Luke Jennings gets "profound"

[Melody]

Loved this article by Luke Jennings in the Guardian, which is a primer on being "profound" in contemporary choreography. He's having a dig at Nederlands Dans Theater in the process, and I have no idea how justified his derision is, but I must say I've often thought the same when faced with what's generally known as "cutting-edge" dance. Or art or music for that matter. When I'm left thinking, "have I just not understood what they're trying to do, or are they having a joke at my expense?" it comforts me to know I'm not the only one.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/jul/06/nederlands-dans-theater-review-lets-get-profound?CMP=twt_gu

Edited July 6, 2014 by Melody

[loveclassics]

I think Luke Jennings is spot-on with this.  I've seen a few new works over the last ten years and they all featured the points he mentioned.  He missed out the bizarre lighting effects though, which are frequently more interesting than the choreography, when the light isn't shining directly into the audience's eyes, that is.

 

What I want to know is what rule says a modern piece has to be solemn, serious and significant?  Can't we have a little light-heartedness occasionally?  Or at least, less solemnity and sheer misery (7 Deadly Sins, Sweet Violets, Metamorphosis etc.)

 

Matthew Hart did some LOL pieces - Cry Baby Kreisler, for instance, but fun seems an alien concept to new choreographers today.  Perhaps they should watch Still Life at the Penguin Cafe to see how to get a serious message across while still being entertaining.

 

Linda

[Anjuli_Bai]

I long ago told myself that if I think the emperor is naked - then naked he is.  If anything can parade as "art" then my opinion of it (and yours) is as valid as anyone else's.

 

And, I long ago concluded that if it seems to me that the music is unmusical meaningless junk - then that's what it is.

 

And, if modern/contemperorary choreography is one continuous display of angst - I could save myself some money and just get angstsy all by myself.

 

And, if obscurity of purpose is a sign of "sophistication" - then I feel no shame in declaring that the cupboard is empty.

 

And, if the "choreography" is "how many ways does she bend and splay" then perhaps the "choreographer" should invest in an anatomically correct doll.

 

Shine the lights in my eyes - and I leave.

 

Blast the "music" - I'm gone.

 

I have seen some marvelous dance and dancers at Netherlands Dans Theatre - but I've also walked out before losing my eyesight and hearing.

 

Likewise -- before drowning in "this is art - but you (I) are incapable of realizing it."

 

It's not easy being unsophisticated.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Anjuli_Bai

[zxDaveM]

I think Luke Jennings is spot-on with this.  I've seen a few new works over the last ten years and they all featured the points he mentioned.  He missed out the bizarre lighting effects though, which are frequently more interesting than the choreography, when the light isn't shining directly into the audience's eyes, that is.

 

What I want to know is what rule says a modern piece has to be solemn, serious and significant?  Can't we have a little light-heartedness occasionally?  Or at least, less solemnity and sheer misery (7 Deadly Sins, Sweet Violets, Metamorphosis etc.)

 

Matthew Hart did some LOL pieces - Cry Baby Kreisler, for instance, but fun seems an alien concept to new choreographers today.  Perhaps they should watch Still Life at the Penguin Cafe to see how to get a serious message across while still being entertaining.

 

Linda

 

 

See ANYthing by Kristin McNally!  :-)

[zxDaveM]

Loved this article by Luke Jennings in the Guardian, which is a primer on being "profound" in contemporary choreography. He's having a dig at Nederlands Dans Theater in the process, and I have no idea how justified his derision is, but I must say I've often thought the same when faced with what's generally known as "cutting-edge" dance. Or art or music for that matter. When I'm left thinking, "have I just not understood what they're trying to do, or are they having a joke at my expense?" it comforts me to know I'm not the only one.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/jul/06/nederlands-dans-theater-review-lets-get-profound?CMP=twt_gu

 

Reading the text, I'm amazed it got 2 stars!

[chrischris]

I appreciate that Luke jennings has been one of the most high profile journalists to constantly raise the ridiculous opportunities given to women choreographers, as he does again here.

[Kitschqueen_1]

Mmmmm but would I rather be challenged with what I watch than see "safe" classical repertoire?

[tabitha]

See ANYthing by Kristin McNally!  :-)

Hi Dave, Kristen was one of 3 choreographers who collaborated on a piece for this year's RBS Linbury and Main Stage performances. The piece is called Concordance and it is awesome! It is a 3 part piece and the first part, which was choreographed by Kristen, was really very good. The other 2 parts choreographed by Alexander Whitley and Martin Joyce were also very good, but Kristen's just had the edge for me. Loved it all though, and would love to see more by her.

[Ian Macmillan]

More 'profundity' from this morning's Links?

 

http://www.culturekiosque.com/dance/reviews/booty_looting_vandekeybus882.html

[Pas de Quatre]

As DD is now focusing on contemporary, DH and I have sat through many works over the last few years, both student and professional shows.  We have consequently devised a penalty system whereby a piece loses marks if displaying too much of any of the following.

 

- slapping the back wall in angst (well known school has a wall in the theatre often used in this way)

 

- slapping the floor

 

- excessive meaningful writhing

 

- slow motion without a reason e.g. Rites of War recently used it very effectively to denote soldiers crossing a minefield.  In other pieces recently seen, it can take several minutes to sit down or walk across the stage for no apparent reason

 

- treating the audience with contempt

 

- excessively loud "music"or sound and/or blinding lights directed into the audience - this is not a third degree interrogation

 

That's just a few for starters.  Anyone else got anything to add?  

 

However, inspite of this jokey list, there is some wonderful contemporary dance around.  Classics are classics because the duff pieces have been forgotten.  With new work you can't strike gold everytime! So there are bound to be some less satisfying works as well as excellent ones.

[aileen]

Great post! Had you and DH seen much contemporary before your DD stated specialising in this type of dance? My daughter refuses to watch any ballet which involves someone rolling on the floor for no obvious dramatic purpose. We saw something at the ROH a few years ago (Sensorium?) which she did not like at all for that reason, but she was only 9 or 10 at the time. I'd like to know how the dancers treat the audience with contempt. I've not seen that. It sounds intriguing. 

[Anjuli_Bai]

More 'profundity' from this morning's Links?

 

http://www.culturekiosque.com/dance/reviews/booty_looting_vandekeybus882.html

 

The Reviewer declared it wasn't dance, so this reader declares it wasn't a dance review.

[Pas de Quatre]

Yes, I have been watching Contemporary Dance since i was young.  First it was Rambert and London Contemporary Dance Co as home grown companies with visits to UK of overseas ones such as NDT, Alvin Ailey etc. DH just gets dragged along, but has developed quite a discerning eye.  

 

Now we have Richard Alston, Mark Bruce, Matthew Bourne to name some high profile companies, but with the growth of many new smaller contemporary dance companies, and the establishment of Dance hubs, such as The Point in Eastleigh and Pavilion Dance Southwest (to name my closest ones,) there are many more things to see.  What limits my theatre visits is timing.  Like most dance teachers I have classes after school and am often busy at the weekends, so I can't get to everything, but have seen quite a lot this year.

 

When I say contempt for the audience, it is probably the choreographers rather than the dancers, but I include shouting and haranguing the audience, climbing over them whether dancers are clothed, or even in the nude as in one production this year. Choreographers should remember that in general the audience is on their side - after all they have come of their own free will to watch, and probably paid good money for a ticket too!

[loveclassics]

Hi Dave, Kristen was one of 3 choreographers who collaborated on a piece for this year's RBS Linbury and Main Stage performances. The piece is called Concordance and it is awesome! It is a 3 part piece and the first part, which was choreographed by Kristen, was really very good. The other 2 parts choreographed by Alexander Whitley and Martin Joyce were also very good, but Kristen's just had the edge for me. Loved it all though, and would love to see more by her.

What is Concordance about and what music does it use?  Must admit I tend to give the Linbury a wide berth because the seating is too uncomfortable for an entire evening.

[tabitha]

Well, apologies if I don't get this exactly right but the music is what I would describe as a type of electric funk with a strong beat and some sampling. On the programme it doesn't have a name, just said that the music was by Marcas Lancaster. I think he did it as a one-off for this piece. Not my type of thing usually but it was OK and the choreography just complemented it so well that you ended up liking it.

 

I don't really know what the choreography was about if I'm honest. I just know that I really enjoyed the combination of 2 things together that I wouldn't necessarily enjoy separately and I really liked the 'moves' but I can't really describe it. All very energetic and highly watchable and a great contrast to the rest of the school performance which was very classical.

 

I think it will be performed again in the annual ROH main stage performance at the week-end.

[annamicro]

I saw the show two days ago in Hamburg and loved it.

It was very well received by the audience, a principal if Hamburg Ballet even said to have been brought to another world and touched so deeply by Schmetterlig to be in tears.

 

Considering the "modern" stuff proposed on ROH stage by some resident pseudochoreographers, hyperexpensive, repetitive, danced without fluidity and plasticity, I don't understand such an attack against NDT coming from London: they are lightyears ahead.

[helpop]

To add to pas de quatre's list:

 

- soundtracks which aren't music (e.g. discordant miscellaneous sounds)

 

- soundtracks with words

 

- dancers shouting nonsense or single words

 

- staring directly at the audience

 

- long periods of silence

 

 

I like the concept of deducting points!  Do you leave at the interval if the score drops too low? 

[Ian Macmillan]

PdeQ and others, I think you'll find some extremely profound examples here:

 

http://brooklynrail.org/2014/07/dance/dance-and-process

[toursenlair]

gag me.

[Melody]

Gosh.

 

Sorry I missed it...

[Pas de Quatre]

Me too - it sounds such a fun event!

[Pas de Quatre]

Helpop - no I have never left a dancer performance before the end.  This whole idea of giving points started when DH and I were seeing various student choreographic competitions at Vocational schools.  We just started giving our own marks as we went along to see if we had chosen the prize winners.  It was then a simple step to say to each other, for example "I would have given it 8, but deducted a mark for excessive meaningful writhing, so only 7!"