Walking into the theatre, I had no idea what to expect. Sitting so close to the stage, I was able to see 10 chairs arranged in a neat semi-circle with an untouched bottle of water next to each. I had read nothing about this piece prior to coming to the theater because I was very excited about the performance and was excited to see the product of the collaboration between Jerome Bell and Theater Hora. The first thing I distinctly remember was the calm, neutral tone of the translator and sound manager, Simone Truong. After hearing her speak, I assumed the performance would be a somber one, but I was pleasantly surprised. Disabled Theater was short enough to keep the audience riveted to the stage, but long enough to paint a picture about the situations of the actors and for the audience to see a piece of the actors as people.

The first thing the actors did was come out on stage one by one and stand still for one minute. The actors put themselves in a spotlight, allowing the audience to every one of their idiosyncrasies, from their gait to their expression to their clothes. Living in a society where it is impolite, even politically incorrect to stare at the disabled for too long. People tend to simply ignore them, acting as if they are not there. By asking the actors to stand in front of the audience and forcing us to stare at them, Bell tries to show us that it is in fact okay to look. Disabled people are humans as well; there is no need to treat them as caged animals and walk on eggshells around them because all they want is to be treated the same – they do not want our pity. After each of the actors stood onstage, they came on one-by-one again and stated their name, age and profession. The actors all ranged in age from late 20’s to early 40s, even though many of them did not look their age. Looking at all of them finally sitting in their seats, I was overcome with the sense of how little direction Bell had given the actors. Even if all their movements were choreographed, it all looked so nature. Some sat, feet jiggling on the floor. Others fidgeted, and others mumbled to themselves. The actors were not restraining their own character when they were on stage; in fact it seemed even stronger, and more intense.

The main part of the performance was the solo dance pieces by the actors. Bell originally chooses 7 of the pieces, but we later see that all of them are performed. This simple decision itself was possibly a statement on the idea of exclusion and how disabled people should not be separated from others. The solo dance pieces were all unique and separate from one another. While I thoroughly enjoyed all of them, my favorite ones were the dances set to the Michael Jackson song and the Gummy Bear song. All of them, however, clearly showed the actors personalities and character. We were able to understand things about them that would not have come up in conversation. The fact that their dances helped the actors open up to the audience really shocked me, and made me look at the dance piece’s we’re doing in class in a whole different light. We are showcasing a part of ourselves to others that cannot be done through any other medium; dance is something that comes from the soul and should be taken to the heart.

My favorite part of the performance, which was also the most touching, was when the actors discussed their own feelings on the piece. Many of them gave single word answers, but one of the actors talked about how his family didn’t like it, and how his sister cried when going home because it was like looking at “freaks at a circus”. I understand they must be feeling angry and confused, hoping everything Jerome Bell did was not simply for the sake of the performance. I feel that Bell did well in tackling such an important yet rarely discussed issue. He was able to show us that people treat the disabled differently because of fear of the unknown – they simply do not know how to treat them. However, this entire performance showed us that there is no wrong in treating them as our equals; in fact, it is what should be done. All of the performers talked about how they enjoyed being in the piece, and for that I am glad. While I do not believe that Jerome Bell has any personal responsibility to the actors in Theater Hora, I assume that he will continue to voice his own opinions on the treatment of the disabled through other performances and mediums. The only way this piece would be seen as an exploitation of the actors is if the piece was made for the sake of being performed. If the audience and Bell was at all changed by his work and looks at the situation in a different light, then I feel as if it has done some good to the world.

Malavika (B)

With the lights turned off, a cold darkness fell upon the opera house. Save for one dusky light shining on the front of the stage, the entire stage was covered in darkness. A man runs onto stage, shouting guttural, strange words to the audience and then running back in to the depths of the darkness.  On the whole, I was pleasantly surprised by Anna Teresa de Keersmaeker’s Cesana. I might be in the minority party when saying this, but I absolutely loved the first half of the dance (before the lights were brightened). The taunt manner in which the dancers held onto each other as they walked out of and into the darkness was riveting. With the light being so dull, after some time the eyes projected a hazy, other-worldly glow on the people.  Though I understand the complaints others have, I found the effect of the lighting with the white glow of the white chalk circle to be amazing. However, one thing that confused me was whether the gradual brightening of the light was intended or because of the opinion of the woman who shouted about not being able to see the dance. One possible interpretation of this lighting change is that the actions and working of this group of people was becoming increasingly more transparent, and the discord and chaos we see towards the end of the dance is a result of that. The gradual lighting of the stage could show the progression of a “day” (in this case a certain time period), with the interactions between people coming to an explosive climax at the end. One effect of there being little light at the beginning of the dance was that I really had to trust my ears and listen to the sounds the dancers were making so that I could form a visual picture in my head as to what was going on in the entire stage. During some parts I closed my eyes and using the sounds simply imagined the dance in my mind – the entire procedure allowed me to feel the intense emotions that were rampant across the stage.

Other than lighting, another very important part of the dance was music. The entire soundtrack to the piece was a cappella, hummed by performers on stage who worked and moved with the dancers. In that sense I was very pleased; the singers were as much a part of the performance as the dancers; I could see no line between both. The only time I could tell who was singing was when I noticed one person, always different, would be conducting the dancers. The music, accompanied with the lighting, created a very dynamic rather spooky atmosphere.

Many of the movements in Cesana were constantly repeated. Dancers constantly ran in circles, perhaps representing the never-ending repetition found in life. Many of the movements took place around the chalk circle; towards the end of the dance there were pairs dancing in unison with one another. Some slide their feet along the chalk, slowly making their way around the circle and at the same time smudging the very foundation of the circle. The degradation of the chalk circle expressed the slow decline of a society through the general, peaceful movements. In addition to the movements around the chalk, the individual movements on the rest of the stage were radically different. Dancers would run onto the stage, pushing and touching others, causing what at some points seemed to be a brawl. There were many solos throughout the piece, each showing the turmoil the character the dancer portrayed was going through. There was much discord between the individual and the group; actions and appearances that had to be kept up in front of others melted away when alone.

As I whole, I thoroughly enjoyed Keersmaeker’s Cesana. While watching the entire piece, a story played in my head. Each movement meant some, every piece of the performance added to my experience. After the performance, I read through the booklet given to us and read a bit about Keersmaeker and her intention behind the piece. I was surprised when I was able to see much of that in her piece. In addition, I thought the lighting choices were brilliant in this piece, and the music was a very good accompaniment to the dance. Though there are many things I still do not understand from the piece, on the whole I can say that I enjoyed it at some deeper level, which made this entire evening worthwhile.

Malavika (B)

The photograph I decided to analyze was Andre Kertesz’s Wandering Violinist, taken in Abony, Hungary (1921).  I was immediately drawn to the photograph because of the story within the scene; everything from the positioning of the people to their clothing and expressions adds to the story created in the viewer’s imagination.  In addition, the very gritty, urban feeling of the photograph reminds me of the work of the muckrakers, who strived to show the art world the darkness behind the glitz and glam of the big city. The main positive point, in my opinion, is the simplicity which allows the reader to look into a small portion of a man’s life without having to think about political agendas or any other ideas usually infused into photographs.  Through many of the photographs I saw in the slideshow, but especially this one, I feel that Kertesz is really able to capture the timelessness of a scene; the never-ending, pure emotion behind simple moments of life.

The composition of the photo itself is aesthetically pleasing, following many of the basic rules of taking a good picture.  Space is given for the people to “move” into- the baby has the winding road and a small section of the road is empty in from of the violinist and the small boy besides him.  In addition, the directions in which all three of the people are looking are different. The baby is looking to its left; while it may seem as if he is looking at the violinist the positioning of his feet tells the viewer he is looking at something outside the shot, which can be said of the other two. This fact, along with the placement of two large figures on the left side of the photo as compared to the small figure on the right adds tension to the piece- The viewer’s eye is immediately drawn to the right.  Kertesz also used the rule of thirds when planning out his photograph- the violinist and the young boy are located on the right of the picture with the arms slightly extended to the lower left. The starting point of the road and the buildings is in the upper right of the photo, balancing the variety of objects seen.

I plan on taking a photo with multiple focal points like The Wandering Violinist with not as much balance in order to add a sense of tension. One thing I’ll have to worry about is color because different colors add different visual weights.  I don’t plan on taking a picture involving people though its is the citizens of NYC that really make it the unique place it is on the simple grounds that its always hard to take a good picture with something that’s constantly moving.

Last Thursday, our class was fortunate enough to attend a dance rehearsal of choreographer John Jasperse. Writing about this rehearsal merits a different kind of analysis than other dance performances because what we observed was not a final product. What we saw was like a rudimentary template- there is still much work and thought that needs to go into it before it is sometime Mr. Jasperse finds good enough to show the world. We were blessed to be able to watch the physical manifestation of Mr. Jasperse’s imagination; we witnessed mistakes being made, jokes being told and overall being able to see that the dancers and the choreographer are people like us. I personally enjoyed the absence of that “forth wall” that is so prevalent in performances, while really let me connect to the ideas that Mr. Oliver discussed with us when he took a break.

The first thing that struck me was the attention to minute details as well as the input of ideas from the dancers to the choreographer. Being an abstract dance, I always had the preconception that pieces were made relatively easily- the choreographer would teach the dancers some moves, they would get the costumes, music and backdrop ready and it would be show-time. I was proven completely wrong. The level of attention Jasperse gave to his two dancers was astounding- he would mention placement of fingers, positioning of the feet, movement of the eyes and many other things I couldn’t catch. He would stop them ever time something significant would go wrong, talk about it and restart them again. It was interesting how the entire process was so scientific and analytical; each and every movement had a specific meaning, and to be properly conveyed it had to be done with the utmost precision.

The dance rehearsal can be split into two distinct parts; the first part was subtle and beautiful, while the second part was full of acrobatic, explosive movements and was very “in your face”.  Jasperse discussed the idea of emergence in his project description, something I was able to distinctively see in his work. He talked about the idea of splitting the body into 13 different parts, and assigning movements attributed to each to “dance” a sentence. This would not only help him in his endeavor of creating a piece that doesn’t look like something he would make (thus without his distinctive style), but was also allow him to showcase the idea of emergence, which is when new functions and arise through the interaction of difference parts. Placing movements that seemingly have no connection together and fine-tuning them is his attempt at recreating a phenomena seen often in nature; the “native” is the movements and poses he knows so well while the “foreign” is allowing his dance to become far greater than what he can control. I also saw the idea of emergence in his piece through the selection of his two dancers: Stuart and Simon. While Simon had a ballet background as seen through his rather stiff and restricted movements and tightening of his legs and arms while dancing, Stuart seems to have had a background in other styles of dance. He moved with a fluidity and grace that really brought a whole different meaning to the movements he did; he was able to showcase the beauty and flexibility of the human body.

The effect the background music had on my interpretation of the dance was immediate and startling. The first part of the rehearsal was at first done with a metronome, allowing the dancers to keep track of their movements and be in sync with one another. I thought it seemed rather bland with attached to the steady clicking of the music, and it was to my pleasant surprise when I found out it wasn’t the music Jasperse was planning on using. The more abstract music, which consisted of unintelligible whisperings of multiple people layered on above another, the whole dance took on another meaning. Following up with the idea of emergence, this music gave a whole other dimension and complexity to the dance.

As a whole, it was immensely satisfying to watch Jasperse’s rehearsal. To be able to watch something so intimate was quite a humbling experience; I was able to see that there is nothing that can be done well in this world without hard work. To see the dancers at their most vulnerable was quite an experience, because I got to really understand their thought processes when they themselves try to interpret the dance and really understand the effect what they are doing is having on the audience. I look forward to the completion of the dance, and hope I can see a performance and really see how the dance evolves in the coming months.

The post-modern movement as a whole is a rather confusing one. Like many other large, encompassing art movements (the Post-Impressionist movement comes to mind), there are different sects and groups and new techniques and ideas become popular throughout the years. However, there are some characteristics that hold them together. The term post-modern dance was created by Michael Kirby, who defined it as a dance where “movement is not preselected for its characteristics but results from certain decisions, goals, plans, schemes…” (Banes xiv). Essentially, post-modern dance is functional; rather than using mood, music and characterization, it uses things like costume, lighting and in functional ways. (2). The idea was for the dancers to showcase the crux of what dance was- expression and emotions. They wanted the audience to really see the very movements and create a story behind them. There were many performances where the dance was simply eating onstage, or performing daily actions during a precise time-constraint. This brought about the new idea that dance is not dance because of the story told, but because it was shown and called a dance. In addition, post-modern dance was spontaneous. It had a freedom that modern dance and ballet didn’t; the dancers “…relinquish technical polish, literally to let go of bodily constraints and inhibitions, to act freely…” (xxvii).

Steve Paxton, a member of the Judson Dance Theater was a choreographer of the post-modern movement. Paxton was fascinated with the idea of the human body and its functionality and explored it in many different pieces. He was part of a growing number of people who believed the human body was the very center of the art that is dance, rather than being the carrier, or facilitator. Steve Paxton’s contact improvisation was a very radical idea, but function into the very conceptions we place on post-modern dance. Paxton had his students be trained in the human body; they learnt was movement and how to move separately and with others. They learnt how to hold their weight and shift it throughout their body and to stop thinking and for a lack of a better term, “go with the flow”. Steve Paxton’s CI is the epitome of spontaneity – the dancers have no idea what they’re going to be doing even seconds before it happens. The result of what he has is something very smooth, sensual and organic. It does not rely on the costumes or the backdrop or the music to make a complete piece the audience can enjoy- his work stands on its own.

Malavika Attur (Blog B)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/arts/dance/lyon-opera-ballet-presents-limbs-theorem.html?ref=dance

Before writing about the dance review I chose, I’d like to say that Wendy Oliver’s Writing about Dance really helped me understand the process of analyzing a dance performance and writing about it in a paper. Before reading this, I always thought that writing dance papers simply entailed putting some jargon on paper and adding some references here and there. I never understood how exactly to capture the emotions and feelings one has when watching a performance in words, or what exactly dance essays were even about. Writing about Dance was able to break down the process for me and show me that its not very different than writing an essay for an English class- just a different subject. However, while in some cases it is good for authors to have a basis, or guideline so that they can collect and refine their thoughts, in some cases it is better to simply let the writing and the idea flow onto paper without restraint.

The dance review I chose was The Dawn of a World, Dreamlike yet Chaotic by Rosyln Sulcas. The review follows the Feldman Model of Criticism discussed by Oliver up to a certain point- using “description, analysis, interpretation and evaluation” when writing a critique. The first thing I noticed was that the title itself was very carefully chosen; it accurately depicts the author’s impression of the very piece and sets the tone for the juxtaposition of order and chaos of the dance piece itself. The first paragraph of the review gives the reader much needed background on the dance piece. While “Limb’s Theorem” was choreographed by William Forsythe, who was director of the now obsolete Frankfurt Ballet, the performance was run at the Lyon Opera Ballet. This information allows the reader to understand that the performance might have not follows the original choreographer’s intent, and that there would be differences in interpretations between both and original performance with the original Ballet and this one.

Ms. Sulcas, after  giving some background information, goes into the actual description of the piece. “Just as in life, there is too much happening; the eye must organize, choices must be made, something will be lost” (Sulcas) She describes the movement of boards and the dancers rushes around them, appearing and disappearing out of the view of the reader. That sets the tone for her interpretation, comparing it to life, where there is always a blur of activity, and one must choose what to do and where to look at because there is always something that you will miss. Sulcas stays on the idea of division of vision when looking at the stage for the first part of the dance. She also gives a short analysis of the musical backdrop to the piece, writing about the “electronic score ticks and hums…”, which further support her interpretation of time and the passing of it.

Sulcas differs from the Feldman model in that she splits her analysis of the dance piece into the three parts and places her evaluation of the entire piece at the end, as the dance itself is three parts. In the next paragraph she explains how the second section of the dance, “Enemy in the Figure” is one that is sometimes presented alone, which tells us that the first section is almost like an addition, or a prequel so that the viewer can have a broader understanding and appreciation of the second section. She deftly and concisely describes the movements of the dancers in this section, comparing their movements to the very movement of atoms, who  slip and slide and rush past one another in a never-ending abstract dance.  She then moves to her depiction of the third section of the dance, though she is rather too concise in her descriptions here. She simply states that there is a multiplication of objects on the stage.

At the very end of her review, Sulcas gives a short evaluation of the entire dance. She states “The Lyon dancers aren’t always consistently clear in the way they show Mr. Forsythe’s use of epaulement…”, and then applauds select dancers in the work. Overall, the language that Sulcas uses in this review is evocative and inspires the reader, painting a beautiful picture of chaos coupled with order, something found from the microscopic to the macroscopic world. However, I feel that she does not include as much description and analysis as she could have for a piece that complex and varied. While she includes abundant background information and analysis, she lacked in description and evaluation. However, she does use many of the points found in Oliver’s writing, from a meaningful title to smooth, flowing writing. In the end, it fulfilled it duty, which was the inspire the reader to see the performance and be an insightful, though-out piece of writing.

Malavika (Blog B)

For this blog post, I am writing about Erica’s self portrait. Erica’s self-portrait was unique, because it was the only one that had to be redone. Her first attempt showcased a power-point highlighting important things from her life, like her family, piano-playing and her baking. To complete her power-point, Erica had baked some cookies to give the class. While it was nice, it was on the boring side because there was nothing to actively engage the class. In comparison, in her redone self-portrait, Erica mimicked the very actions she takes when she bakes. Placing her tray in an imaginary oven, she took out her phone and set the timer for her treats. I found it interesting that before the portrait started, she decided to use her own phone because she said it allowed her to set the time with a precision down to the seconds. She  then goes to sit down in her chair, her laptop next to her and pages of homework on her lap. Her baking supplies are neatly arranged next to her laptop, showing her thoroughness and her commitment to what she is doing. Her Science Olympiad shirt and Einstein cradle show her passion for the sciences. As Erika continued to do her homework while she waited for the timer to hit 0, I liked the stillness that fell over the room, permeated by the periodic clicking of the Einstein’s cradle. It was rather calming watching her complete her work, thoroughly working through the problems with a slight furrow on her face. When she stumbled on a problem that stumped her, rather than skipping over it or simply asking someone for help, she decided to go online and do what she needed to do. It reinforced the idea that she’s thorough in whatever she does. As soon as the timer went off, Erica’s entire body relaxed. A small smile reached her lips, and it was almost as if there was nothing between her and her baking. Baking seemed to be her solace- her way of distressing after a long day.

Before taking the baked goods out of the oven, Erica took a toothpick to make sure they were properly done. Her smooth actions showed that she’s been baking for a long time and really understands the process.  She then takes out her tray, placing it on the table. I liked that she took a cupcake out and showed us the process of icing and placing sprinkles on it. Personally, when I think of baking I always imagine them coming out of the oven perfectly cut and glazed and just ready to eat.  People sometimes forget the hard work, effort and creativity that goes into cooking, so it was nice to be reminded of it. Finally, it was great that everyone in the class was able to taste some of Erica’s cooking- it allowed her to open up and show us a little bit of her world. I really liked Erica’s second attempt at her self portrait much more than her first one- it was much more intimate and interesting. The class was engaged, wondering what was in her covered tray, listening to the steady clicks of the Einstein cradle and simply just watching her be in her element.

Malavika Attur (Blog B)

Both Berger in Ways of Seeing and Barnett in A Short Guide to Writing about Art conceptualize the viewing and understanding of paintings, and have informed me as to how to tackle analyzing art.

Berger discusses the idea of perspective, and how people interpret an art-piece in multiple ways. “The way we see things is affected by what we know or believe” (Berger 8). As a result of changing times, perspectives change. A black cat in a painting might be interpreted as a symbol of bad luck in medieval times, but as a symbol of feline grace in modern day. The painting itself is perceived in a different way. Also, when viewing art, one should focus on the painting as a single entity. From the museum room it is placed in to the caption beneath the painting, many things color the viewer’s perspective of a painting. Barnett argues how museums do not recreate the historical context of an art piece. “The object…is de-contextualized, or more accurately, but into a new context” (Barnett 30). A Native American headdress that is meant to be worn with a ceremonial robe in a sacred ritual does not invoke the same feelings when displayed in a glass case under harsh, fluorescent lights. The caption beneath a painting is information that was not intended to be given with the painting; it is excess information.

Both Berger and Barnett give “cautionary words” on reproductions of paintings. With the introduction of technology, it is rather easy to find reproductions of art pieces. However, these are always inherently lacking. Barnett discusses how reproductions lack the textures and overall depth of the original and tend to be viewed in smaller dimensions than the original, altering viewing of details and the very impression a painting gives. The emotions and ideas one would feel when standing in front of an original painting can be in stark contrast when looking at a reproduction.  In addition, when a painting is reproduced, the uniqueness of the painting is lost. “…the uniqueness of the original now lies in it being the original of a reproduction” (Berger 21). Taken out of its original context, the painting loses much of its meaning.

Barnett and Berger stress the point that a painting is a sacred thing. It embodies not only the feelings of an artist, but an entire historical time period. When looking at paintings in the MOMA, I understand that it is important not only to understand the perspective from which the painting is being viewed, but to focus on the painting itself. I need to try and make sense of the art piece, by delving into its past observing the uniqueness of the original. I will take notes on the smallest of details and hold discussions with others in order to see differences in interpretations among viewers of the same piece.