• home
  • upcoming
  • noori screendance festival
    • reviews
    • digest
    • journal
    • info for artists
    • education
    • partners
  • donate
Menu

loveDANCEmore

  • home
  • upcoming
  • noori screendance festival
  • reviews & more
    • reviews
    • digest
    • journal
  • artist support
    • info for artists
  • who we are
    • education
    • partners
  • donate
×

reviews

loveDANCEmore has reviewed performances taking place across northern Utah since 2010.

Contributing writers include local dancers, choreographers, arts administrators, teachers, students, and others. Please send all press releases and inquiries about becoming a contributing writer to the editor, sam@lovedancemore.org.

The opinions expressed on loveDANCEmore do not reflect those of its editors or other affiliates. If you are interested in responding to a review, please feel free to send a letter to the editor.

Bashaun Williams and Megan McCarthy (pictured in rehearsal attire) performing an excerpt of a new commission by Yin Yue for Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Bashaun Williams and Megan McCarthy (pictured in rehearsal attire) performing an excerpt of a new commission by Yin Yue for Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Dance West Fest: Topography

Ashley Anderson July 1, 2019

topography n. the physical or natural features of an object or entity and their structural relationships

The inaugural Dance West Fest combined workshops hosted individually in the past by Repertory Dance Theatre, Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company, and the University of Utah. The newly branded workshop culminated on Thursday night with Topography, an aptly titled program that featured a hybrid of dances in varying stages of completeness. The evening served as a preview, both of the upcoming local dance season as well as of work from outside the state, and provided an instructive side-by-side of pieces that would not share a program otherwise.

With no printed playbill, directors and choreographers personably introduced each dance and cast; the informality was a nice foil to an otherwise surprisingly polished presentation in the Rose Wagner black box, complete with lighting and (light) costumes. 

Doris Humphrey’s 1949 “Invention,” staged by Limón company alum and veteran repetiteur Nina Watt, opened the program with jubilation. RDT will perform this new acquisition in its coming season; here, it was danced with aplomb by seasoned company members Jaclyn Brown, Lauren Curley, and Tyler Orcutt. 

Difficult feats such as a series of tours en l’air, with bow-and-arrow arms, and suspended hinges to the ground appeared effortless, buoyed by the performers’ horizon-focused gaze. As Norman Lloyd’s piano score transitioned from effervescence to effort, so too, and seamlessly, did the relationships between dancers. Though “Invention” clocks in at just eleven well-paced minutes, “through form and music and shape and gesture, [Humphrey] creates a world." 

Lauren Curley and Tyler Orcutt of Repertory Dance Theatre in Doris Humphrey’s “Invention.” Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Lauren Curley and Tyler Orcutt of Repertory Dance Theatre in Doris Humphrey’s “Invention.” Photo by Tori Duhaime.

The fully-mined finality of an archival work was followed by an exploration of something brand new, as Ann Carlson introduced an onstage rehearsal featuring Ririe-Woodbury artistic director Daniel Charon. Carlson explained that, for her, the audience always completes a dance; this is evident in her 2017 work for Ririe-Woodbury, “Elizabeth, the dance,” which the company will re-stage this fall. 

Charon tap-danced to “Moses Supposes” from “Singin’ in the Rain” and Carlson admitted she knows nothing about tap as she mimicked his movements while calling out directions, her hands fluttering behind her like quaking aspen leaves. Her coaching interjections, which functioned both for Charon and for us, made the case that, even here, the audience remained her final ingredient. 


Molly Heller (left) and Arletta Anderson presenting the start of a new collaboration with Katie Faulkner. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Molly Heller (left) and Arletta Anderson presenting the start of a new collaboration with Katie Faulkner. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Bay Area choreographer Katie Faulkner presented a collaboration with Arletta Anderson and local artist Molly Heller. The three women live in different cities, and Faulkner introduced their piece, the beginning of an evening-length one (shown in front of an audience here for the first time), as an experiment in working across distance and time. 

Performed by Heller and Anderson, the duet focused on percussion (audible, prancing pony steps, body slaps, and half-intelligible, breathy muttering) to create an abstracted narrative verging on the humorous. Like a contemporary art rendering of two Stooges, Heller and Anderson’s foibles (literally) pushed off and built upon one another, the two garnering laughs as they raced in circles around the stage, one clearly imagining herself the triumphant winner. 

Rebecca Aneloski (foreground) performing in a piece created by Dante Brown during Dance West Fest. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Rebecca Aneloski (foreground) performing in a piece created by Dante Brown during Dance West Fest. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

New York-based choreographer Dante Brown mined both poetry and personal life in his offering performed by four students of the workshop, which he introduced as a “text to movement experience.” For the most part, any clarity was derived from the poetry read aloud by Brown at the front of the stage. The dancers began by moving in a rather amorphous blob and Brown’s relationship to them, as well as his choice to wear feathered wings, was not abundantly clear, lending the selection the air of a classroom exploration (in fairness, it was created in just several hours over the course of the workshop). But a solo by Rebecca Aneloski colored the space between performers and text beautifully, providing both heft and purpose. 

Yin Yue, also based in New York, presented twice on the program; first, a duet performed with Grace Whitworth, who is rehearsal director for Yue’s YY Dance Company, and then, to close the program, an excerpt of a new commission for Ririe-Woodbury to premiere in April 2020. 

Yin Yue (left) and Grace Whitworth in Yue’s “The Time Followed.” Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Yin Yue (left) and Grace Whitworth in Yue’s “The Time Followed.” Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Lights rose on “The Time Followed” (2019) on what appeared to be one figure - the soon-revealed duo of Yue and Whitworth continued the idea of a singular, eight-limbed body with responsive, intelligent, and close-quartered partnering. Each manipulated the other through challenging weight shares and elegant promenades, both remaining in simultaneous control throughout. The ending image had Yue and Whitworth facing each other, arms outstretched and hands slowly rising while moving closer together, like moths seeking the light.

The program-concluding excerpt of Yue’s Ririe-Woodbury commission gave an enticing glimpse of company newcomers Dominica Greene and Nicholas Jurica. Similarly task-oriented partnering once again emphasized movement itself as concept (if the chosen selection is any indication of the whole). The dancers of Ririe-Woodbury appeared freer to inject daring in their approach to Yue’s choreography, or perhaps their sense of abandon was a product of their bodies’ interpretation of a new language - either way, it was a rewarding expansion upon the previous, more carefully calculated, pas de deux. 

Dominica Greene and Brian Nelson (pictured in rehearsal attire) performing an excerpt of a new commission by Yin Yue for Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Dominica Greene and Brian Nelson (pictured in rehearsal attire) performing an excerpt of a new commission by Yin Yue for Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company. Photo by Tori Duhaime.

Amy Falls manages and edits all reviews found on loveDANCEmore.org. Please send press releases for upcoming shows, and inquiries about writing, to amy@lovedancemore.org.

In Reviews Tags Dance West Fest, Repertory Dance Theatre, Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company, University of Utah, Doris Humphrey, Nina Watt, Jaclyn Brown, Lauren Curley, Tyler Orcutt, Norman Lloyd, Ann Carlson, Daniel Charon, Katie Faulkner, Arletta Anderson, Molly Heller, Dante Brown, Rebecca Aneloski, Yin Yue, Grace Whitworth, Dominica Greene, Nicholas Jurica
Comment
NOW-ID’s Rite of Spring. Photo by David Newkirk.

NOW-ID’s Rite of Spring. Photo by David Newkirk.

NOW-ID: Rite of Spring

Ashley Anderson June 23, 2019

Industry, productivity, labor, ritual, depletion, exhaustion.

These are some of the themes that emerged while watching Now-ID’s Rite of Spring. Even the path to the stage, surrounded by railroad tracks, chain-link fencing, and brick and concrete block buildings, felt like part of the performance.

The raised stage underneath the 600 North on-ramp (498 West 600 North) emerged like a destination in the midst of this industrial setting, an oasis for people curious to see what unfolds when an opera singer, four phenomenal dancers, and Igor Stravinsky’s landmark score come together to create an event. The performance began at 9 p.m. and ended less than an hour later, just as the sky had darkened and night had come.

Now-ID’s Rite was a study in contrasts: between the vibrancy of the dancing and the desolation of the landscape that surrounded it, between the glimpses of mountains and the concrete that surrounded the stage, between the timelessness of the music and the ephemerality of this moment, between the perseverance of the performers, and the ultimate collapse that ended this Rite.

Avoiding an explicit narrative, Rite unfolded as a series of images: beginning with the four dancers seated on stools at the corners of the stage. Evoking boxers waiting on the edges of a ring, they seemed focused and primed. Jo Blake stood, as if to signal the beginning of a ritual, and slowly walked by the other dancers (Sydney Sorenson, Liz Ivkovich, and Tara McArthur) to greet Joshua Lindsay as he stepped onto the stage and began singing. Lindsay’s voice, sonorous and lush, heightened my attunement to sensorial engagement, of letting the sounds, sights, and actions of this event convey meaning.

When Lindsay exited, Stravinsky’s score began, and Blake’s solo presented a transformation: from human to extra-human, with arms that morphed into wings as if he were performing an invocation. He danced like he was propelled by forces, and the clarity and strength of his performance was mesmerizing to watch.

Although the performance was choreographed by Charlotte Boye-Christensen, with Nathan Webster providing the concept, the dancers made their ideas into realities with a performance that was impressive in terms of both stamina and precision. Each dancer presented distinct qualities, while also maintaining a sense of coherence. Sorenson danced with a rare combination of power and extension. Ivkovich had a compelling expansion to her movement, limbs stretching away from her center of gravity in ways that seemed to resist gravity. McArthur presented a flickering, quicksilver quality, with movement that was so fast it seemed superhuman.

In unison sections the women generated a sense of solidarity, bounding across the stage with a loping gait that seemed to gain momentum as they moved. At other times, the four performers divided into pairs that suggested rival tribes: Ivkovich and McArthur wore red-ish pants that contrasted with Blake’s and Sorenson’s attire. In partnering sections, they seemed to engage in combat, like wrestlers grappling.

Tara McArthur and Jo Blake in NOW-ID’s Rite of Spring, in costumes by Mallory Prucha. Photo by Jeffrey Juip.

Tara McArthur and Jo Blake in NOW-ID’s Rite of Spring, in costumes by Mallory Prucha. Photo by Jeffrey Juip.

The costumes, by Mallory Prucha, added to the rough and exposed environment: pants were made of heavy cotton (“monk’s cloth”) but shredded at the hems and stained with dark streaks. Make-up and hair by Stephanie Ericson, Rikki-Lee Thomas, Brittany Botarri, Kevin Truong, and Vanessa Alfaro enhanced the sense of severity with body paint and spiky hairstyles. As the performance continued, the body paint disintegrated, leaving traces of colors just as the surroundings presented traces of former industries and communities.

It’s hard to decipher the connections between this landscape and this Rite: in some ways the choreography presented a familiar tale of a woman’s sacrifice for the betterment of a community. In other ways, the dancers seemed to be exposing the exhaustion and depletion of cultures and sectors that are no longer sustainable or viable, perhaps suggesting that we become more judicious in where we invest our energies and resources. No matter the interpretation, the dancers’ commitment to the choreography was impressive, and their ability to execute the phrases while maintaining a sense of understated calm was riveting. Each one is a compelling artist, and the lighting design by Cole Adams made it appear, at times, as if their bodies were glowing. A gorgeous and appropriate effect.

NOW-ID’s Rite of Spring, with lighting by Cole Adams. Photo by David Newkirk.

NOW-ID’s Rite of Spring, with lighting by Cole Adams. Photo by David Newkirk.

Kate Mattingly is an assistant professor of dance at the University of Utah. She has a doctoral degree in performance studies from UC Berkeley, and has had writing published in The New York Times, The Village Voice, Dance Research Journal, Dance magazine, and Pointe magazine, among others.

In Reviews Tags NOW-ID, Jo Blake, Sydney Sorenson, Liz Ivkovich, Tara McArthur, Joshua Lindsay, Charlotte Boye-Christensen, Nathan Webster, Mallory Prucha, Stephanie Ericson, Rikki-Lee Thomas, Brittany Botarri, Kevin Truong, Vanessa Alfaro, Cole Adams
Comment
nathan shaw in sb dance sleeping beauty.jpg annie kent and nathan shaw in sb dance sleeping beauty.jpg juan carlos claudio and annie kent in sb dance sleeping beauty .jpg

SB Dance: Sleeping Beauty

Ashley Anderson June 16, 2019

In addition to re-imaginings of company repertoire as well as happenings and installations throughout the year, SB Dance produces an original new work each June. Their latest, a two-night run of Sleeping Beauty at the Rose Wagner, contained many of the unique hallmarks that have developed with the company over its 20-year span. These hallmarks include intricate and energetic movement that retains the vitality of just the right amount of creation and rehearsal time, consistently deft prop and set piece incorporation and manipulation, interdisciplinary collaborations, thoughtful production choices, and representations of elements of queer identity. Also included is frequent reference to S&M, bondage, and sexual power dynamics. This could easily play out as a short-cut to dynamic tension, but it instead emphasizes charged human connection in the well-practiced and integral role it plays in SB works. Themes of consent as well as physical and psychological dominance and submission are modally fitting for movement-based theater. These very themes are subtextually quite present in existing classical interpretations of The Sleeping Beauty, and explicitly take center stage in SB’s retelling.

In the program notes, director Stephen Brown cites two books that re-engaged his interest in the “typically misogynistic classic.” One is Robert Coover’s metanarrative novel, from which Brown borrows the multiple-perspective approach of the different fairytale archetypes to frame the show. But the show is critically divergent in this way: Where the novel is postmodern in structural form, SB’s reverts to the classic storytelling device of explicit narration. This is an apt choice for the more abstracted media of interdisciplinary live dance theater. The narration is carried out with stagey charm by vocalist/actor Ischa Bea and string accompanist Raffi Shahanian, jointly billed as MiNX. These two serenade us in song and introduce the primary characters and their conflict: Annie Kent as Aurora and Nathan Shaw as Maleficent, in a dramatic first romantic encounter.

The introduction is an intense duet. Both characters wield a carving knife in each hand. The flourishing knives never supercede their interplay; they serve as an extension of the sharp, symmetrical movement quality. Annie Kent is instantly a compelling performer in the titular role whose presence reads well in the intimate black box theater, a space with effective technical production and unobstructed sightlines from the stadium-style seating. The audience gazes down on this private moment of consensual, equal powerplay; it is the show’s last. Maleficent alludes to the classic cursing pin-prick with a knife cut along Aurora’s skin, thus felling her. Aurora is put in her figurative box as an inert object of desire - by being stuffed quite literally into a cardboard box and loaded onto a dolly, which Shaw step-ball-changes, impressively lightly yet ominously, into the wings.

The next scene features four boxes, each containing a languid, sleeping someone in navy gender-neutral jammies - Aurora and the three Beauties, performed by Christine Hasegawa, John Allen, and Ari Hassett. Arms flop and butts lift from within as harpsichord strains evoke the Baroque, to great effect. These sleeping cuties re-emerge and re-enter their packages and sprawl onto their pillows in a very realized dreamstate, and momentarily make us wonder just what they’re up to in there. They begin to interact, and execute a catching and falling sequence into the pillows. Shaw then reappears to partner the dreamers. SB newcomer Ari Hassett sought her withheld pillow by avidly scrambling up Shaw into a high-flying press lift, to general gasps. She consistently displayed the great strength and agility of someone you suspect may be more comfortable inverted than not. Shaw packs them and stacks them, continuing the deft utilization of props with a believable slapstick drop of the topmost box before exiting to leave the lone packaged princess center stage.

The narrator next introduces and campily sexualizes Prince Phillip, played with hyperbolic virility and suavity by Juan Carlos Claudio. He distributes flowers amongst the audience in the single house-lights-up nod to immersive audience interaction. Then begins the beautiful and effective and creepy duet with a half-lucid, half-conscious Kent. I have been recently discussing the classical dance trope of the partnering of an exhausted/poisoned/dying woman a la Swan Lake, La Sylphide, etc., and was gratified to see it so explicitly treated here. The narrator jumps the gun with a “happily ever after”: As Aurora awakens to the Prince’s (steamy) nonconsensual attentions, she slaps him and heads out. Here the “reworking of a classic fairytale” metanarrative becomes central. The narrator frantically rewrites the story (adorably, with a feathered quill in a very contemporary libretto binder). Her accompanist, enjoined to “play something!,” delivers a cringily deadpan rendition of Sublime’s “Date Rape.” Directed to play anything else, he moves along to Eurythmics’ hit “Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This).” Tellingly, this is a shift from a direct naming of the violation of body autonomy to fantasies of dominance and submission. There is herein some precedent for the show’s glancing identification of abuse pivoting to the focal artistic treatment of desire and sexuality.

We next see Aurora striking out for L.A., a classic naive waif with tattered nighty, shawl, and old suitcase in tow. The former cohort of Beauties in forced slumber now become minions of their malevolent captor. They are intriguingly costumed in black, their bad-guy hats still sporting tags, Hassett in full mustachioed Groucho mask, all sporting bedroom slippers. This last addition made all the following choreography exceptionally interesting and beautiful - lots of fluid petite allegro and gliding undercurves. The three Beauties establish themselves as a compelling ensemble, whose different movement qualities mesh together in a cohesive whole.

This cohesion holds well throughout the knife-wielding dance led by Shaw in what seems to be a warehouse of the boxed. Shaw’s Maleficent grinds on the cardboard containing the Princess, gaining pleasure from his control. The Prince obsesses over the same object from behind a stack. The two begin a voyeuristic game of withholding and expressing proprietary power over the box, deepening their characterizations and dynamic tension. The captured and bound Prince must watch the sadistic stabbing of his object of (unilateral) desire as the box is repeatedly punctured by Maleficent and company. Thus follows another hard reset of the story as the Prince charms his way into a telling of his version of the fantasy. It is narrated as “an Aurora who wants saving,” and is presented as the male fantasy contradiction of an experienced, sexually mature woman who is also lacking power (while literally bound at the wrists) and who requires childlike protection. This Aurora duets with each Beauty in turn before being carried off by the Prince. Kent’s duet with John Allen begins in struggle but features moments of lilting beauty, especially encapsulated by a swinging turn where her feet skim and glance off the ground in a dreamlike slow skip. Christine Hasegawa expertly twines with and directs Kent in a more dominant mode, and Ari Hasset brings a forceful tenderness to their duet. Aurora’s long velvety cuffs are then positioned over her eyes as a blindfold, with her elbows pointed upwards. This makes for a very interesting posture in her dancing with Nathan Shaw and Juan Carlos Claudio as well as underscoring her lack of free and informed choice.

After Princess Aurora is swept away, another abortive “happily ever after” is cut off by The Beauties, now clad in frilly frocks and silly tutus, skittering about and demanding their turn in the telling. By slumping against and running into the many cardboard boxes in a believably haphazard stupor, they in fact artfully rearrange the set pieces into a central cluster upstage. The Prince arrives to kiss them awake, with comically loud smacks, only for them to be repeatedly cursed by Maleficent, as heralded by the loud “snick” of the knife. It is a light treatment of the dark theme of the willing recidivism in The Beauties’ victim/perpetrator role. This cycle of drugging and waking escalates and intensifies until it comes to a head. The bodily manipulated John Allen and his repeated falls to the pillowed floor become untenably frantic, like something between Pina Bausch’s Café Müller and The Three Stooges. This built tension is capitalized on as the Prince and Maleficent forge a felt erotic bond in a charged look over the inert bodies they control. The two pair up and the narrator resignedly sighs something to the effect of “you two, of course, no, that makes perfect sense.” And moreso than any other moment, this one has been prefigured and developed; it perfectly does make sense.

Thereafter, as the audience can only have been eagerly anticipating throughout, Aurora takes her turn at directing the narrative centered on her experience. She voices and then enacts her own fantasy, bringing the show to its abrupt, violent conclusion.

The other book Brown cites as inspiration is Joan Gould’s Spinning Straw into Gold: What Fairy Tales Reveal About the Transformations in a Woman’s Life. It is a nonfiction exploration of fairytale as allegory for the breadth of the changing, lifelong experiences of womanhood. And though SB Dance presents strong and vital personalities across the gender spectrum, the central character of Aurora was not terribly developed. Rather, the multiple-narrative perspectives sacrificed her singular ontological continuity to the presentation of an object through multiple lenses. Annie Kent embodies Aurora completely and performs the role stunningly, but the role is object and naif. When she finally wrests back her agency (through engagement with the super-structural narrator, not her abusers), she enacts a brief and frenetic revenge fantasy à la Quentin Tarantino. Revenge fantasies make us feel the reward of redressing grievance, but don’t do the rhetorical work of conclusively addressing expository complexity. Sleeping Beauty features Kent as a performer but doesn’t center Aurora’s experience as a character.

I grant that the processing of trauma, confrontation and accountability of (living) abusers, complexity of emotional attachment, and complicities would make for a very different ending - one that is less of a campy-dark combo, more truly dark. And I’m not advocating for that alternative, necessarily. However, the presentational scaffolding of program notes, press releases, and interviews invite this expectation. A City Weekly profile indicates that Aurora’s character will be especially rich, and the ticketing blurb asserts a “#MeToo warp” to the classic tale. Organizations like Whistle While You Work (@whistle_whileyouwork) facilitate a platform for whistleblowing and providing resources for the dance and performing arts community to actively benefit from engagement with the #MeToo movement. While metacommentary doesn’t easily make a work artistically stronger or more enjoyable, when artists choose to reference social and political movements there is then a greater onus to address them responsibly and more fully. Not to do so then borders on appropriative. Sleeping Beauty beautifully and inventively updates a classic fairytale and peoples it with darkly compelling archetypes. But I did wonder if it intended to address or redress the entrenched misogyny that it identifies in the original.

In his program notes, Stephen Brown expresses gratitude to his truly fantastic group of co-creators with the witty neologism “WTF-people”, as in “WTF are you doing in Utah?”  This is an example of the counter-cultural positioning that, as a non-native, I find intriguingly endemic to Salt Lakers. It implies both separation from Utah’s political and social establishment and affiliative solidarity with the subversive underground. But actually, and hopefully not to their chagrin, SB Dance is a pillar of the local arts community. Besides being a long-running successful company with lasting internal relationships and frequent new fruitful collaborations, they are teachers and college/university faculty, alumni of other longstanding dance institutions like Repertory Dance Theatre and Ririe-Woodbury Dance Company, and entrepreneurial arts therapists. Not least is artistic/executive director Stephen Brown, who creates programming connecting arts organizations, businesses, and local non-profits, such as Eat Drink SLC, and serves as president of the Performing Arts Coalition, which addresses arts and culture policy making, was instrumental in the needs assessment and creation of the Rose Wagner Performing Arts Center, and represents the Rose Wagner’s many performing companies in residence. In fact, less so than anarchic countercultural arts rebels (of which Salt Lake is certainly possessed of a few, like personal favorite Forbidden Fruits [@slcfruits]), SB Dance is very much a part of the fabric of the Salt Lake arts establishment. And as an innovative, sex-positive, broadly collaborative company, that is to the establishment’s benefit. Perhaps this bit of podunk posturing is an ironic understatement by an artist, producer, and organizer who in fact takes immense pride in the standing legacy and ever-growing stature of the Utah arts scene.

Photos at top: (left to right) of Nathan Shaw, Annie Kent, and Juan Carlos Claudio in SB Dance’s Sleeping Beauty, courtesy of SB Dance.

Nora Price is a Milwaukee native living and working in Salt Lake City. She can be seen performing with Durian Durian, an art band that combines post-punk music and contemporary dance.

In Reviews Tags SB Dance, Stephen Brown, Ischa Bea, Raffi Shahanian, MiNX, Annie Kent, Nathan Shaw, Christine Hasegawa, John Allen, Ari Hassett, Juan Carlos Claudio
1 Comment
Some of the artists and performers of Junction Dance Co’s Zero Flux. Photo courtesy of Junction Dance Co.

Some of the artists and performers of Junction Dance Co’s Zero Flux. Photo courtesy of Junction Dance Co.

Junction Dance Co: Zero Flux

Ashley Anderson June 16, 2019

The curtain opened on the first evening of Junction Dance Co’s Zero Flux to an empty, yet brightly lit, stage. The audience clapped in anticipation, their excitement palpable. I could tell right off the bat that Junction Dance Co. possesses a loyal fan base, based on the number of catcalls. The music then cut through my thoughts, pulsing. The cyclorama sparked to life, displaying a projection of outer space. Before that image had settled in my mind, the dancers streamed on stage from the wings for the first piece, “New Americana.”

I first noticed the dancers’ tennis shoes. I made a mental note that things to come would require more grip than a bare foot could offer. The music was electric, heightening the effect of the fast and precise dancing. I was impressed by the musicality of the choreography, clearly crafted in tandem with the flux of the music; no note went unaccompanied. The dancers were committed and full of energy, their smiles infectious and genuine even from eight rows back. And I was not disappointed in my assessment of their shoes: I saw lots of tumbling tricks sprinkled with b-boy steaz.

The second piece, “Freedom,” opened with fireworks, both those projected on the cyc and those coming from the five men crushing it with their footwork. I was impressed with their ability to stay in unison even at faster speeds. Women made their way on stage, joining the men in duets. Although each duet used the same phrase, I appreciated that each pair seemed to make the connections on their own.

My favorite moment happened quite drastically: The music changed simultaneously with the cyc. Everything blurred and was pushed suddenly into a new image, that of a city scene. New dancers cascaded into the group, which had now transformed into a street party. Dancers of all ages formed a half moon. Those who stepped into the middle of the semi-circle owned it, grasping their moments in the center. During this cypher session, I took a scan of the audience; I could see some heads bobbing in time to the music. I was glad to see how this piece pulled in the audience, movement now rippling throughout it. “Freedom” exuded a sense of community that truly included everyone.

“Collard Greens” brought out rows of dancers, clad in green, keeping the beat of the music in their feet on a stage also awash with green. The piece was a tap dance, and one of my favorites of the evening in terms of pure enjoyment. Schoolboy Q blared through the speakers (“Oh [oh] luxury / Chidi-ching-ching could buy anything, cop that / Oh [oh] collard greens”) as the dancers mimed money in their hands. Their feet chugged forward, the taps accentuating each beat. The audience went a little wild, whooping with appreciation. I only wished that the music was a little quieter so that I could have heard all of the taps.

In “Peggy Lee,” the dancers sported leotards, tights, and heels. I couldn’t help but think of cabaret clubs, as the movement was sexy and punchy. The playful piece, set to a fresh remix of “Fever,” offered the women a chance to showcase their technique and extensions. I especially enjoyed that the choreography was reminiscent of old jazz rather than sticking to a more contemporary style.

During “Reading Rainbow,” I was transported to a fond memory and delighted by the piece’s lightness. A vibrant rainbow was splashed on the cyc, the backdrop for a single dancer wearing what were possibly the most 80’s-print pants I’ve ever seen. The score was none other than the theme from the TV show “Reading Rainbow.” The soloist perfectly captured a balance between cheesy nostalgia and quirkiness, to a song that defined and nurtured a generation.

“Atomic Breath” felt fully developed. There was a story, guided along by a narration of movie clips; the words lent a framework that shaped the audience’s experience. Different sections that were all tied together took me on a personal journey through a story I created for myself about the birth of the universe and the dawn of time. This dance had many sections of intense movement, the all-male cast fierce in their physicality. “Atomic Breath” was one of the more temporally dynamic works on the program.

“Still,” a solo performed by a dancer sheathed in a powder blue costume, was set to a song conveying failure and heartbreak. The dancer did a great job of holding her own and of letting the lyrics inform her emotional performance, and the piece’s angular, staccato movement suited her. Energetically, though, the piece felt ill-placed on the program. It may have been a better fit next to “Love Journals” in the second half.

“Pursuit of Happiness,” another large group number, featured a lot of unison and relied heavily on formations to fit everyone on the stage. The choreography took on many of the same characteristics as the other dances, and only one moment really stood out to me. All the dancers were on their backs on the floor, and did a ripple in three groups in which they contracted, clawed their fingers, and splayed their legs at weird angles. The lyrics mentioned night terrors and this canon provided a vivid visual.

“Dreamers,” featuring another all-male cast, opened with an image of a hallway, maybe a school, projected on the cyc. A lone dancer in a red jumpsuit entered, sweeping. As he started dancing, other “janitors”  wearing the same jumpsuit but carrying different cleaning tools soon joined him onstage. The piece reminded me of all of the times I put on music and jam out, dancing while I’m supposed to be cleaning my house. The piece successfully kept all the dancers onstage doing different tasks while not distracting from the rotating soloists. The music, from the original “Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory” with Gene Wilder, created a whimsical setting. The quirkiest solo was by a dancer with a red feather boa who danced to a child’s voice talking. At the end, everyone came together to gather all the feathers that had fallen off the boa, as though they were gathering up their wishes because they now had to go back to work.

“The Quest” was funky and fast. I got lost in the movements and felt like I was at a club or a  bumping house party. The songs kept switching and building in intensity. I spotted more canon in the choreography, which was a motif throughout the show. I liked the piece’s abrupt finish, and thought it was a great way stick the ending of the first half.

The second half opened with “Love Journals.” Four women were featured in downpools, frozen as the light shone off of their rose hued, crushed velvet dresses, and moved on musical cues one by one. It was predictable, yet satisfying to watch. The dancers had a lovely sense of timing, each of them aware of the others, and I saw extensions for days that spiraled into attitude jumps. The choreographer here made different choices with timing: They didn’t jam pack movements to accompany every single beat of music. I was actually able to process the movements as the dancers lingered intentionally through their phrases. I appreciated the power of stillness and the purpose of slower movement. I also saw the first bare feet of the evening, which worked well with the concept by allowing the piece to feel more vulnerable.

After the women left the stage, a solo male dancer made his way on. I had seen him performing house tricks and fancy footwork in the other pieces on the program, but in this one he came alive through the contemporary movement, extending and leaping through the air. It was stunning. He was soon joined by another man, the two then performing the same movement but with different facings and spacing. This added a layer of depth, as most other pieces had utilized only front-facing unison. Both also emoted with their faces, making their duet more tender.

“Can you dance to my beat?” featured upbeat music, pops of color on the cyc, and constant motion for the dancers. At times, my focus was pulled to different places as I watched the dancers weave in and out. About halfway through, a drummer entered and began playing in time with the music. I wanted there to be a microphone by his drums, though, so I could hear them better over the loud music. My favorite moment came at the end when a female dancer approached the drummer and the two began creating together as the recorded track came to an end. She was saucy and playful, and he sped up his pace to match her frantic movements. They were very much in it together.

“Positive Vibrations” was performed by the junior Junction Dance Co. group. They were apt performers, showing their growing knowledge of muscular isolation and control. It was easy to see where the name of the work came from as, at different times that matched the music, the women would vibrate their whole bodies. There were also some nice breakout moments from the group, and it was fun to watch an individual dancing versus the group. I was impressed by their ability to lift and partner one another at such a young age.

The standout work was “What Do You Desire?” To begin, a man talked into a microphone, acting out his monologue for two dancers like a teacher lecturing to his students (the dancers were obviously the students as wore costumes resembling school uniforms). There was no music, making it a nice counterpoint to the other pieces. The dancers then performed a duet that visually interpreted the monologue/lecture. The monologue itself highlighted what can be a constant struggle for an artist: Do I make art, or do I eat and pay bills?  The dancers made great, and funny, choices - I laughed several times as their movements matched words perfectly. Altogether, the piece was witty and entertaining, and also made me think about what I value.

The dancers in the fun and lively “Slippy Socks” wore gray shirts and shorts with colorful socks. A live violinist provided the score. She felt included in the work as she moved about the stage, smiling and making eye contact with the dancers as she played vigorously. The piece had several duet vignettes in which each dancer matched their partner’s styles and energy well. This piece had a more “modern dance” feel to it, as the choreography blended together big, sweeping circles and dives to the floor and felt gooey rather than sharp or accented.

“How Come?” also featured live music, this time a guitarist who sang and played a sad love ballad that asked why someone wasn’t interested in him. The dancers had perfect timing throughout and looked well-rehearsed.

“Etude No. 2,” a duet between a male dancer and a female pianist, was my favorite of the pieces to live music. The pianist began playing as the dancer held his position on the floor in a meditative position, his eyes closed. The anticipation built until he suddenly began dancing. Each phrase was convoluted and twisting. He tied himself in knots and untangled them, and was up and down, giving a visually dynamic performance. The pianist had her back to the audience, so I could see her fingers flying across the keys (she didn’t look at his dancing). Throughout the piece, he moved closer and closer to the pianist, as if he was being pulled to her inevitably by an unseen force. He ended the same way he began, on the ground with a straight back, knees folded, and eyes closed. As the pianist finished, both turned to look at each other. The lights stayed up to emphasize this powerful moment, and I was struck by the simplicity of their final acknowledgement of the other.

The closing piece, “Earthquake,” was fast and furious like I would expect an earthquake to be. Set to a driving beat that continually sped up, the dance featured the show’s entire cast of performers and packed a punch to conclude the program on a high note.

Overall, I was highly entertained by the evening. Each piece had me tapping my feet because I couldn't help being swayed by the music and movement. The first half felt more planned, with transitions accounted for and dances moving from one piece to the next with no pauses. It also felt more cohesive in content - I could see and make connections between most of the works.

The second half was more random. None of the pieces connected energetically or conceptually. This didn’t necessarily detract, but the sheer number of pieces in the show (nineteen in total) was overwhelming. I found myself wishing that Junction Dance Co. had spent more time developing some pieces, maybe exploring their depth versus just their short aesthetic value. I was, however, impressed with each performer in the show. They were all stunning in their authenticity and performance quality. Not only were they expert performers, but they were (dance) multilingual, performing a variety of styles.

I was reminded that the dance world is constantly evolving. Dancers who can tumble and do tricks are in high demand; they must have the technique, but then also be able to throw it all away. More and more, I see a fusion of styles, with this show being a prime example - a crockpot filled with many ingredients. To extrapolate, I find this evolution within dance to be an apt representation of the fusing of cultures happening all around us.

Ashley Creek is co-director of Brine and can be seen performing with Myriad Dance Company and The Penguin Lady. She also works for Ballet West, teaching Academy students, schoolchildren, and female inmates at the Utah State Prison.

In Reviews Tags Junction Dance Co, Junction II
Comment
Press image for Manubhuti - Being Human, presented by ChitraKaavya Dance.

Press image for Manubhuti - Being Human, presented by ChitraKaavya Dance.

Chitrakaavya Dance: Manubhuti - Being Human

Ashley Anderson June 3, 2019

On Sunday afternoon, ChitraKaavya Dance presented Manubhuti – Being Human at the Jeanne Wagner Theater. The program’s five offerings brought together a multigenerational cast of performers steeped in classical Indian dance forms. It struck me how elucidating it can be to see young dancers and older dancers together on stage. Even if you’re not deeply familiar with the traditions being presented - I know next to nothing about the history of Indian classical dance - you begin to see how dance traditions exist across the span of many interrelated, individual lives. The evening also featured contributions by modern dance artists Erica Womack and Katie Davis.

Womack’s “Ages” and ChitraKaavya director Srilatha Singh’s “Hyphen-ated” exist as a part of a longer conversation between these two artists about how to collaborate across their distinct choreographic heritages. I spoke a little bit with Womack after the show and she shared stories about moments when Singh and her company members challenged her instincts, ultimately leading her to make a riskier choice. The highlight of “Ages” was Srilatha Singh dancing in silks to Cesaria Evoria’s famed rendition of “Besame Mucho,” as Womack held a large fan, dead-pan. I was reminded of Kazuo Ohno’s Admiring La Argentina, except it was a little more lighthearted and a little less self-serious.

One of the most exciting elements of Sunday’s performance was an excellent live band: Suchinth Murty singing, Tarun Gudipati on the tablas, Abhishek Mukherjee on sitar, Sriram Krishnamoorthy on violin, and Shreyas Hoskere on keyboards and flute. Their presence raised the bar, particularly in “Hyphen-ated,” which began with an intense exercise in mirroring between Srilatha Singh and Malavika Singh, whose opening number at the top of the show was the evening’s namesake. (I don’t know if the two are related.) As they peered at each other through the empty wooden frame, I was drawn to their different strengths as performers. In Srilatha’s dancing, I watch her hands, and how quickly she can shift my focus without my expecting it - in short, the mastery of someone who’s been at it a while. In Malavika’s dancing, it’s her expansiveness, the ability to fill the empty stage, and her proclivity for off-balance rests and unexpected pauses - a hip tucked at an obscure angle, a lunge that seems too deep to sustain and then crumbles silently. I’m eager to see more of these conversations in the future.

Samuel Hanson is the editor and executive director of loveDANCEmore. 

In Reviews Tags Chitrakaavya Dance, ChitraKaavya Dance, Erica Womack, Katie Davis, Srilatha Singh, Suchinth Murty, Tarun Gudipati, Abhishek Mukherjee, Sriram Krishnamoorthy, Shreyas Hoskere, Malavika Singh
Comment
← NewerOlder →