2025 | Relational Choreography Masterclass and Relations (Live) (Dik Danstheater x ICAF Hub Singapore)
In June 2025, I participated in the Relational Choreography masterclass by Dik Danstheater. The masterclass culminated in a dance performance, Relations (Live), on 14 June to nearly 200 audience members as part of the International Community Arts Festival Hub in Singapore (ICAF Hub Singapore).
A picture with the Dik Danstheater team (Left to Right): Jordy Dik, Vincent Dankelman, Sjaak van Dam, Loura van Krimpen
Core members from the Relational Choreography masterclass.
Picture with the audience at the end of Relations (Live)
BACKGROUND
Drama Box hosted ICAF Hub Singapore: The Gathering from 12 - 15 June 2025. in Singapore. The festival which originated in Rotterdam, the Netherlands is held once every three years to showcase community arts organisations, professionals and practices from around the world.
The masterclass by Dik Danstheater was a sharing of their Relational Choreography method that the company developed over the last 5 years. The approach aimed to make dance accessible to all by centering on call and response and allowing individuals to dance from authentic impulses and respond spontaneously to each other.
It was an experience to go through the masterclass with dancers who were differently abled and with varying dance/movement backgrounds.
The studio transformed from a mountain of cardboard boxes to a studio with mirrors covered and cardboard floors - riddled with the core group drawings and words.
The setting up of the Stamford Arts Centre Black Box over half a day for Relations (Live).
LEARNING POINTS
As a beginner dancer, I appreciated the way the facilitators (Jordy Dik and Loura van Krimpen) introduced a common language for all the dancers with our various backgrounds. This included the 11-point system about different ways to create movements by ourselves and with each other, and the Rainbow method to describe different movement qualities.
Jordy and team had also shared how the Rainbow method supported their directions with participants, example, "The movement is too blue, could you add more red and orange and green." Another participant of the masterclass also shared about how it was refreshing for a choreographer to be uncompromising in their directions and creative vision even while working with the community. And this communication method is indeed one way to bridge that.
The 11-point system to kickstart movement individually and with others.
The Rainbow method to communicate various movement qualities.
Jordy had shared that they have used this approach across different projects, as in conducting the masterclass with a group who would become the core members that would then support the accompanying improvised show, Relations (Live). The approach is thus intense and time-limited, often happening over a week with the communities. For ICAF Hub Singapore, it happened over the span of 5 days, with 3.5 days of workshopping and the show on the last day.
I am mindful that the work taps into the instinctive and impulsive movement participants have and present. I noted that the core members all had varying levels of dance/movement background. I am wondering how such a method would apply to a community that had no dance/movement background or even physical impairments with movement? How would a longer term process (think, months) where participants may want "mastery" look like?
During the performance of Relations (Live), we had audience members seat among the core members on the stage. The piece would also move on to expand the level of audience interaction, inviting them to be part of improvised sequences. While Jordy and team had pre-empted us about how we could invite audience members to join us for the Happy Dance at the start, I felt myself reflecting a lot about the art of audience interaction.
There was a point in the show where we had to do a series of solo movements based on audience members. I found myself on the side with 3 other audience members. I had thought that the 3 audience members would need more guidance and so asked if 1 or 2 of them would like to be paired with the other core members. To which, the audience member declined and said, "I'm good, I can follow." Have I over-extended my care and undermined the audience's abilities and excitement in being part of the improvised spectacles like lifts? However, I am also mindful I was in a room of like-minded creative peers, how would the general public have liked to be supported or would self-selection suffice if audiences knew it would be an interactive piece?
A clip of the directorial process and performance of the said choreography between myself and some audience members.
Later on during the relational choreography, where Jordy and Loura simultaneously improvise a dance piece, I found myself with another 2 audience members (you could see a clip of the start above). However, we continued on in another sequence after, requiring a mix of core members and audience members to get on our fours to become a staircase for a dancer to step on. In the moment, it struck me, making me wonder if audience members were comfortable with it? Would the audience members be able to say, "no"? While performers of participatory works are always thinking of how to evoke audience's participation, do we also need to learn to consciously hold space for audiences to say, "no" in the thick of performance?