Click here for a great post by LGOYB. She hits the nail on the head:
the implications speak to one of the reasons why “dancer” is as much an identity as a profession. I and many dancers I know will talk of dance as our therapy, our refuge, our safety net. And the idea of giving it up (a suggestion frequently and cavalierly made by some nondancing others in our lives) provokes feelings akin to withdrawal.
March 6th, 2006 at 10:09 pm
I wholeheartedly agree…and I think that one of the difficulties facing modern dance is that many modern dancers manage to reach a “professional” level of technical mastery and feel such relief in the studio that they look to perform and make some kind of career of it…but are nonetheless not artists in the sense that while they may feel joy and refuge in dance, they don’t have something inspiring, indelible, original and authentic to say through their dance. Nothing wrong with that at all, as long as they realize it. Just because one loves doing something doesn’t mean one should do it in front of an audience and call it art. So i wonder if a lot of dancers inadvertantly have a kind of identity crisis. or maybe we have lots of aimless choreography and performances for other reasons. Any thoughts?
March 7th, 2006 at 7:57 am
Christopher Pelham brings up a big topic. I think his criticism applies to most art forms–passionate, but not broadly inspiring amateur efforts in many disciplines abound in community theaters, concerts, art fairs, and throughout the blogosphere, to cite a short list. While his reasoning may be one reason there are “lots of aimless choreography and performances”, I think there are so many others. Another short list: economics that prevent dancers, and especially most older, more seasoned artists who often have the most inspiring and indelible things to express, from working full-time (or at all) as dance artists; economics and the business of modern dance preventing many of the few who have the privilege and guts to work full-time in the field from working in optimal conditions (with the ability to pay seasoned dancers, free of a truly insanely demanding touring schedule, free of the constant demand to put out one new work per season regardless of whether you have anything to say, etc.); little ongoing, rigorous choreography training available to modern dancers outside of a few MFA programs (especially in proportion to technique classes); narcissism (dancers need to be very interested in ourselves to do what we do well, but I think the concert dance world often is so to a fault, and I think it is one of the things that keeps many of us from being interesting to folks other than each other); in many places (I see this in spades in Los Angeles, less so in New York), not enough respect for rigor–deeply refining work on levels technical, physical, intellectual, and creative.
March 7th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Interesting points. There are definitely those people who “make it” in dance (more on the choreography side) who aren’t necessarily exceptionally talented in dance; they’re exceptionally talented in organization and promotion and have the self-confidence to head-butt their way through all the barriers. Those are impressive traits, just not always fascinating to watch.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:59 am
thank you, both of you bring up great points.
i think even many dancers with good artistic instincts are left to choose between technique class and…studio time to explore their own movement. Artists in all disciplines need time to let their talent and ideas cook, and that time is really at a premium. I would like to see more of us who have a podium, by virtue of being educators or presenters or writers or ASO administrators, to take more of a leadership role in on the one hand urging other artists to find and take to the time to develop their work properly, and on the other hand making it easier for artists to do this. I’m trying to back this up by creating long-term residencies for the development of new work. Of course I’m not the only one or the first. Not everyone is in a position to do this. But we can all be more willing to give more honest criticism of underdeveloped work and performance skills and more encouragement to these artists to dig deeper, and not tell our friends, oh that was great when it wasn’t. because as we all know only too well, there’s no future in modern dance (as a career as opposed to a hobby) for any but the most realized. Many people taking technique classes don’t have higher aspirations. It’s tough on the instructors I’m sure when amateurs and professional artists must share the same classes (because there are I presume too few professionals to offer professional only classes outside of conservatories). How do you give them both what they need?
It’s a problem everywhere in America right now. Our society places a tremendous premium on the efficient mass production of commodities for mass consumption. It calls for a lowering of consiousness so that more commodities will be more readily accepted. Art on the other hand raises consciousness, which leads people to see more truly and be choose more judiciously. Perhaps, we are coming as a culture to a place where time/labor/money intensive art forms that do not also generate wealth (like for instance tv/film) such as dance are becoming impossible. and yet as a society we are getting older and older and the experience of being in the body is not going away…something has got to give. i would think either our culture is going to really melt down or somehow grow up.
But it’s not only that. I hear a lot more dancers express frustration that they cannot take more technique class than I hear frustration that they cannot work more on their performance skills, artistry, and artistic vision. On the contrary, I think a lot of dancers (myself included at times) may actually be somewhat relieved. Maybe many people are drawn to dance because it is non-verbal, because we can disappear in it (and with the grind that many of us experience in our daily lives, two hours to disappear into bliss seems pretty good). We have to teach ourselves to ask more of ourselves and one another. If we don’t, who will?
March 7th, 2006 at 9:13 pm
What a great tangent for this discussion to have gone off on.
Aimless choreography, I think, is inevitable, in the same way that not every book written nor even published is fully worth its pages, not every meal paid for is high dining. There are lots of folks who found refuge in the science lab who spend their lives doing mediocre science, plenty of so-so accountants, middle managers, hairdressers, news reporters–more regrettable would be those who never left the classroom but can’t teach, those who thought the White House was a cool place but…. Why hold dance to a higher standard? And, if you tried, whose standard? Much as we’d prefer if it were, dance, like other fields, is not a pure meritocracy. Modern dance may well not have existed if Martha Graham hadn’t had family money on which to rely. The funds that do exist to this day are so scanty that the distinction between hobby and profession is economically meaningless. Those professional amateurs who manage to take class are the bread and butter of the professionals who teach them. Bad dance never killed anyone, what’s the harm?
The idea that, if only la creme de la creme of the dance world presented, dance would gain more popular recognition in the world at large is, I believe, false. Those who attend dance concerts are, by and large, other dancers and those who are in some way associated with dancers. Ergo, the more dancers, the more audience. As another discussion on this blog stresses, even “good” dance is an acquired taste, and nondancers are more likely to acquire that based on informed opinions, often from dancers in their circles of acquaintance.
For all this though, yes, there is a harm. A while back I was involved in a writing group (different art, same issue) where I saw works that were not very good greeted with heaps of adulation, to the point where I stopped believing in the feedback I received, and not long after stopped believing in my own work–lost the urge to write. Doubt I’m the only one this has happened to, so we do risk silencing a few by overencouraging the many. I believe there is enough bad choreography in the world, so I choreograph only when it becomes compelling. I accept (more some days than others) that I have more to offer the dance world as a teacher than as a dancer, but I still seek out my therapy fix as a student in class. Those couple hours of bliss must not be discounted.
March 8th, 2006 at 9:06 am
>
So important. I have been so helped by people in these positions. I hope, as well, to grow in the next chapter, into being a creator of a space where other artists can be nurtured (partly for selfish reasons–it helps my artistic juice flow to be around that energy!)
>
Harsh reality, but I tend to agree. The country has been moving in this direction for a few decades, led by big economic and political policy forces. It may not be here to stay, but it’s here to stay for now, perhaps changing slightly here and there, but only by a few degrees. How to deal in the meantime is a (in my life, the) great dilemma. To stick with the rigors of modern dance with full acceptance of what even Merce C. says is the fact that enjoyment of making dance is the Only thing the choice will give you? To somehow parlay the experiences, knowledge, training into a form that is more marketable in today’s society (like Michael Bourne and Garth Fagan and Twyla T. do on Broadway, for example, Baryshnikov does with his acting, celebrity cultivation, and one could argue, new art center, or others, including myself, do in film/video)? To break into and develop new hybrid forms that marry qualities concert dance and the majority’s way of perceiving?
> This and overly harsh criticism–two sides of the same coin that diminishes dance as a cultural currency. Hope you regain the courage to write with the support of wiser guides!
March 8th, 2006 at 9:18 am
Oh dang. I quoted y’all, but then saw that my copy/pastes didn’t show up. First point in response to Christopher’s call to people in positions to do so to support artists’ need for time to create. Second point is to his comment about non-commerce oriented forms becoming impossible in our culture. And third, in reponse to Gail’s comment regarding too much encouragement to the many risks silencing the few. Reminds me of the great Woody Allen quote about LA, where indeed they do “yes” you to death, “you can die of encouragement.”
March 18th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Definately an interesting argument…one that I have grappled with internally since the day I decided not to major in pre law. The desire to dance, to make dance, or to teach dance cannot be studied in a marketing group. The illogic behind choosing to take class or to be a dancer or to be a choreographer is almost mystical. Perhaps I enjoy that mystery about myself…that I simply cannot put into words the complete reasonings behind taking class, and renting space and making some potentially mediocre work without hoping for fame or payment or to even make a fraction of my living. It’s a mystery that I am not sure I want to solve.