Monday, September 13, 2010
Fragmented Acro-dance Deconstructionism
What does that mean?
Fragmented acro-dance deconstructionism is a term I made up a few years ago to describe the current trend of popular choreography, in the ballet genre. What it is, is movement that is very physical, disjointed, on-the-edge, fast-paced, over-extended, creatively inventive with body-moves and basically disconnected from any core. This type of movement is easier to do, because it does not require the same kind of technique required for classical ballet. It is fun to watch but after about 5 minutes the repetitiveness of intent out-weights the ability to hold you attention, because there is no reason behind the doing except for the sheer pleasure of distortion.
A lover of dance actor friend of mine described such a piece of choreography they saw, as having great body-movement, but that it wasn't dance. What? They are moving but no one is relating to each other, the audience, the music or to any clear artistic intention, a reason to be doing. Nothing has been said, no message communicated. The duet for example, seems romantic but there is no inter-connection between the two dancers, and is not going anywhere.
Ah! You meant choreography - Choreo which means "steps" and Ography "the relationship of steps to space". So, you are saying that because there is no movement in space, and no connection to each other or to the music, and that there is no story or higher-minded poetic message trying to be communicated - that what we are watching is not dance? Yes, she said.
Fragmented acro-dance deconstructionism is a term I made up a few years ago to describe the current trend of popular choreography, in the ballet genre. What it is, is movement that is very physical, disjointed, on-the-edge, fast-paced, over-extended, creatively inventive with body-moves and basically disconnected from any core. This type of movement is easier to do, because it does not require the same kind of technique required for classical ballet. It is fun to watch but after about 5 minutes the repetitiveness of intent out-weights the ability to hold you attention, because there is no reason behind the doing except for the sheer pleasure of distortion.
A lover of dance actor friend of mine described such a piece of choreography they saw, as having great body-movement, but that it wasn't dance. What? They are moving but no one is relating to each other, the audience, the music or to any clear artistic intention, a reason to be doing. Nothing has been said, no message communicated. The duet for example, seems romantic but there is no inter-connection between the two dancers, and is not going anywhere.
Ah! You meant choreography - Choreo which means "steps" and Ography "the relationship of steps to space". So, you are saying that because there is no movement in space, and no connection to each other or to the music, and that there is no story or higher-minded poetic message trying to be communicated - that what we are watching is not dance? Yes, she said.
# posted by DEANGELO DANCE : 4:30 AM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]