DCDanceBlog

I was at the Metro DC Dance awards a couple nights ago…it was pretty great, in a way. The last time I’d been to the awards show was three years ago, shortly after I’d first arrived in DC and thus I knew almost no one. So the other night was an interesting contrast, seeing folks I’ve worked with, taken class with or from, and watched perform. So great to see that the city really does have a dance community that’s actually fairly cohesive. It was also interesting, though, to see the various genres of dance and to realize that there actually aren’t that many folks who are working on the type of dance that I’m interested in, that is somehow saying something and yet is fully authentic, not pushing an idea but hoping that it comes across.

It’s funny, Lotta and I got into a discussion about this at the reception after the show–one of many debates in our ongoing efforts to figure out what we like about dance and what we’re trying to do. Lotta has such great perspectives that I always respect, but she is a bit of a dance snob, I think (Lotta, would you agree?). And frankly, I think she has reason to be b/c she has great taste and has seen a lot of high quality dance in Europe, where their standards in terms of themes and ideas are much higher than ours. Anyway, though, I can respect her opinions, but it also brings out the reactionary in me, where I get a knee jerk reaction away from that highbrow, intellectual and abstract view of dance. So, talking about the performances at the show earlier, she praised Ed Tyler’s work as really the only one that night that was truly honest and real and truly evoked something in her. And of course I knew what she meant. I loved Ed’s piece too–the lighting was great, the music terrific, and the performances were simple and yet strong, and certainly honest, if that means anything. But frankly, I also really loved Step Afrika’s performance too. I had a major visceral reaction to the step movements (I love all of that stuff–step, tap–anything creating an audible rhythm through the dancers’ bodies). Their performers were terrific and compelling, the live music impressive…It was great dance too, but in a different way from Ed’s. More physical, more about purely dance, rather than mood, atmosphere, emotion. Me, I’m a huge huge fan of mood and emotion, of course, but I think it’s 100% possible to be totally effective by just highlighting good movement. It doesn’t always have to have a deeper point, right?

One other thing about the awards: why did it seem to be always the same 5 groups/performances nominated for the main 5 or 6 awards? That struck me as kind of strange. Surely there were a few other good performances in 2005-06, no? But I don’t know how the process works…I saw a piece a few weeks ago by an Israeli woman visiting here and working w/ Meisha Bosma. It was great, fun and funny and very fresh. But presumably she’ll be going back to Israel at some point. So if someone nominated her piece, how would the official members of the selection committee figure out if she was worthy of winning, if they hadn’t seen it originally?

The last thing I want to say is how struck I was by how all the striving in the dance world–I guess in the art world in general. I was feeling a little self conscious at the show at first, thinking that maybe I seemed like an imposter. I haven’t done that much, yet, in terms of creating or performing dance in the area, and was feeling like maybe I didn’t really belong there. But then I started thinking of the people around me who I knew, people who love dance too and feel strongly that they have something to contribute, yet might not be where they want to be–haven’t yet found their groove, haven’t figured out how to express what’s inside them, aren’t yet sure what they have to say but feel like there is something there that should get out. It’s really nice, actually, a process of trying to become fully ourselves, in a way.