from the project co-ordinators.

We see how using digital tools for both dance and music was a resource and a tool for the students to document and display their art. Yet, the most important learning outcome from the usage of digital tools was how it allowed them to view themselves as artists from an external viewpoint and enabled them to reflect on questions about what they want to convey, where to find aesthetic knowledge, and why and how they make the decisions they make.

Being able to closely link theory to artistic practice and artistic output also became important to the process. The music students said there was little theory to apply to their improvisations when using the studio as a tool. However, they did experience the theory in practice as we were able to play back and manipulate their work in the studio and shine different theoretical light on their improvisation techniques. We were able to analyse acoustic improvisation theories using digital studio technology and knowledge.

We find that the cross-disciplinary aspect, which was important to us, suffered from time pressure. We had envisaged that the artistic process would take place through a cross-disciplinary dialogue in that the music students and dance students would be creating something together and gain an insight into each other’s knowledge, references and artistic values. We wanted the process to be more circular with the students giving each other feedback during the process in pursuit of a shared outcome. In the end, the dance students created the film and the music students added music to the film. Both were good learning, but we had planned for the music students to play a greater role in the artistic development process with a view to creating a joint audiovisual product.

The project took place over two weeks. During the two weeks the dance students were involved full-time, while the jazz students joined after three days. The dancers first completed a dancing for camera course with Boger while beginning to develop their concepts and ideas for self-produced dancing for camera choreographies.

Once the musicians joined in, the cross-disciplinary part began as the dancers presented their ideas and thoughts on music/sound for the videos. After group discussions between the dancers and the musicians, the musicians entered the studio to develop sequences which they would then go on to record. Meanwhile the dancers were recording and editing their dance videos. Some of themvisited the studio to make specific audio recordings, give instructions and record text.

The dance students spent much of their time working individually during these weeks – with the exception of the course with Boger. Flønes and Boger were in attendance to guide the students artistically, technically and practically when needed.

The music students were always working together, first in a practice room at the faculty where they employed laminar and atomistic improvisation techniques and then in the music studio in Tou with a technician and course tutor. In the studio they explored the ensemble techniques while isolated in different recording booths, only being able to contact each other via microphones and headphones. They also recorded soundtracks for use in the dance films.

Two days before the films were due to be screened, project manager Kristoffer Alberts developed a runny nose and was unable to meet the students due to strict Covid measures. He isolated at home, where he edited the soundtracks for the films – a process intended for all the music students in collaboration with Alberts. Instead the music students spent their time with Alberts’s replacement Per Zanussi listening to and discussing the recordings they had made in the previous days. The students appreciated the alternative solution and say they benefited from it, although they were unable to participate in the editing process – an important element of the course.

The project concluded with a screening of all the films with music. Both dancers and musicians were present along with the supervisors and the invited guest, Brynjar Åbel Bandlien. Each dance student presented the idea and concept for their video before screening. After each video we asked the students to give each other feedback.

Our strategy for the project was for us to serve as supervisors. We were therefore careful not to moderate or instruct the students in respect of their artistic content. Our mandate was to watch and listen to establish the direction the students were taking and then support them irrespective of their artistic choices. This meant we had to be responsive to where the students were in their respective processes and not push the process towards a result, rather insisting that the process be adhered to. The strategy was to give the students an insight into cross-disciplinary artistic research by using digital tools and to enable them to conduct such art projects largely independently of teachers or tutors. This in order to help them develop as artists and shape their own artistic practice, both during and after their studies.

Our motivation behind the project was the need and desire for closer cross-disciplinary collaboration at the faculty – a collaboration initiated by faculty staff but also deeply rooted in the students’ own motivation. Our experiences as freelancers have shown that professional musicians and dancers will be confronted with cross- disciplinary collaborations and that this needs to be addressed on the bachelor course. Performing arts students will also find that it is important to forge close cross-disciplinary bonds during their studies so that they are not left without interdisciplinary experience or contacts in other art disciplines when they graduate. At a time when the arts have suffered under strict Covid regulations limiting physical contact and travel, it has been especially important to be able to work together and create art together using digital tools to prevent cross-disciplinary collaboration from grinding to a halt. It is important to us that the students experiment with cross-disciplinary artistic research and that trial and error can be just as important in developing good art on a performing arts programme.

The Faculty of Performing Arts in Stavanger is committed to cross-disciplinary co-operation across dance and music, and the Access All Areas project has been part of this commitment. Yet we feel that the project took a slightly different turn compared to previous projects as the students themselves played a major part in designing the process and outcomes. The most valuable feedback we have received is that the students would like to continue to conduct cross-disciplinary art projects outside the faculty as well. We believe that such creative and student- driven processes involve a steep learning curve and that it is these kinds of projects that need to blaze the trail for cross-disciplinary collaboration in the future. We must always see the students at the faculty for who they are and support their knowledge and background as well as their needs. It will be important to continue this work following the Access All Areas project and its focus on digital tools, but we must also acknowledge that from the autumn of 2021 there is likely to be a great need for physical interaction without the digital mist that has descended over the arts.

Practical info

Our feedback and message to the faculty is that the curriculum should not be a copy of the previous year – that we can wait until we know who the students are and what ideas they have got and then draw up a plan accordingly. With the extreme Covid measures in place in 2020/2021, the entire staff and student group had to make drastic changes to make the most of the course. On the one hand this was far from ideal, but on the other we have discovered new ways of conducting artistic research as the students were forced into a situation where they took considerable responsibility for their own learning with teachers and staff acting as facilitators for interaction and development. We can take on board these learning points for future academic years when we no longer have to observe further restrictions.

We believe that a three or four-year bachelor programme is a very limited time period before the students throw themselves into working life where they are expected to develop their own artistic projects. It is imperative that we explore and practise these skills during the bachelor programme. One practical exercise which we found very useful to the artistic research project that Access All Areas became was hiring in external expertise once we knew what the students in question wanted and needed. Henrikke Boger’s film theory course and access to the facilities at Tou Scene and Tou Lyd and other public amenities gave the project a more performative angle where the students could draw on other resources than just their own instruments and bodies. The students were able to see their aesthetic and embodied knowledge through a camera lens, by recording with a studio technician, and by practising visual art in nature and in the cityscape. Much of this came about on the students’ initiative, and we believe this allowed them to see how artistic development can take place anywhere with unexpected collaborators and that this is something they need to remember after they complete their performance bachelors. We hope to be able to continue the Access All Areas project by conducting cross-disciplinary artistic research across the faculty and other institutes nationally and internationally. We think this would be useful in order to identify new opportunities for artistic research and be able to make new contacts outside the faculty.