Performer as perceiver: perceiver as performer
Matthew Rodger Johann Issartel Sile O’Modhrain
SARC, Queen's University, Belfast
E-mail:
Proceedings of ENACTIVE/07
4th International Conference on Enactive Interfaces
Grenoble, France, November 19th-22nd, 2007
Abstract
The proposition in the title of this paper is intended to draw a link between psychological processes involved in aesthetic gestural performance (e.g. music, dance) for both performers and perceivers. In the performance scenario, the player/dancer/etc., perceptually guides their actions, and acquires the skill for a performance through their previous perceptions. On the other side, the perceiver watching, listening to and experiencing another’s motor performance, simulates the actions of the performance within the range of their own motor capabilities. These phenomena are possible due to common mechanisms of action and perception, and in tandem provide the basis for the rich experience of gestural performance.
This paper reviews evidence for these claims, using examples from the domains of music and dance performance. Questions that arise from these propositions are addressed and suggested empirical explorations of these ideas are given. Further problems in incorporating these theories about gestural performance experience within Enaction are highlighted for future discussion.
1. Introduction
This review puts forward the concept that gestural performance experience arises through common mechanisms of perception and action. Initially, it will be beneficial to clarify use of the term ‘gesture’. Firstly, research and theory about ‘action’ are here applied to gesture, implying equivalence between the two terms. As intention is a necessary component of action [20], in distinguishing action from mere movement, the implied equivalence between gesture and action here may raise issues about the role of intention in performance gestures. To be clear, the main intention is considered to be the performance intention as a whole, to which other actions are considered to involve more basic intentions (see [10]). Regarding ancillary gestures in music performance, for example, the main intention of the performer may not necessarily be ancillary gestures per se, but rather the intention to communicate a holistic musical ‘expressive unit’ [26], for which the ancillary and effective gestures are more basic, subsumed within the overall performance intention. Secondly, regarding musical performance, it is considered that perception of auditory events will induce simulation of gestural action thus allowing for non-visual communication of action. This is emphasised here as discussion of movement in dance and ancillary gestures in music performance may bias understanding towards visual communication in performance and this is insufficient for understanding musical performance as a whole.
.
2. Performer as perceiver
The ‘performer as perceiver’ can refer to two features of gestural performance. Firstly, the performer is engaged in perceptual guidance of their movements during the actions that constitute performance [13], and can to an extent modify their actions on-line on the basis of perceptual feedback and attention [21]. Thus, the performer is an active perceiver of their own bodily movement and bodily interaction with instrument, through the gestural channel [2], or interaction with conspecifics [8]. Secondly, the extent to which performance actions are not available to on-line guidance and manipulation delimits the extent to which memorised or pre-programmed movement is necessary for performance. It is here that the acquisition of performance content and skill is effective. Present skill level and characteristics will be formed through prior perception and feedback, both of one’s own performances, through the development of sensorimotor loops, as well as from observational effects, either from instructive demonstration [9] or in audience of related performances. It thus seems that both during performance and during its acquisition, the music or dance is actively shaped by current and previous perception.
In musical performance specifically, empirical support for the performer as perceiver comes from a number of sources. Evidence shows that effective musical movements in performance are perceptually guided, for example in the vocal closure of pitch gaps [13]. However, the connection between auditory perception and effective sound-producing movement seems to be more salient in skill acquisition than in online guidance. This is illustrated in studies where altered auditory feedback had a stronger effect on memorisation of a musical piece [5] and on development of expressive variation [15], than on online performance errors.
At a more holistic level of musical performance, the presence of ancillary gestures as communicative cues [26] indicates that performers are perceptually sensitive to effective means of communication in performance, as those gestures that are felt to fit the music become incorporated into their physical performance. This is neatly summarised by Thompson et al. [24]: “visual aspects of performance signal that performers are not merely producers of sound but are themselves listeners, highlighting the musical activity as a shared experience between performers and listeners”–p178. To explore the nature of this developmental aspect of performance, research is in progress to explore the ancillary gestures made by musician as a function of skill acquisition. By comparing the presence and characteristics of ancillary gestures in performers of different skill levels, and over the acquisition of a new piece of music, the effects of self-recursive perception on these performance gestures may be illuminated. It is hypothesised that as skill level increases, stability and consistency of gestural movements will increase, and that the relationship between gestures and musical parameters will become stronger, as gestures come to ‘fit’ the musical intention.
This point leads to the question of whether it is possible to consider ancillary gestures in music as dance performance, where there is an explicit focus on the ‘fit’ between movement and performance intention. In the case of a positive response, the question arises of what could be the weight of such movement in the musical performance of the performer? In the same way but from the perceiver point of view, what could be the consequences on the perception of the musical performance?
3. Perceiver as performer
As with the first proposition of the title, the second can refer to two aspects of the perception of gestural performance. The first concerns the contention that embodied motor simulation is central to perception of the actions of others [11], and by extension, perception gestural performance will entail embodied simulation of those gestures. To the extent that embodied simulation of gesture obtains, the perceiver is a covertly simulated performer in resonance with the actual unfolding performance. A corollary of this idea lies in the boundaries of its limitations. A perceiver does not actually realise the actions in simulation, a fact which is necessary to maintain the self/not-self distinction [11], that is, ‘I am resonating with the performer, but I am not myself the performer’. This trivial fact becomes less trivial when looking at studies of action identities in, for example, piano performance. The ability of pianists to make more accurate judgements about their own performance than others [16] may likely lie in the greater resonance potential between their own motor system and that employed in the stimulus performance, i.e., their own recording. This observation leads to the further possibility that the degree of communication and engagement between performer and perceiver in a natural setting may be partially determined by the match between their respective motor capabilities.
Secondly, due to differences in motor mechanisms between skilled and non-skilled performers within a given domain, it follows from this account that there will be differences between skilled and non-skilled perception of a given performance. That is, the extent to which a perceiver is capable of simulating performance actions, will be a function of their own action capabilities, and in turn will shape their own perception of a performance, with skilled perceivers being closer matched to the performers. For example, the observation that trained musicians are greater able to articulate in verbal report their conscious experience of music as evidence of a richer conceptual content of their experience [1], coupled to the claim that concepts have a basis in the motor system [7], indicates the dependency of musical perception on motor capabilities.
An empirical imperative that follows from this possibility is to examine the extent to which skilled performers differ from non-skilled in their perceptual judgements of different performances. Some evidence to answer this question has been gathered in studies of dancers. One study in progress, conducted by one of the authors, has analysed real-time judgements of dancers by non-dancers Preliminary results revealed that although global choreography judgments may be different, participants followed the same relative judging pattern. This suggests that, as in tasks where the subject is performing the behavior, so too in judgements of motor behaviors we are naturally attracted by certain movements. Another study from the neuroscience literature compared fMRI activity of dancers watching performances of their own dance genre with performances from another genre [3]. The results showed greater activity in the premotor cortex when witnessing a dance genre that they have acquired greater motor capabilities in. This indicates that familiarity with motor skills of a specific genre affects processing of dance performance. A further study of perception of gymnastics found that skill level of perceiver influences judgements, and hence perception, of both aesthetics and skill in the gymnast performance [19]. In order to extend this last finding to the domain of music, a study to be conducted will compare the ratings of musicians of different skill levels in response to musical performances by players of different skill levels. This is intended to uncover whether musicians are more consistent in their perceptions of performances by players of a similar skill level, and hence motor capability, as themselves. As a result, this research will explore the effects that motor ability compatibility has on perception, as an indicator of the resonance potential of simulated gestural performance.
4. Exploring the flexibility within common performance-perception experience
The claim that a person’s perception of gestural performance can depend on their motor capabilities could be taken to mean that only skilled performers can be engaged by a performance, and only if it is in their relevant skill domain. Schutz-Bosbach & Prinz [18] imply this when they suggest that, “[i]f you have never played tennis in your life, you will probably never think of buying a ticket to watch a game at Wimbledon.” – p349. This is not the claim we wish to make, as gestural performance has a universal attraction to people with different motor systems, as shown by the universality of music and dance [14]. Rather, the differences in perception between skilled and non-skilled performers that result from differences in respective motor capabilities are better considered as smaller individual variations within a larger common motion-perception spectrum, which is grounded in our physical and physiological similarities.
A motion-perception spectrum runs from the perception of non-biological movements at one end to the perception of self-actions at the other. Progression up the spectrum might correspond to the degree of activation of the common mechanisms of perception and action that develops strength through familiarity with one’s own actions in and of the environment. At the lower end, it is observed that perception of non-biological events is constrained by the motor system’s sensitivity to biological motion, in preservation of the 2/3 power law [25], or perception of biologically plausible movements in non-biological stimuli [23]. Additionally, it has been proposed that perception and prediction of inimitable events in nature involves attenuated simulation in the motor mirror system of possible actions that share sufficient motional features of the events [17]. The other end of the spectrum is characterised by research into self-action identities that reveal a greater perceptual sensitivity for one’s own movements as they have a greater correspondence to one’s own motor system capabilities [12]. Where our individual perceptual experience of an action will lie on the motion-perception spectrum will partially be a function of our familiarity, which relates to our motor resonance, with the motion or action perceived, but will have greater dependency on our physiology, which has greater similarity than differences between people. A further observation of relevance is that in the mirror system, which is implicated in perception of other’s actions [11], ~30% of mirror neurons are responsive to perception and execution of actions that identical, whereas ~70% are responsive to any similar or related action [7]. In terms of the motion-perception spectrum, this suggests that motor-capability-dependent differences between peoples’ perceptions of action are more likely to result from differences in the smaller percentage of neurons, as these are involved in actions that can be identically simulated, whereas the greater number can be approximately simulated, facilitating perception of skilled gesture by non-skilled perceivers.
The common motion-perception spectrum can be related to gestural performance by considering the following example. Schubotz [17] describes listening to a performance by the pianist Glenn Gould as events supposedly inimitable to the majority of perceivers and presumably mediated by the perceiver’s ability as a pianist, familiarity with the piece, etc. With this example of virtuoso music, while it is not possible for a non-musician to reproduce the effective gestures of the great player, it is still possible for them to reproduce the kinematics of the holistic (musical) gestures that envelope individual effective gestures [6]. Following Grush’s emulation theory, Clark [4] comments that “[w]hen we hear the beat, we are implicitly aware of our capacity, should we wish, to tap our fingers in time with the pulses, to anticipate the pulses, to swing a conductor’s baton in time with the pulses, and so on”-p35. Extending this to the case of the virtuoso performance, there are congruent gestures that are possible to make, which correspond to gestures in the virtuoso performance at a level higher than individual notes say, but are rather more like the gestures of a conductor, or ancillary gestures of a performer. Indeed, this may provide the basis to the communicative powers of ancillary gestures in music performance, as they can facilitate attention towards the imitable movements in the musical sound. As Bharucha et al. [1] observe, there are different perceptual experiences of motion available in music and while non-skilled perceivers may not be able to simulate the individual effective motor skills, they are able to access the higher-order motion that may be the vehicle for expressive communication (see also, [22]).