co.da’s Cause a Decision

The new crop of co•da dancers this season at Sugar Space are the tightest batch yet. In “Cause a Decision” they seemed determined to show off technical prowess and cohesiveness as a company. They succeed at that and took some notable risks along the way. In particular, they merit applause for making use of that tiny studio in some new ways. (The experience was only slightly marred by allowing a photographer on the frontmost of only four rows to clack away his shutter for the entirety of the show. Sure, Sugar Space needs press photos, but isn’t that what dress rehearsals are for?)

“Hips, Quakes & Stones” was the true company number. It arrives in the program notes with a quote from Courtney Love. “I’m not a woman. I’m a force of nature.” Choreographer Monica Remes should consider conducting workshops for people interested in excavating their psychologic relationship to Joan Jett, Love and Pat Benatar through strutting, air guitar, rocking out and vocalization. The action–– from a series of madcap dashes across the space to the ultimate image of the cast climbing the ballet barre stage right–– leaves the audience unsure if the dancers are crazed fans, fantasies of specific rock personae or eight bodies enthusiastically trading identities in competition for the highest quotient of glam. Remes’ was the best and most courageous use of the space. “Hips” confronted all of Sugar Space’s physical limitations while avoiding the traffic jams that plagued other works.

Fiona Nelson’s “Sum Continuum”, was set to excerpts from David Eagleman’s text “Sum”, which offers a depiction of afterlife with obvious choreographic opportunities. (The dead linger in a great waiting room till the last time they are remembered by the living, at which time they’re “called” to a more final threshold. In the meantime, they also relive their mortal experiences, but reordered so as to stack up mundane tasks into continuous years of sleeping, months of showering etc.) The problem is that the dance too tightly illustrates the text, leaving the audience with little tension, wondering why all these dead people are so young, perky and enthused about their ambiguous new existence. Still, the opening is truly striking. The choreographer sits in the dark, lit by her laptop, informing us of the three ways each of us is consigned to die. She types the list, hesitates, makes a change, and like the one of the Fates, continues.

Joshua Mora’s “Second Rate?” could easily have been the fiercest work in the show had it not been compromised by the weight of it’s score. Particularly in the context of the text heavy work that had preceded it, it suffered from the series of TED talk clichés about a living well that comprised Shane Koyczan’s lyrics. The heart of this work wasn’t to be found in these tired  platitudes, but in the very particular camaraderie of Brooklyn Draper and Monica Remes. The pair draw out of each other a sense of ecstatic play that is absent in the rest of the show (and in much of the dance field in general).

Guest choreographer Eric Handman offered the most surprises, perhaps because his work was framed with the most expectation. “Phantom Limb” bore the marks of so many of his dances. His fascination with the self-estranged human hand has calcified into a morse code of distorted wrists. Periodically, flat, pale paws cut in front of the face and eyes of another dancer, seeming to want nothing, save the clean execution of the gesture itself. Another perennial obsession is partnering. The entanglement of bodies in “Phantom Limb” is lovely, quiet and deft. They might be seven characters from a Harold Pinter play that can’t help but interrupt and offend each other, eventually destroying the coherence of the conversation, but accelerating its crooked centrifuge. Everyone ends up on the floor in an unimaginable pile. Then they get back up, dust themselves off and look around. Jane Jackson is stoic, Brooklyn Draper is almost curious. Soon its back into the fray, there’s nothing else for it. As usual, the void of the stage is metaphor for larger, darker emptinesses.

There’s nothing in terms of steps that hasn’t been glimpsed in Handman’s earlier work. What sets “Phantom Limb” apart, is restraint, in the departments of music, performance and casting. Michael Wall’s score places itself expertly in the background–– unlike many of the film scores Handman has used before–– it doesn’t tell us how to feel about the dancers-as-characters. Instead it folds and directs the experience of time. “Phantom Limb” is a lucid dream, but one spare in signs and symbols. Finally, Handman is working without any men, without any discernable bravado, machismo, balletic maleness or plausible avatar for himself. These tools have their place, but their absence here makes Handman’s detail-obsessed pure-dance voice more legible, though still mysterious, like neon in the dark.

This cold but luminous place is where Handman’s been headed for quite a while, since he started to shed his earlier voice like a snakeskin. Gone is the Eric Handman who made dances on playful, boastful improvisors akin to himself, men like Josh Anderson or women like Jess Humphrey. Five or ten years ago, he almost might have been caught in Mora’s dance, romping with Draper and Remes. One place isn’t better than the other, just different, and it’s nice to see them side by side.

Samuel Hanson contributes regularly to loveDANCEmore and SLUG magazine.

En Route Dance Festival & upcoming

 

 

Below find a review of a dance film festival brought straight to your computer by Sam Hanson. While the nature of an online festival bridges the gap between the Wasatch Front and other dance communities, it’s nice to know the festival carries a lot of connections to artists based in, or recently brought to, Salt Lake City. After checking it out consider looking at what else is up in Utah, including a casting for RDT’s LINK series presentation by Graham Brown and a Movement Forum fundraiser.

Dance’s Made to Order is an online magazine– every month it brings subscribers three new dance films. As a frequent viewer and one-time artist (March 2012 edition!), I can broadly endorse their work. Some of the films are quite good, and it’s a great way to see diverse perspectives in dance from all over the country and beyond.

Immersion in the outside world was precisely what I sought and received in watching their latest effort. Dances Made’s annual En Route Dance Festival, which ended this Sunday, is part of a growing trend in stage choreography and screen dance: temporary online exhibition (another recent example). The only piece I’d seen before was Simon Fildes and Katrina McPherson’s The Time it Takes, an homage to lush, wet Scottish landscape that screened in conjunction with the couples’s’ visit to the University of Utah earlier this year.

I found myself comparing McPherson’s work to Axolotl Collective’s Panspermia, a sci-fi work where “two aliens perpetuate a cosmic lineage”. The locations chosen for Panspermia were likely in the Mexican state of Puebla, where the Collective is based, but wherever they shot reminds me of desert lake beds of my own experience in the Western United States. It feels appropriate that aliens would do business here and that they would look at turns like orphans of the sea and animated plastic refuse. The excellent performances here remind one of the best of Alwin Nikolais’ work, though here the abstraction of the body seems less about erasure and more about the playful questions about ourselves we have always asked through imaginary animals and extraterrestrials.

A much more approachable effort, Turn Around Tango comes from Canada. There’s not much to say save that a tango performed back to back is much more fascinating than it sounds. This filmmaker has all the stylish dance-in-a-void bravado of Edouard Lock, without being so heavy handed. It’s left to Pas, a brief farce on the use of French nomenclature in ballet to further critique the supercilious. Courtney Harris and Charli Brissey make fun of classical dance in a way that only those versed in it could.

The festival also featured some work where the connection to dance was a little more obtuse. British choreographer Siobhan Davies and David Hinton brought All This Can Happen, a structuralist feature which juxtaposed creatively reframed found footage with excerpts from “The Walk”. The text, a novella by Swiss writer Robert Walser, deals with the raptures and horrors of every day life as an artist. It’s great that work like this is being reframed in a dance context, and I hope lots of people see it in this way, which beautifully demonstrates the simple choreography of the cut– the beginning and ending of a movement taken out of context becoming the way we construct the unitary power of “a singular move(ment)”.

Also very strong was Melting Justice, which was described in the program notes as “a film from the Democratic Republic of Congo…a mediation on agency vs. voyeurism that simultaneously captures instances of embodied critique while confronting the viewer with challenging questions about the passive consumption…” Petna Ndaliko Katondolo’s work was nothing like it’s art-speak byline, but his work is worth researching––  here is an artist who uses the conventions of documentary film in the age of the video to make an audience feel physically implicated as we watch (among other things) a man literally dance through oblivious traffic.

Samuel Hanson contributes regularly to loveDANCEmore and SLUG mag

FOUR, a conversation/review

It’s no secret that peer reviewing has been a talking point on the blog. As a sometimes reviewer, other times choreographer Erica has grappled with ways to write about work and read what others say about her own work. As an administrator and choreographer Ashley oversees these tensions on an ongoing basis. So we tried to write this conversationally after watching RW’s season-opener “FOUR” tonight at the Rose. We write with the hope that multiple opinions and a casual approach creates a balanced discussion. (Let us know how we do). Part of the way through writing we realized a conversation format doesn’t allow for standard “descriptions,” so keep in mind this is designed for those who have seen this show, and we definitely  think you should.

AA: The evening featured a huge amount of dancing by the extremely talented six member company and the choreographic variety was immense. All the dances but one featured the full company and I’m really amazed at the end of every RW show that they can physically get through it.

EW: The show order seemed a little complicated but I agree that the dancers were in fine form and there was an array of movement aesthetics that would please eclectic audiences.

AA: I feel like we were both pretty into Charlotte Boye-Christensen’s new duet, “The Finish Line” which was performed by Brad Beakes and Tara McArthur. While it displayed Charlotte’s classic athletic style, it was more distilled than her past work and seemed softer. (When Martha Graham fell in love with Erick Hawkins her arms starting curving, just saying!)

EW: I agree, right out of the gates I felt we were seeing growth from Charlotte as a choreographer. It reminded me of a well-worn relationship where intimacy, playfulness and aggression all reside equally in the physicality and performance. They embody those things, Brad and Tara were really successful. I felt like all the movements were necessary, nothing was arbitrary.

AA: Totally agreed. I found the choreography to be engaging and was so relieved that it was real duet and not a duet for six, but how does this make you feel about her second work on the program, “Turf”, from 2009? For me it really changed my impression.

EW: This was the first time I’d seen “Turf” and I was hopeful in the beginning. I liked the competitiveness of a trio from the men but really the difference between the two works was that in the duet I saw two humans having a real experience on stage and in “Turf” I wasn’t given permission to get to know the dancers in the same way.

AA:  I can see we were both underwhelmed by “Turf” after the success of the duet. It also, honestly, seemed rehearsed less than the other material on the program.

EW: I did find the opening piece “Grid” to be a little bit like “Turf”. There were some nice moments but conceptually and physically things did not settle for me in a conclusive way. The piece takes place in an environment of stage-length, chalk covered, elastic bands and it brought up issues about how our environment affects our decisions. And when those barriers are removed do we make the same decisions out of habit or are we able to make new decisions? As a choreographer I thought that it would be interesting to work with a prop like the that and even take that prop away at the end of the process. What would the dance look like if the “grid” was absent? I wonder if we could still feel it’s presence and think we could, maybe even moreso.

AA: It’s hard because I don’t want to re-choreograph dances from the audience but I had similar concerns about how “Grid” was functioning despite the obviously engaging tactic of the prop. It related to the John Utans piece on the program as well. In that piece the stage was littered with TV’s with rural Utah vacation footage and the beginning and ending moments of movement alongside them peaked my interest but as it went I fell into watching the TV’s exclusively and was in some kind of bad-audience-trance.

EW: Oh that’s funny, I didn’t watch the TV’s at all.

AA: So it’s clear we worked our way through the show with ebbs and flows but I think we both agree that something we had no questions about was Ann Carlson’s re-staged “50 Years”. If Charlotte’s duet was distilled then I don’t even have an adequate description for this work. Every second of the dancer-vocalized-score seemed essential to me and it’s really rare I feel that way about a dance.

EW: Throughout, this piece gave me kinesthetic responses.

AA: What kinds of responses? For me, it was cold chills and constant wonderment at what would be next from the voices and bodies of the dancers.

EW: For me it was during the moments of complete stillness where there was real settling in my skin and bones. It brought me on an organic journey where each section took the time it needed to fully resonate. It inspired me as a choreographer to be more patient and not doubt a seemingly simple idea.  I don’t know how to say this without being cheesy but it was through the simplicity that metaphors were made, and she must have had a real trust in her process and clarity in vision.

AA: It was also highly stylized and designed from the dirty, auburn costuming to the white-fabric floor and sparse light bulbs. Watching a choreographer make such clear choices (in 1996 by the way!) was a beautiful way to end the evening (that was also cheesy).

EW/AA: laughter laughter laughter

Nox Contemporary: Collaboration at its best

With sentiments similar to that of the new film series, Screen Deep, the second Alternative Genres (August 27, 2012) show at Nox Contemporary provided Salt Lake with a chance to experience converging

forms of performance and film.  Upon entering the gallery, I was greeted by parallel rows of laptops screening a variety of video pieces from local artists.  As I put on the headphones to view one of Aniko

Safran’s pieces, I was able to leave the rest of the world of the gallery behind, creating instant intimacy.  In one work,  Safran explores the notion of time and space through the use of a metronome.  As I watched (and heard) the ticking of the metronome in its various settings, everywhere from a nondescript room to flourishing shrubs, I was forced to think and rethink about the way in which one feels and experiences time.  This idea was further exaggerated by my peripheral setting, where everyone else in the gallery existed in a separate time and place from myself.

I was then ushered into a larger, adjacent room, which was entirely bare in order to view the second live performance of the evening (having already missed the first).  As a contemporary piece, Samuel Hanson’s “Duet”, was flawless, which is to say that it was far from being perfect.  Hanson explored the process of creation by choosing two volunteers from the audience to help him construct the piece in

the moment.  Upon blindfolding them, he guided each to a separate corner of the room.  He then instructed them to simultaneously cross half the distance from one to the other, then repeat, and repeat, etc. After many back and forth attempts at this, the two individuals finally met somewhere near the middle.  At this point, Hanson asked them to interact with one another in various, simple ways, until they

were each lying on the ground, one massaging the other’s arm.  We, the rest of the audience, were invited to form a circle around the two of them and were then instructed to slowly back away while keeping in

mind that their figures were only getting further away and not actually shrinking as we would perceive.  Again a test of trial and error, as Hanson asked us to restart this process each time we lost

awareness of the fact that they were not actually getting smaller, all the while, the massage continued.  At the end of the piece, the two volunteers stumbled their way back to their original positions in

opposing corners, back to the beginning, as if nothing had happened yet.  While this piece made me hyper aware of the process rather than product, it left me asking the question: how much should the

performance be the choreographer’s vision and how much should be the artist’s contributions to it, as a consequence of Hanson’s intermittent statements of, “No, I actually want you do it more like

this” when things were not happening as he envisioned them.

Before the next performance began, I was able to view another video piece.  “Trent goes Bowling” by Jan Andrews consisted of a video showing the creation of shards of mirror which were now on display inside of a salmon suitcase.  The video showed the artist (and friends) rolling a brilliant pink bowling ball (also exhibited in the gallery) across the room in order to break various sizes of mirrors.  The lack of headphones coupled with the white noise of the rest of the gallery made it impossible to hear anything in the video except for the crisp shatter of glass.  Along with these, the artist had provided a statement in which she divulges that this piece was originally the preparatory work for another.  That is, she needed the glass shards and came up with a creative way to acquire them and the process ran away with her becoming something else entirely.  At this point, she knew she had created something that she wished to share.

Once again, I entered the bare room, this time equipped with a ballet barre and mirror.  Valerie Atkisson began what appeared to be a warm up routine, which she performed several times over with succinct rhythm.

Her  movements were also clearly in conversation with the music she had chosen, a classical piece.  Her elegant motions and perfect timing evinced this austere notion associated with such modes of music and dance.  At the end of her piece, Valerie removed a large white poster board which had gone unnoticed underneath her feet for the entirety of the performance and held it up to show a second piece which she had now created.  Upon closer inspection of this dance drawing, I was astounded by the beautiful lines she had created, which mimicked the fluidity of her entire piece.

The final performance of the evening was “The Windy Gap” choreographed by Ashley Anderson and performed with Efrén Corado.  Set to a series of slides, Anderson danced the first part of the piece solo, then Corado, and finally the two of them together.  Each time, to the same set of slides, with each individual performing the same routine.  The beauty of the piece came from its unfolding, watching the way each interacted with the photographs in their own way, Anderson incredibly aware of the details in the images behind her, and Corado mimicking formations and shapes in the stills.   In the end, the way in which their seemingly individual pieces came together was seamless, each in communication with different aspects of the photos, each in communication with one another, at one point Efren’s piercing slaps of his own thighs

dictated the movements of Anderson.  I found this performance in particular to be quite fitting for the gallery setting.  I could imagine this unending repetition of routines, much like Valerie’s, to recur again and again alongside others, installations, videos, stills, etc.

Echo Smith studies classics and literature at the University of Utah. She regularly attends dance, theater, and music performances in SLC.

coda’s starter kit at Sugar Space

If you become a member of coda, Sugar Space’s new professional dance company, you’ll find yourself in a situation much like Repertory Dance Theatre is said to have been in its early days. You and your comrades make dances on each other and you pool your knowledge to provide each other classes and choose a guest artist. Every few months, there’s a new audition and the process repeats.

I just came home from watching the first iteration of this cycle. My initial takeaway is that it read like a real ensemble evening. Diverse interests were explored, but it didn’t feel like a grab bag where a half a dozen people had been chosen from a pool of random, opportunity starved dance artists applying by mail. Care had been taken in putting a show together, in a more than idiomatic sense.

Molly Heller’s work, which was split into three, provided a narrative scaffold for the rest of the evening. In these “acts”, placed between other dances, Heller explicated her relationship with husband Brad Heller. Each vignette was also a performance of (and to) Rod Stewart’s monster(ous) hit “Da Ya Think I’m Sexy” [Rod’s spelling, not mine]. In part one, Heller (in golden stretch pants and a flouncy green top) gave her husband (purple tights, peasant ruffles up top) what might have been post modern prelude to a lap dance, while matter-of-factly telling him to periodically adjust the volume. Act II saw Brad and Molly coyly singing the song to each other while Molly slid herself across Brad’s passive form. She crept slowly, giving choice attention to certain curves, arriving in unison next to Brad just in time for the second or third chorus of “If you want my body and you think I’m sexy/ Come on honey tell me so/ If you really need me just reach out and touch me/Come on Molly let me know”. “No. It should be sugar.” Singing this line lying face down next to each other earned a healthy laugh from a crowd that had been gently giggling the whole time. The final number was a giddy romp through the space for Ms. Heller and non-dancer Brad. The song was finally playing at full blast, which was quite satisfying, when all of a sudden the dancing devolved into a slide show of Googled images of Rod himself on the back wall. The piece ended as choreographer, husband and technical director struggled in turns to disactivate of the projector and diminish the specter of Rod.

As light, fun and self-effacingly hip as this all sounds it did leave me with a few lingering questions. How was I supposed to feel about the relationship between “trained” wife and “untrained” husband? Was this just a big joke or is this really “their song” in some serious, if sentimental, way? If I am being invited into an inner joke space of their relationship, why and how? And if not, what was the aim of making it seem so?

Nancy Carter’s Hold me tight if I love you left me with many similar questions about form and content. The work was a modern dance trio, mostly, thought it began with each dancer choosing one audience member with whom to slow dance. They did this a few times at the very beginning, with a tender awkwardness that left me wishing they would make everyone in the audience dance at least once and then that would be that. What ensued instead was an exploration of formal themes such as how a trio  functions, how Shira Fagan could stay in unison with Jane Jackson with Anne Marie Robson Smock attached to her body etc. The varied musics, notably a spoken word piece about hearts “bruising but not breaking” provided an unexpected modicum of contrast.

I am pretty sure that the it in Everything is Nothing Without It was dance itself. Jane Jackson’s ensemble piece was a melange of fast paced dialogue and introspective group dancing. The six women fought over a cupcake (“That’s not really dancer food!”), went to a “showing” within the dance, and argued about the primacy of the left vs. the right brain in dance making. There was some serious unison dancing, and then we returned to the image the dance started with, the heart of the dance really, choreographer Jane Jackson trying to decide how to start dancing. Standing there twitching with indecision, is something everyone who makes dances (and probably everyone else as well) can identify with.

Particularly in Everything is Nothing, but in everything else I’ve discussed as well, I noticed one recurring issue. Though each was an excellent first draft, all of these pieces seemed to be looking for a kind of high drama, something surreal, possibly even operatic. And yet none couldn’t quite get there because they were held back by a commitment to a certain idea of dance-theater “realism”.  There’s nothing “actorly” or “real” about the way most dancers talk and emote on stage- and that’s fine- we’re not actors, at least not in the same sense. What would it look like if we embraced that and became the strange, unique creatures that we are? In doing so maybe we could learn a little bit more about ourselves than the fact that we’re afraid of food and that we don’t know our left from our right.

Guest artist Shannon Mockli demonstrated commitment to a ballsy idea in her solo A Space Between. A slow, contemplative solo, almost too dramatic, happens in front of a video where slipping focus is an obvious metaphor for the areas between states of consciousness, life and death. There’s a recorded text of Mockli discussing an ambiguous experience of “being between” that caused her to reflect on mortality and the life of the body, as it is and as it is imagined. In other hands, it could have been a tragic failure of a piece, yet Mockli is so committed to doing things because she feels them, that we feel them too. She transcends trend and conceit, working in a format that is reminiscent of a great essayist. She lays out several co-existent threads that can only be tied together by holding them inside ourselves all of them at the same time. Her dancing is so strong it can’t be overpowered by other the other media- and that’s rare.

Mockli’s group piece Vital Rein did similar things for each of its performers. Annie Robson Smock in particular danced in a way that I’ve never seen before, her length bridled and released with a sense of timing I didn’t know she was capable of. Mockli and dancers never lost interest in the realness of the task, nor in the responsibility of holding each moment’s metaphoric capacity.

Samuel Hanson writes in this blog often, makes dances, makes coffees and makes videos.