New Flow Vids

yes I do... I stared a thread related to that here a while back.. it evolved into this other beast though.. I attacked the issue from a different perspective from most.. I felt that in order to understand how to move, you had to understand how the poi move... I looked at how different patterns related to each other..

At the time, I wasnt taking the time to think about the stuff and was hurredly posting.. I'll quote the portion that I think sums it up best. Enter REALLy long exerpt:

Now the point I was making was very much sidetracked by the direction of the conversation.. one of the things I'm trying with the 'class' stuff I'm working on is getting passed all the distractions (I don't mean that in a negative way) that occur when conversing.. The poitns in that thread are really tied to how patterns (or more generally movements) come together... In fact, I'd say its more about how movements come together not the patterns.. See, the patterns give us the 'outward' appearance.. and with the exception of us geeks, that's where the focus of all poi discussion is.. and so naturally when people talk about, explore movement.. They try and take an approach that is very much isolated -from- patterns as much as possible.. Ex. how can I dance with my feet, while I weave this way or that or how can I move my body while performing a static piece like a weave.. This last point may not be directly intuitive... I mean who thinks of a weave as being static? I simply mean watch people weave.. they just stand there... get into your weave.. do something with it... make the weave something more than a 'poi pattern'.. you know.. anyway.. this is getting offtrack of my earlier point..

my point was that people were looking at poi patterns by their appearance and ways to do movement for the most part in isolation to that.. I'm not saying that that is a bad thing.. what I'm saying is that the poi patterns -are- movements.. spin your poi patterns without poi.. voila.. you see the movement.. when people focus on you and not the outward appearance, this is what they see... film yourself 'freestyling' all your poi without your poi.. is it fun to watch? is it interesting? is it engaging?

now grab your poi.. dance.. don't spin the poi.. I mean dance likeyou would if you didnt have poi.. do the poi get in the way?

the answer to the first set of questions is probably a no, and the answer to this last one is probably a yes.. my point being that everything has a bigger picture.. and its how we learn to incorporate these patterns together.. You can't learn to 'move with your poi' if you arent trying to see how poi patterns come together.. For me, this is where the key to movement lies..

let me sidetrack here for a moment... recall earlier (in one of the other posts), I said that ideally you should not do the same move twice.. Thus, learn to be fluid and all from one pattern to another.. well apply that to this discussion, and you'll see a bit more of what I'm getting at I think.. Since we are constricted in our movements based upon what patterns we are spinning, then naturally the movements we -want- to make (ala dance) would dictate the patterns we will spin.. some patterns are more free than others and so naturallyt I could do anything I want with seperated poi, but in the bigger picture of flow and whatnot, this isnt always available.. so its about saying, 'this is where I am now' and 'this is where I want to be' and then using your knowledge of the poi to make those movements happen.. In the end, what you will find is that you are moving without poi.. that is to say you can drop your poi and go through the motions and see dance.. BUT, you are doing it within the context of poi.. so that both the without poi and with poi are interesting, engaging, and one in the same..

One final point, and I'll end this forever long post. This is why the concept of degrees are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO important.. degress refer to static positions. Think of spinning poi like a flip-book.. degrees allow you to discuss any frame (page) in that book. and because it applies to ANY and EVERY pattern the same, it allows you to think about the position in isolation to the pattern.. What I mean here is that a 2nd degree twist is the same regardless of whether its a weave, or butterfly, or what have you.. and so when it comes to making the transition from 'this is where I am' to 'this is where I want to be' as described above, it becomes your guideline.. because you know that from your 2nd degree position, you can go to either a first or third, or maintain your second, and finally, that you can take this into any pattern (as in weave to inversion or whatever)... basically it provides a reference that allows you to see 'oh this is the page I'm on, so if I do x, y, or z I can end up on that page.' if that makes any sense..

I know a lot of this seems just like making someone more fluid with poi, and to a large degree it is.. but its not about the outward poi appearance.. and that's the key here.. its about that underlying dance that people see when they look passed the poi..

Edit: rovo, since you go by cleric a lot.. you can ht me up on aim to discuss these tings one-on-one.. I know that leaves the people here out of the loop.. I don't mean to cut them out.. I just mean that it would help progress a lot of these concepts further and quicker than these long posts do.. Ask cleric.. what I put in 15 pages of a word processor, i covered with him in about an hour of discussion.. (without 15 pages.. ) and went into richer detail and comprehension..

oh yeah.. and here's that thread that I grabbed the quote from..
http://www.spherculism.net/phorum/index.php?read,33,1186,page=2

I stole this icon from you a LONG time ago... I have one of your other ones too.. The static stick guy on fire one.. people on fire make me laugh.. That didnt come out the way I meant to put it.. but.. anyway..

I don't know if I said things right in my last post.. Its more than just the connections... the conenctions are to me, like patterns are too most people.. but.. the connections are just 'more patterns' in a sense.. and so the purpose I see in them are twofold:

1- the field is still relatively new.. I had a ton of stuff written here but I deleted it.. I think I will keep it simple and say that this is an intellectual point.. There are tons of conceiveable stuff out there that we know is possible, but havent done.. ala the community matrix... and so its not that they are showing off what they can do.. its they are showing you something that you can do.. You may have forgotten how, or forgotten to, or not known at all that you could.. but its the fact that -you- can and know you know or are reminded or whatever... Its not that you are taking really that one pattern.. its that pattern or something in that pattern inspires you to do something else..
If you listen to the good spinners, they will tell you all the time to go back to basics.. and the main point is that there's always something you overlooked or didnt fully register or whatever at the time.. and that's SO true.. That's why the hardest part about progressing is the fact that you have to 'unlearn' and 'relearn' things.. Most of our conceptual barriers are been broken... so hopefully we can spend less time unlearning.. But that's why when I think advanced.. I think of stuff that's generations of patterns down the line.. It's like someone handing you paint and brushes, teaching you a few ways to stroke, and then asking you to recreate a rembrandt.. It takes time.. and though we came together as a commuity to understand our tools, that understanding has given us sight into the future.. we will all have to work on the skill... In the meantime, we all need that reminder or inspiration to move our own personal matrix to the next level..

2- I think you caught the first point before though.. This one I don't know if I expressed well.. I think that there is also a story thats being told when you don't repeat.. Repetition is fine in music, and what not.. which is why I say that 'routines' have a place and need not be underestimated... I guess that depends on your audience.. but you don't read -stories- that have the same paragraph over and over in different parts of the book, like you might in a poem.. So I think that there is something to your use of a pattern that speaks when you only use it once. Then there are two magics.. the magic of the flow, and the magic of thought.. and they intertwine in the presentation when you think about why that pattern went there..
Moreover, its the fact that as far as appearances go, you can get many of the same effects with different patterns.. that goes for both hand and poi movements.. So, even beyond the vast diversity in permutations that one has at very early stages of poi, there is question of why I need do the same thing when I can achieve that effect by other avenues..
As a spinner, I find that this keeps me interested while spinning.. It also keeps me hooked while I watch.. because it speaks to me on many levels.. I see the 'audience' piece.. the fluff as it were.. but I also see the deeper current that communicates from spinner to spinner.. because, I see another part of them... one that speaks directly to -me-.. Think of it like looking at a painting.. some people can see the painting stritcly superficially and come to appreciate its beauty.. other people also think the painting is beautiful, but enjoy the beauty of the stroke, texture, and whatnot, as much as they enjoy the overall appearance...

I guess what I mean by all of this is that you can take a route that is highly technical and speaks just spinner to spinner.. but I think that would be denying the other 'audience' half.. and in either case is neglecting.. Its through a combination of both that you don't leave anyone out or behind.. and that's what I'm trying to encourage..

I think there is only spinning for yourself, which is doing whatever you like, cos it's not for anyone else and spinning for an audience. Videos or whatever.

Ahhhh now I understand a bit more. Ideally, if I was a really good performer, even the spinners in the audience wouldn't be able to think, other than what I would be wanting them to think... direction of attention and all that. Each new instance would bring something new / interesting for them to watch so that any analysis of the routine would come when it's finished.

I think I only use tech to mean subtle differences or detailed or y'know a very fine variation. A complex pattern to replace a simple one I would use the word: geeky.

heh, where did the (2nd) original topic go?

Wasn't that 05 video the uber dark one that you made in a blackout? It was darker than a bad fire video, which was impressive in itself! Or maybe that was just for me... I don't know. I remember the excitement and subsequent turning off of your video due to being able to see nothing but glowsticks... But my monitor is particularly dark, thou I can't remember if I watched it on my monitor... :s

Yeah I know that too. Even stuff I saw the first time and understood I might now practice and understand. Or watching it a second time might make you think of a variation you hadn't before due to some knowledge changed in you.

Yeah precisely... and you can use your body and your imagination to make a similar looking move very different for the lay audience. You can do a lot of different techniques and the lay audience will pick it up. I mean you can deliberately do a lot of similar stuff with tiny variations and 'force' the audience to pick up on all of them. Weather this performance will patronize spinners in the audience I think depends on how you make it...

In the simplest way you could just have different coloured poi, and then they would be forced to notice some things that would have been hidden before...

as for the other bit, yeah I know improv jazz is far from a good analogy... maybe jazz would have been a better analogy. And certainly, there is jazz I like, but I don't like jazz that a techy jazz player would like. Thou I think maybe I would like techy choir music or techy opera singing...

Ah I see better what you mean now. I'm not sure good performance is about keeping things interesting for me... firstly it's about making a good performance for the audience. I think it has to be interesting in some respects for the performer too... otherwise they wouldn't be doing it, but I'm not sure if the spinning should come into that... It certainly won't at the end... you'll have done it so many times in practise the entire routine will be boring... (I don't think this is true... you just get worn into it... each time is a new test... )

But yeah, it should be good spinning from your point of view. Otherwise why present it to the audience? That would be like lying. I certainly find one of the most interesting parts of performing is finding out which moves the audience likes... I think as I get better at performing... I'll be able to guess better... or make the moves better....

yeah yeah I get what you're saying, but I would be more like: "I want to go into a buzzsaw out of this weave, and do this body movement so it looks cool and symbolises , since I want it to finish on that beat of the music, I'm going to have to go in , to get all the buzzsaw beats I want to help symbolise the weave will be concise, but that will help overall. the next time I do it.. it'll be out of a reverse weave, because I'll be over the other side to help balance up the audiences view and move around the stage a bit and also to symbolise then I'll have to go into buzzsaw "

So in the end... other things would weigh more on my mind than repetition of movements... if I was as good as the above paragraph. Which I'm not. I am more like: "right lots of vertical moves... linked up nicely... pause in music... then lots of horizontal moves ending in the superhardcore stuff." But I'm working on it...