DCDanceBlog

by Ilana Silverstein

Today, Daniel Burkholder/The Playground shared the current project, My
Ocean is Never Blue as part of the New Joe’s Open House: A piece that
explores emotional, environmental and societal relationships with
water. I appreciate the format: open rehearsal, informal showing,
anything that welcomes the audience into the creative process! Dance
is fluid and constantly evolving, and a performance in a black box
theater is just one piece of that. But how much is too much? too
little? How much is communicated without speaking? What would be
helpful to share with an audience as an introduction or program note
to have an understanding of the work?

About 20 people sat on one side of the studio and hung over the open
window to watch a group of 18(ish) dancers. We performed five of the
sections that we have been playing with in rehearsal. Before each
section, Daniel explained to the audience what they were about to see,
shared the section’s connection to water and the exact improvisational
score. It felt satisfying to put the work out into the world and hear
a response. The comments were on the literal side like, Is there a
direct connection to the environment? Will there be an advocacy
component? And to those literal questions, Daniel gave literal
responses: explaining that the piece will incorporate water statistics
and we are looking to partner with environmental organizations to host
fundraisers for environmental issues, etc. But wait. Hold the phone.
Isn’t ART political? Does ART about water issues not raise awareness
of water issues? The ART is a direct reflection of the time period
and society of when and where it is created. I don’t think we can
extract that from the work. Perhaps this is too farfetched, but this
investigation of water is making a difference, starting conversations,
expressing what we are experiencing.

For more information/upcoming performances visit:
http://improvarts.alkem.org/myoceanisneverblue

Ilana Silverstein

john saw momix at george mason this weekend. this is what he wrote about the performance:

Momix was AMAZING!!!.  I was thinking — “how I am going to write this up for the blog?” — but realized I had no way to do it.  This one goes unexplained, uncritiqued.  That said, it was genius for its use of illusion and eye-trickery (ok, same thing).  This was as much a function of the lighting and costumes as it was of the dance (which too was amazing).  The lighting was a total mystery to me; I have no idea how they achieved what they achieved.  Bodies were suspended in space, because the lighting exposed the liftee but not the liftor, even while they were perfectly adjacent to one another.  And the costumes turned everyone into biomorphic oddities; half their bodies were missing because only some parts of the clothes were glow-in-the-dark, leaving the rest night-black.  They were like Miro pieces floating around the stage.  The dancers were strong, trained in ballet yet built like gymnasts. 

i realised the other day that what i am attracted to in dance and
choreography is the movement. the very actual movement. the body that
moves.

not the body in a shape, a form, a pose, a formation.

but the body that moves between shapes, forms, poses and formations.
what i can’t touch. the movement that is gone once it happens. the
body that moves between and through shapes, forms, poses and
formations.

it’s the between i like.

the form is necessary. but it’s the going to it and from it that i like.

that’s why i can’t love ballet. or paul taylor or petipa or
cunningham, or any dance that strives for a form, a pose.

and that’s why i love the dance that doesn’t treat the pose as the destination.
that’s why i love the dance who’s destination is the path to and from.

——-

i have never thought about this before. it’s crazy.

———

wait, i take it back, i take it back. i should say: that’s why i can’t
love ballet or paul taylor or petipa or cunningham, or any dance that
strives for a form, a pose, AS MUCH.

because ballet or cunningham’s stuff travels. a lot. and it has
elements that isn’t pose oriented. but it definetely goes for shapes
in a way that in turn shapes the dynamics of the overall movement of
the choreography. it many times feels as if the shapes are the whole
point of travelling in space at all. this makes me think of what
cunninghams pieces would look like if the still shapes (the “breaks”
in the flow of the movements) were taken out.
also, it makes me think of how this is one element that is very hard
in terms of technique. meaning, it’s the moving parts of movement that
is hard. not the arriving.

and to never arrive, never go into shapes, is the hardest.

it’s late and already these performances are long past, but i wanted to write very very briefly about 3 performances john and i saw last week.

the first was “stomp” at the warner theatre. fantastic!!! so worth seeing–very delightful, fun, intesting, lovely. kind of like cirque du soleil in its ability to delight despite that it isn’t strictly “art” but rather entertainment. and yet so entertaining! the performers are amazing percussionists creating complex beats on all kinds of everyday objects–basketballs, sinks, even plastic bags! just amazing. and all those beats get into your body and just make you feel good.

then we saw lar lubovich’s othello at the kennedy center. also pretty great, although sort of sleep inducing too, the way most ballets can be, i find. but it was pretty compelling, at least for me–interesting and innovative choreography, strong themes, and (thank god) no sense of the classicism that can be so boring. sarah kaufman of the wash post wrote a review of the performance that didn’t even mention lubovich’s choreography, oddly–and i think that was one of the best points of the performance. that and his amazing sense of lighting and staging at certain points.

on sunday afternoon we saw kankouran, the african dance and drumming group, at dance place. also great, in its own way–another performance whose rhythms get under your skin and get you jumping. great drumming but even greater dancing, esp among some of the women, who looked to be fully enjoying the movements and yet totally in control. really inspiring and it made me want to MOVE!

so why am i sitting here writing and not dancing?

I haven’t had a chance to fully explore this site, but it looks like a fantastic resource for dance of any type: http://www.artsalive.ca/en/dan/. Lots of video links, other resources, interesting info of all types…