To every dance critic,
When the choreographer receives a critic, hearts race and skin crawls. Your words break hearts and bring in paychecks. Your words matter as much as our bodies and movement does.
Artistically yours,
Choreographers
This past week, I read page after page of dance criticism. I have watched careers fail and rise. I have experienced the heartbreak or excitement of upcoming artists. I have seen dance criticism laugh at historical, genius choreographers.1 The dance critic that demands extreme judgement is not creating literary work, but is publishing opinionated hullabaloo. How does anyone hold the right to tear down a piece that required an immense amount of time, effort, and money? Critics often fully destroy pieces that well established artists create because "they can take it."
Well established artists still hold their art a piece of themselves. When Martha Graham began to age, critics began to compare her current work to her past work. Instead of comparison, critics could have acknowledged a new era in her work. Past work does not bind to the expectations of the critic. Her creative process does not need outside negativity.
I believe that the critic should highlight the strong points of the given work and suggest questions for the choreographer to ponder. The critic should tell the potential audience the intriguing sections of the piece. Art is definitely subjective. However, the individual can see the piece in their own light. The choreographer can continue to question and progress their work. The critic should serve as the medium for the audience and choreographer to see through.
1- Review by Gregory King on Bill T. Jones' Tramontane
(http://thinkingdance.net/articles/2016/10/16/3/Bill-T.-JonesArnie-Zane-Company-Dancing-Oral-Histories/)
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
To Critique the Young, To Critique the Seasoned
To every dance critic,
When the choreographer receives a critic, hearts race and skin crawls. Your words break hearts and bring in paychecks. Your words matter as much as our bodies and movement does.
Artistically yours,
Choreographers
This past week, I read page after page of dance criticism. I have watched careers fail and rise. I have experienced the heartbreak or excitement of upcoming artists. I have seen dance criticism laugh at historical, genius choreographers.1 The dance critic that demands extreme judgement is not creating literary work, but is publishing opinionated hullabaloo. How does anyone hold the right to tear down a piece that required an immense amount of time, effort, and money? Critics often fully destroy pieces that well established artists create because "they can take it."
Well established artists still hold their art a piece of themselves. When Martha Graham began to age, critics began to compare her current work to her past work. Instead of comparison, critics could have acknowledged a new era in her work. Past work does not bind to the expectations of the critic. Her creative process does not need outside negativity.
I believe that the critic should highlight the strong points of the given work and suggest questions for the choreographer to ponder. The critic should tell the potential audience the intriguing sections of the piece. Art is definitely subjective. However, the individual can see the piece in their own light. The choreographer can continue to question and progress their work. The critic should serve as the medium for the audience and choreographer to see through.
1- Review by Gregory King on Bill T. Jones' Tramontane
(http://thinkingdance.net/articles/2016/10/16/3/Bill-T.-JonesArnie-Zane-Company-Dancing-Oral-Histories/)
When the choreographer receives a critic, hearts race and skin crawls. Your words break hearts and bring in paychecks. Your words matter as much as our bodies and movement does.
Artistically yours,
Choreographers
This past week, I read page after page of dance criticism. I have watched careers fail and rise. I have experienced the heartbreak or excitement of upcoming artists. I have seen dance criticism laugh at historical, genius choreographers.1 The dance critic that demands extreme judgement is not creating literary work, but is publishing opinionated hullabaloo. How does anyone hold the right to tear down a piece that required an immense amount of time, effort, and money? Critics often fully destroy pieces that well established artists create because "they can take it."
Well established artists still hold their art a piece of themselves. When Martha Graham began to age, critics began to compare her current work to her past work. Instead of comparison, critics could have acknowledged a new era in her work. Past work does not bind to the expectations of the critic. Her creative process does not need outside negativity.
I believe that the critic should highlight the strong points of the given work and suggest questions for the choreographer to ponder. The critic should tell the potential audience the intriguing sections of the piece. Art is definitely subjective. However, the individual can see the piece in their own light. The choreographer can continue to question and progress their work. The critic should serve as the medium for the audience and choreographer to see through.
1- Review by Gregory King on Bill T. Jones' Tramontane
(http://thinkingdance.net/articles/2016/10/16/3/Bill-T.-JonesArnie-Zane-Company-Dancing-Oral-Histories/)
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
How do you know your audience?
How does a choreographer create a narrative dance with universal concepts that the audience will know? In today's world, dance is becoming more and more global. Dancers perform all over the world and attempt to relate to their audience. However, most stories are not universal. In the above pictures, a Chinese audience may not know the myth of Clytemnestra, but a Greek audience will know the name if not the entire story.
As dance continues to grow in the international field, I think that the universal connection for the audience is movement. Movement and mobility is possible for most bodies. Dance fascinates because it shows the limits of the body in virtuosic technique or the mundane through American post-modern movement. So, the narrative dance may no longer be universal to every audience, but the choreographer can strive to make the movement evoke response out of any audience. If dance incites reaction and response out of the audience, is that not the goal of every choreographer?
The Daily Performance
On Tuesday in class after our free write, Professor Brooks breifly mentioned daily life as a performance in her free write. After she mentioned the idea of our daily lives being a performance, I began to ponder the ways in which my life could be a performance.
To me, a performance is vulnerability in allowing yourself to be seen. This idea was reinforced for me today in Introduction to Modern class. Beau had us stand in two circles, an inward and outward circle, with the circles facing one another. We rotated around the circle and did nothing but stand in front of someone and allow ourselves to be seen. Beau spoke of this exercise as a standing performance. In nothing more than a standing posture, we are performing in that we are allowing our body to be witnessed by those surrounding us. This is essence is the daily performance; stand and be seen.
To me, a performance is vulnerability in allowing yourself to be seen. This idea was reinforced for me today in Introduction to Modern class. Beau had us stand in two circles, an inward and outward circle, with the circles facing one another. We rotated around the circle and did nothing but stand in front of someone and allow ourselves to be seen. Beau spoke of this exercise as a standing performance. In nothing more than a standing posture, we are performing in that we are allowing our body to be witnessed by those surrounding us. This is essence is the daily performance; stand and be seen.
How Critical is Too Critical?
When I read a criticism of a performance, I often find it to be rather informative. It is usually meant to help the choreographer, dancers, and director further investigate their piece and it gives a new perspective on the matter. I know that I personally benefit from criticism because it pushes my mind and body to a new level. But can criticism be unhelpful?
In the mid 1900's, dance critic, Louis Horst wrote a review on Paul Taylor's completely still, Seven New Dances. He titled it "Paul Taylor and Dance Company", left it blank, and signed it with his initials, L.H. Horst definitely made a statement by writing the review this way and said a lot without saying much at all. But was his action too critical? Did it really help? Did it hurt him? It did not necessarily assist Paul Taylor in furthering his work and did not give him any feedback. Then again, maybe this is the reaction he wanted.
In the mid 1900's, dance critic, Louis Horst wrote a review on Paul Taylor's completely still, Seven New Dances. He titled it "Paul Taylor and Dance Company", left it blank, and signed it with his initials, L.H. Horst definitely made a statement by writing the review this way and said a lot without saying much at all. But was his action too critical? Did it really help? Did it hurt him? It did not necessarily assist Paul Taylor in furthering his work and did not give him any feedback. Then again, maybe this is the reaction he wanted.
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
What makes a dance scenario effective?
In class, we examined several different dance scenarios and the ways in which dance was able to add to each scenario. One question asked was about the effectiveness of each scenario. With this question in mind, I began to question what caused a dance scenario to be effective. What does it mean for a dance scenario to be effective? Are there dance scenarios that aren't effective? Can different dance scenarios be effective in different ways?
In order for something to be effective, the result produced has to be the intended result. That is, the result of a specific scenario, such as the reaction to a dance scenario, would need to be the intended result, such as the choreographer's intended result, in order for it to be effective. When considering two very different dance scenarios, such as August Bourninville's La Sylphide and Doris Humphrey's New Dance, I've decided that different dance scenarios can be effective in different ways. La Sylphide is a narrative with the intended result of conjuring an image in the reader's head. La Sylphide is effective in the way that a mental image can be formed without ever viewing the dance. New Dance is by no means a narrative. It is difficult for the readers of Humphrey's New Dance to create images in their minds. However, New Dance is effective for reason that it conveys a specific mood as well as depicts various human interactions, as was Humphrey's intent. After viewing sections of New Dance, it became evident to me that Humphrey's dance scenario was effective as it conveyed to me the effect she was trying to induce.
Though La Sylphide and New Dance are vastly different, both dance scenarios are effective. Both produce the result that was orignially intended by the choregrapher. With these dance scenarios, I wonder if they would remain effective if we had not read about the desired result. Would we still be able to detect the disorder and mood Humphrey was trying to convey without reading her desired result? In what ways can the choreographer's intent be seen in choreography? Does a dance scenario even need to be effective? Does the result produced from the audience need to match the result intended by the choreographer? If a dance scenario were allowed to effect an audience in any given way, not just the effect desired by the choreographer, the scenario would cease to be effective in terms of definition, but would begin to open a whole new world of possibilities for the audience. The audience could then view a dance scenario and allow the dance scenario to effect them as it may, not just in the way the choreographer intended. Perhaps then the audience would cease searching for meaning in dance scenarios and would allow the dance to effect them in any way it may. It is no secret that dance moves people to react; perhaps the effectiveness of a dance is found in the way the audience is effected and not just the effect the choreographer intends.
In order for something to be effective, the result produced has to be the intended result. That is, the result of a specific scenario, such as the reaction to a dance scenario, would need to be the intended result, such as the choreographer's intended result, in order for it to be effective. When considering two very different dance scenarios, such as August Bourninville's La Sylphide and Doris Humphrey's New Dance, I've decided that different dance scenarios can be effective in different ways. La Sylphide is a narrative with the intended result of conjuring an image in the reader's head. La Sylphide is effective in the way that a mental image can be formed without ever viewing the dance. New Dance is by no means a narrative. It is difficult for the readers of Humphrey's New Dance to create images in their minds. However, New Dance is effective for reason that it conveys a specific mood as well as depicts various human interactions, as was Humphrey's intent. After viewing sections of New Dance, it became evident to me that Humphrey's dance scenario was effective as it conveyed to me the effect she was trying to induce.
Though La Sylphide and New Dance are vastly different, both dance scenarios are effective. Both produce the result that was orignially intended by the choregrapher. With these dance scenarios, I wonder if they would remain effective if we had not read about the desired result. Would we still be able to detect the disorder and mood Humphrey was trying to convey without reading her desired result? In what ways can the choreographer's intent be seen in choreography? Does a dance scenario even need to be effective? Does the result produced from the audience need to match the result intended by the choreographer? If a dance scenario were allowed to effect an audience in any given way, not just the effect desired by the choreographer, the scenario would cease to be effective in terms of definition, but would begin to open a whole new world of possibilities for the audience. The audience could then view a dance scenario and allow the dance scenario to effect them as it may, not just in the way the choreographer intended. Perhaps then the audience would cease searching for meaning in dance scenarios and would allow the dance to effect them in any way it may. It is no secret that dance moves people to react; perhaps the effectiveness of a dance is found in the way the audience is effected and not just the effect the choreographer intends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)