Archive for January, 2010

Discussing the Unseeable

Still/Here by Bill T. Jones

This month marks 15 years since former New Yorker dance critic Arlene Croce scandalized the arts world by writing a scathing review of Bill T. Jones’ “Still/Here” without actually having seen it. Croce dismissed the piece, which featured terminally ill people talking about their illnesses, as victim art and refused to see it on the grounds that Jones had crossed a line between performance and reality, thereby making it “undiscussable” as a work of art. In short, she said, she could not review people she was forced to feel sorry for.

Coincidentally, on the occasion of this ignominious anniversary I, too, have found myself with an opportunity to review a dance work without seeing it. Unlike Croce, I have no ideological objections to this piece. Also unlike Croce, I plan to attend the performance. The reason I won’t see it is that I will, like the rest of the audience, be wearing a blindfold while the dance takes place.

Dana Salisbury

The piece is Dana Salisbury’s Unseen Dance, and it’s happening Saturday night at Green Space in Long Island City. I interviewed Salisbury a few months ago for an article that appeared in The Brooklyn Rail, and we spent a rainy afternoon talking about how she came up with the idea to create dances for audiences who can’t see them. As it turns out, the idea evolved from a project she created called Dark Dining, in which participants experience a four-course meal and entertainment–musicians, singers, tap dancers, beat boxers–while blindfolded.

I’m excited about finally getting to experience Salisbury’s strange sensory world for myself on Saturday night. I also have to admit that the prospect of literally putting myself in the hands of a bunch of strangers who I’ll never actually lay eyes on (Salisbury calls her dancers the No-See-Ums) is kind of scary. Tune in for my report next week.

  • Share/Bookmark

A New Experiment for Cherylyn Lavagnino Dance

A confession: I have a fear of post-performance Q&A sessions. While they can sometimes offer surprising insights about a given piece or choreographer’s process, they also have the potential to devolve into drawn-out torture sessions of discomfort. Either everyone is too shy to ask a question (guilty), or someone in the audience is all too eager to display his or her dance knowledge with a long, rambling dissertation about something that has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Happily, there are exceptions–and Sunday afternoon’s salon series performance of Cherylyn Lavagnino Dance at NYU’s Tisch Dance Studio was one of them. There, a very young audience member’s comments renewed my faith in the value of Q&A sessions and left me with a deeper appreciation for the work of Lavagnino, a choreographer who blends classical ballet and contemporary dance.

On the program were four pieces, including a work-in-progress called Menage, which Lavagnino and her company created during a residency at The Silo this past summer. According to Lavagnino, the inspiration for the piece came from Degas’ ballerina sculptures, and indeed watching the dance was like seeing those sculptures come to life. Dancers coupled and un-coupled in a series of intricate partner work that is one of the hallmarks of Lavagnino’s style. The movements were deliberate and meditative, as though the dancers were figuring out in that moment how they might fit together and how their movements–the sweep of a leg or the nudge of an elbow–would cause the other to respond.

Little hints of narrative flickered throughout. In one, a woman clung passionately to a man who appeared not to notice her. In another, two men joyfully waltzed each other across the floor, coming to rest side by side with linked arms.

The program moved along swiftly, and by the time the last piece was over it took me a moment to bring Menage back to mind. But a young boy, who couldn’t have been more than seven or eight, was ready with an astute observation. He noticed that there were lots of different stories in the dance, he said, but not one whole story. He was right on, and Lavagnino told him so. The piece lacked an overall cohesiveness because it was still stuck on the fence between abstract and narrative.

Thanks to the boy’s thoughtful observation, we learned from Lavagnino that narrative work is new territory for her. She added that she plans to bring in Kay Cummings, who teaches acting for dance at NYU, where Lavagnino is dance department chair, to help flesh out the story and the dancers’ characters. And though the dance was sparked by Degas, both Lavagnino and composer Scott Killian admitted that it seems to be taking on a kind of deep-South, Tennessee Williams flavor as they continue to work on both the dance and the music (composed by Killian in collaboration with Jacob Lawson and Jane Chung).

And so, as the boy so precociously suggested, the whole story has yet to emerge.

It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. We’ll have our chance in the spring, when Cherylyn Lavagnino Dance has a season at Symphony Space May 6-8.

In the meantime, the kid in the audience has given me a lot to think about–not just in terms of Lavagnino’s piece but in how I approach my work as a dance critic. Like the know-it-all who hijacks a post-performance Q&A session to expound on obscure bits of dance ephemera, dance critics can fall into the same trap in our writing. In our valiant attempts to grasp at a piece’s meaning and relevance we can often lose sight of what’s happening right in front of us. The boy reminded me that the first thing you have to do is take a deep breath and tell what you saw, and say it simply. The rest will unfold from there.

  • Share/Bookmark