Archive for the ‘Dance Culture’ Category

#460 – After the Dance Is Over 3: Reggie Wilson/Fist & Heel

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

reggie wilson/fist & heel @ columbia college dance center, 4/1/11

Can you imagine if I was a novelist and I had to find a choreographer to come up with a dance to let people know they should buy my book?  — Reggie Wilson to Sharon Hoyer, NewCity Stage

Reggie Wilson’s collaboration with Congolese choreographer Andréya Ouamba, The Good Dance, Dakar/Brooklyn, starts with the notion that if Westerners ground their sense of the ethics and meaning of life in texts—the Bible, the Talmud—then African and African diasporic cultural traditions use the dancing body as the central medium for communicating ethics and meaning. For Wilson, the “Good Dance” is an African version of the Good Book.

But this doesn’t mean that his group’s performance was filled with goodness. On the contrary, there was much sin and suffering, violence and rupture, displacement and disorientation in The Good Dance.

The dance is centered not only around bodies of people—people who come from around the world, people with all different size and shape bodies—but also bodies of water, in this case the twin histories of the Congo and Mississippi Rivers.

Deep, troubled, muddy, powerful, both these rivers, which appear in The Good Dance not as contiguous currents, but rather meted out in plastic bottles of water. These plastic bottles get assembled and reassembled, kicked and thrown, gathered and redistributed throughout the performance.

Each bottle, each dancer, each segment of the piece, each gesture itself becomes a fragment of a larger story, a dispersed sampling of a larger essence, the contained traces of a wellspring, the confluences of a delta, the preserved essences of a larger whole that cannot ever be reassembled again and must, instead, be danced into a narrative, a river of meaning produced from the fragments of liquid contained in our polymer present, never to quite decompose, quenching thirst even while poisoning with impenetrable residues.

There were multiple flows to Wilson’s magnificent and moving creation:

  • He broke the fourth wall by speaking to the audience while balancing a bottle of water on his head, at first it seemed like a break from the dance until slowly another dancer entered the stage, dodging and darting around Wilson, trying to knock him from his perch at the center of the piece, an example emerging of domination and the arts of resistance.
  • The music and the gestural language of the dancing continually linked African and African-American traditions, persistently noting connections that were powerfully referenced throughout.
  • Wilson dragged his dancers around at times, as if to play out power relations between a master and his subordinates at all levels, from the symbolic to the actual.
  • Most of all, his troupe collected and doled out their bits of the diasporic river traditions, picking up in new places, borrowing and imitating, crossing cultures as if trying to get to the bank on the other side and back again, alive, navigating the churning rapids, finding beauty in the baptismal moments between.

Wilson’s dance was a purification ritual, to be sure, but it was also an initiation into deeper awareness. It seeped into your consciousness with the silt of history. And like receiving a message in a bottle, a communication from the stormy deeps, one felt filled with wonder at the vast distances that expressivity can travel, the ingenious modes of survival and adjustment that humans absorb, preserve, and send along. We are bodies of water, after all.

But during The Good Dance, one also grew aware of the extended traumas of dislocation in the African diaspora, and the fragility of those hurled along on rafts of this diasporic culture, which was splintered and lashed together as those in its currents undertook makeshift improvisations, dramatic affirmations, and forceful negations and repudiations. To keep their heads above water was no small thing.

The Good Dance‘s mix of wonder and terror was more than good, then, it was great. And it was rendered beautiful by its turn from wisdom found in a frozen body of authoritative texts to knowledge gained through a carefully-corporealized text written with bodies.

Links:

*After the Dance Is Over offer a few belated posts about contemporary dance performances this year in Chicago.

#459 – After the Dance Is Over 2: Same Planet Different World

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

same planet different world @ columbia college dance center, 3/10/11

In choreographer Joanna Rosenthal’s corporeal take on the gender dynamics of classic film noir, muscles seemed to be led by other parts of the body. Bones, sinews, and tendons did the propulsion. Or, sometimes, it seemed like some kind of string was pulling and yanking on the dancers, as if they were puppets, dummies, or, perhaps, real people helplessly trapped in cinematic archetypes, mere projections of selves instead of active agents.

The dancing suggested that power might emanate from outside the self, applied from larger cultural forces to the body rather than coming from within. Forgotten elements of the past—the violent, lurking past—are still with us, the dance suggested, even if they are in black and white or out of print.

Bodies were sent corkscrewing down other bodies, twisted over themselves, ripped from the contemporary dance setting into the spoken soundtrack of a hard-boiled detective story. Bodies got lost in a descending swirl of bleak tragedy, trying to find their bearings in a world whose initial nostalgic air quickly gave way to a contemporary terror.

One was wrenched out of hip discernment into the violence that lurks in modern life, cells of celluloid whose bars were ripped asunder. Come off the reels, the anguish of cynical calculations led to an inevitable terminus, which was, given the film noir setting, perhaps a preordained conclusion of violent tragedy, one whose chalky outline of a dead body was barely covered by stylish retro garb.

Link:

*After the Dance Is Over offer a few belated posts about contemporary dance performances this year in Chicago.

#458 – After the Dance Is Over 1: Mark Morris

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

mark morris dance group, socrates @ harris theater, 2/27/11

 

Mark Morris’s choreography has always struck me as grid-like, with the ensemble moving in straight lines, either horizontally or vertically across the stage. But one of the most moving moments in Socrates was when the dancers looped back, quite literally, lacing themselves through the grids of their previous movements.

There was something elegant about the combination of rectangles and circles: not the tragedy of Socrates so much as the surprising appearance of ancient Euclidean pleasures in contemporary dance.

Link:

*After the Dance Is Over offer a few belated posts about contemporary dance performances this year in Chicago.

#451 – The Dance of the Pendulum

Tuesday, April 19th, 2011

trisha brown dance company @ mca chicago, 4/17/11.

What’s fun and wondrous about Trisha Brown’s choreography is that it is about the body’s relationship to gravity. Her gestural language treats limbs like pendulums as the dancers lift their arms, move their legs, and flop this way and that. They exhibit enormous control in letting gravity do its work, loosely yet with great force, against yet ultimately within and through their bodies.

In the musicless “Opal Loop,” for instance, from 1980, four dancers swung back and forth, their muscles and bones lifting and collapsing, their torsos pushed and pulled as if by the moon’s tidal pull and, back again, by the earth’s magnetic core.

In the new “Les Yeux et l’ame,” a sketch of a drawing by Brown herself, just a few black squiggles and circles, loomed in the background. They offered the barest of gestures of form in an uber-modern, almost minimalist style. But the dance, set to Jean-Philippe Rameu’s 1748 composition “Pygmalion,” was surprisingly dense, courtly, and complex. It featured eight dancers who worked closely in and around and with each other even as each individual developed distinctive movements.

Of course, one thinks of the myth of Pygmalion when watching this performance. Ovid tells us that Pygmalion fell in love with his own sculpture only to have it miraculously brought to life by Venus and Cupid. In a sense, when watching Brown’s new piece, it is tempting to say that sculpture is the starting point for dance. Or perhaps it’s the end point. Or maybe it’s the opposing same.

In Trisha Brown’s choreography, that is, the still bodies of her dancers emerged as vividly and crisply as if captured in marble, yet they also continually escaped stillness and solidity, as if animated by some larger force. They corkscrewed around each other, they twisted and turned, they overlapped and departed, only to collide again. They resisted and accepted gravity in alternating currents, conversing with it, alive through Brown’s sculpted sense of channeling energies far larger than the human body’s alone.

The bodies of her dancers grew thick with time, dense and simple all at once, statuesque yet liquid, swinging back and forth in action and at ease, never in repose, but rather always reposing.

 

Links:

#437 – Puppet Regimes

Friday, February 25th, 2011

a string theory of two recent puppet shows.

Wonderboy and choreographer Joe Goode.

The self is not an organic thing that has a specific location, whose fundamental fate is to be born, to mature and die; it is a dramatic effect arising diffusely form a scene that is presented.

— Erving Goffman

Just as choreographer Joe Goode’s use of electronic vocal effects and masks distorted the human voice in order to humanize a puppet (see CR #436), his very interest in adding a puppet itself to his dance troupe was rich with humanistic implications. For what is a dancer if not the puppet of the choreographer, a kind of dummy for the bodily manipulations of a gestural ventriloquist?

By adding a puppet to his piece, Wonderboy, Goode dramatized the question of desire in motion. He made apparent the social origins of the self, the ways in which the individual takes shape from the outside as much as the inside, from forces, often invisible, that push or pull us in certain directions, down certain paths, over to certain fates.

And yet, as the puppet himself, Wonderboy, learned to interact with those around him, as the dancers gave him life, made him animate, in a carefully-choreography bildungsroman, he also found his own story. Wonderboy became embodied, a personality, a being in the world, with feelings. Held in sway to others, he held his own.

Joe Goode Performance Group with Wonderboy.

The use of puppetry was quite different in Betontanc and Umka.lv’s Show Your Face! Their puppet was nothing more than a sack of clothes, with a hood stitched on top.

The goal of Betontanc and Umka.lv was not to humanize a puppet in order to meditate on human nature, but rather to decry the dehumanization of the individual by larger systems of power. This was a puppet on the run, panicked and scared, hunted down rather than held aloft. This puppet confronted moments of coarse pleasure among monstrous terrors, and became a new kind of invisible man, not even a man at all but rather a missing person, bullied about by invisible forces themselves seeming out of control.

There was no social self here, only a faceless bag of nothing, strung out and strung up in a rendition made chilling by the absence of even a puppeteer in charge. No one in control anymore, only a faceless, Kafkaesque series of trials, with no strings attached.

Betontanc and Umka.lv, Show Your Face!

Links:

#436 – Vocal Discords

Saturday, February 19th, 2011

two ways of throwing your voice.

In recent visits to Chicago, both performer Laurie Anderson and choreographer Joe Goode toyed with vocal masking and manipulation, but to almost opposite ends.

Anderson performed material from her recent album, Homeland, by adding a voice-lowering effect to her voice. Taking on the role of her alter-ego, Fenway Bergamot, she created an odd distance between body and voice, appearance and sound. The result was a strange, rather disturbing dehumanization. As the audience moved back and forth between Anderson’s pixie-ish looks and the monstrous baritone emerging from the speakers, there was a sort of disembodiment. A gap or rupture burst forth in the space between Anderson’s lips and the microphone that not only amplified, but also transformed her words into electronic signals.

If Anderson became a robot, Goode moved in the other direction. His dancers performed with a puppet, Wonderboy, whose voice was created by dancers once again speaking through various electronic effects. The voice moved higher and lower, spoken by male and female dancers; it was distorted, wavering, twinkling. The effect was not a momentary dehumanization, a roboticization, of a person, as in Anderson’s performance, but rather something more like blowing human breath into the inanimate: a puppet given the gift of feeling and life. There was wonderment, a kind of breathless leap as Wonderboy’s voice gave him a body, and his chants, made real, turned enchanted.

Links:

#412 – Art History

Friday, October 15th, 2010

historicizing the phenomenal ephemeral.

History, certainly, is important. Knowing where you come from and why is essential, and thanking and giving reference to those who came before, who plowed the way to where we are now is vital. But those artists at the club last night were there in flesh and blood for that one night, playing and creating music that will never be heard in that particular way again, and for that they deserve the credit of their night, not an explanation of how and why they got there.

Emily Johnson, “The Conundrum That Is: Writing About Performance,” Mental Contagion

On the surface, Emily Johnson writes of attending a burning hot jazz show at a club in Harlem, but the deeper issue she writes about is the challenge of historicizing artistic experience.

How do we not only represent the aspects of art that are obviously lasting—origins, lineages, linkages, appropriations, and contexts—but also the effervescent explosions of art that “will never be heard in that particular way again”?

It’s easy to assume that the impermanent is unimportant, but when it comes to art, the ephemeral can sometimes, in fact, be sheer power flashing forth, history in-the-making.

#411 – Word!

Friday, October 15th, 2010

emily johnson on writing about performance.

Writing about performance…has to match the courage of the performance makers, has to be a forum other than the forum of performance itself, to help give current and future context to something that is constantly evolving.

- Emily Johnson, “The Conundrum That Is: Writing About Performance,” Mental Contagion

#410 – The Displacements

Tuesday, October 12th, 2010

emily johnson, thank you bar @ the columbia college dance center, 10/8/10.

Emily Johnson

Performance…is an experience that bridges history—it is experienced, and it lingers, and it finds a place of meaning in our daily lives. — Emily Johnson

There is dislocation in Emily Johnson’s dance performance Thank You Bar, but there is no disarray; there is displacement, but there is no rupture. Things are fragmented, but thereby, miraculously, they emerge in a greater whole. The world is broken open, but precisely to understand that it is not broken. History accumulates, but you become distinctly aware that you are experiencing something new.

By the end of the event, you arrive home, and in arriving home, you also learn about what home is: it’s a familiar place rendered strange, a strange place made familiar; it’s a persistent reminder of something you have forgotten but whose impossible recovery is itself inscrutably comforting. It’s a rustle of leaves.

Johnson achieves a mood of anti-melancholic nostalgia. Thank You Bar is inspired by her own meditations on her efforts to feel at home in the world, to measure the connectedness between her childhood roots in rural Alaska, her current home in Minneapolis, and her traveling life as a touring artist. It is dedicated to registering the impossibility of ever completing this connection. Thank You Bar aches with longing. But it also offers a discovery: that it is precisely in incompleteness, in the impossibility of unifying the experience of movement, that home can be felt most potently.

The displacements are many in Thank You Bar. One enters the performance space to discover that the audience has been moved from the traditional seats in the house to the stage itself. There we sit arranged in a semi-circle around a set of amplifiers, microphones, pedals, instruments, and other musical equipment.

The musicians begin the performance. They walk in, play a fragment of the composition, then walk off stage. Yet they remain, relocated to repeating digital loops of the sounds they have made. The loops grow with each trip they make to their gear until a thick texture of ambient noise develops. A scratched acoustic guitar, a celestial falsetto hum, a jolt of electrified static, a scrap of country-music pedal steel guitar. They linger, slowly gathering steam and dust.

A video appears. On the screen, we are taken outside the theater, onto the street. Johnson drags in an imaginary tree, one that was cut down to make the building that is now the Columbia College Dance Center, which was itself once the Paramount Pictures Film Exchange warehouse. Layers upon layers begin to accumulate. Invisible sediment. Old facts yield new insights. We are among reassembled dislocations.

A voice in the video begins to tell us this story, but it is not Emily Johnson’s voice in the video. It is Emily Johnson’s voice on a tape recorder taped to her chest in the video, which has itself taken us from the theater’s actual stage to the screen above us.

Suddenly, from behind the audience, in from the door to the lobby, Johnson steps forward. The screen is gone. She walks on heavy stilts (once trees themselves). Flashlights are taped on to the bottom of each stilt to light her path. The footlights are headlights.

Johnson steps down from the stilts, rolls forward, rolls back, rolls forward, rolls back—displacement, replacement, sameness, change, repetition, alteration, recovery, discovery. We begin to follow her on a treadmill of movement: things and gestures that are here, now gone, now here again, half-forgotten, then suddenly present, remembered. “I’m so lonesome I could cry,” she sings in the dark, lying on the ground behind us.

Before us, musicians and Johnson then create community, which displaces this loneliness. She welcomes us to the “Thank You Bar,” which is the English translation of Que-Ana Bar, Yup’ik for thank you. This was the name of Johnson’s grandmother’s house and bar in rural Alaska, where she grew up. It’s a real place.

But it’s also a place now dislocated by other contacts, newfound connections, future histories. Johnson wheels out an imaginary igloo. She offers each audience member a paper box illuminated by a small light. We share in what Johnson calls an “igloo myth.” For though there were no igloos in her childhood, she is always asked whether there were. So fake igloos are also part of the real past of the Que-Ana Bar. Paper igloos cubes filled with light. The dislocating point of sharing.

Johnson talks to us through a distorted walkie-talkie; she tells a childhood story of being called an Indian and dances the act of not knowing how to respond, her breath itself swallowed up in memory. She turns us around on our chairs to the other side of the dance floor — “This is the deep end” a sign reads. She shines flashlights of all sizes and shapes into the dark air, searchlights, beams that become bridges across the dark, dissipating into the ether yet casting lines into unknown spaces.

Johnson shines a light upward. We follow it. “Pigeons live in this vent” a sign explains.

Johnson stands on a pedestal. She slaps name tags in rapid succession on her heart—the names of each audience member in attendance. She becomes each of us for a moment, as we become her. We lose ourselves for a moment. We discover new selves. Hello my name is….

Suddenly, a technician has become a dancer, in duet with Johnson. Suddenly, Johnson sings in quiet three-part harmony with the musicians. Suddenly, the musicians become the dancers. They spin in circles, hanging on to each other and Johnson with the tips of their fingers. They slip under each other’s arms, making a home of the dance floor by spinning off it.

Johnson gathers us around a small inflatable pool, fills it with dried leaves, climbs in with a flashlight, sinks in to her shoulders as she tells the story of a boy who tried to dissect a blackfish. He couldn’t. Its insides turned to thick black goop when he cut it open. He ate five in frustration, trying to get inside them by getting them inside him. He vomited the goop back out. Johnson’s flashlight crinkled in the leaves, shone out into the darkness.

You can’t get to the bottom of things, I think, when those are the things that are at the bottom of things.

Emily Johnson, Research for Thank You Bar @ the Maggie Allesee National Center for Choreography Residency.

Emily Johnson, Thank You Bar.

LINKS:

#371 – A New Ballet Mécanique

Monday, March 1st, 2010

thinking through the digital & the body.

Digital Incarnate: The Body, Identity, and Interactive Media, an exhibition at Columbia College, features multiple paths to the place where the corporeal and virtual meet. This is a place with a long history: humans have been pondering the body and the mind, the physical and the mental, for millennia. But it’s also a new place: a site in which the technologies of the digital both echo older histories and point-click toward unknown destinations.

Digital Incarnate @ The Arcade Gallery, Columbia College Chicago, February 8 – April 2, 2010.

Two of the displays—Luftwerk‘s Doppelgänger and Troika Ranch‘s Liquid Mirror—are playful and fun. They pull the viewer’s body into the digital through shadow play, silhouettes, and light shows. Actual limbs and their visual extensions blur on a dark screen in Luftwerk’s piece and flickers of light in Troika Ranch’s vertical screens.

One thinks Marshall McLuhan here, but also, glimpsing darker shadows in the shadow and light, x-ray scanners at the airport and other modes of surveillance. The body seemed to evaporate into the digital in these pieces in ways that were at first frolicsome, but increasingly ominous: the body etherealized, but also filled with foreboding.

OpenEnded Group‘s Paul Kaiser and Shelley Eshkar lean toward the traditions of animation in their collaborations with Bill T. Jones and Merce Cunningham. The OpenEnded pieces—Ghostcatching and Hand-drawn Spaces—are striking for how much they reproduce the signature styles of these two famous choreographers in digital form.

As Kaiser explained in his talk, the transformation of Jones’ body to the digital realm revealed his muscular, flowing, vibrant dance style (the markers to record Jones’s dancing body would literally rip off as he moved). When OpenEnded Group combined the motion of a male and female dancer in a Cunningham piece, the angular, skeletal aspects of Cunningham’s choreography remained. They were even accentuated by the merging of two actual bodies into one digital body. Cunningham’s already-abstract emptying out of subjectivity and control from his dancers’ bodies were even more ghostly and phantom-like as they flashed across three screens.

A final computer station features a collaboration between the choreographer William Forsythe and  researchers at Ohio State University. Synchronous Objects, a complex digitalization of Forsythe’s One Flat Thing, reproduced, feels like a lab report, but one that is endlessly entertaining. One Flat Thing becomes quite multidimensional, almost overwhelmingly so—it is indeed reproduced. The user can instruct the computer to map out different aspects of the dance: traces of the dancers’ limbs, the negative space between the dancers, particular relationships between different dancers, and more.

I’m not sure if it’s art or science, or both, but it is something. One plugs into the matrix, in control of data that may lead to new programs of the very self. As fingers manipulate a dance of virtual space, bodies may simply become like so many other buttons, knobs, dials, and touch screens that we use to move between the flesh itself and our machines. Or, perhaps, at the module, our bodies tap into a grid we never knew we already occupied. We begin to glimpse a secret map of the place where inside and outside might merge in what essayist Sondra Fraleigh calls “the elusive soma,” the “body mysterium.”

Choreography has become cartography. We reach the edge of skin at the synapses of the circuit board, and feel, for a moment, sitting in front of a boring screen, waiting for a video to upload, the electrifying shock of watching the material leap into the virtual—what is becoming what might be.