Post-modern dance is a large and multi-encompassing movement, as it defines not just a specific form of dance but also dance created during specific time period, in this case following the modern dance movements of the 1950s. Post-modern dance is a very self-conscious movement, meant to be aware of past movements and techniques used in dance and also to act in response to modern dance’s traditions, which were seen as too constricting and removed from the spirit of dance and art. Post-modern dance follows a type of minimalist aesthetic where the objective of the dance is to draw power and meaning from as little as possible instead of as much as possible. Dance in post-modernism is seen as more classical forms of art are today. Almost anything can be art, but not without context. Once the context is in place, the art is properly identified and analyzed as art. Post-modernists identified even simple movements like walking and running as possibly dance, but they only become truly dance when properly identified as such.

Steve Paxton was a proponent of the analytic post-modern dance movement; his primary contribution was the introduction of contact improvization. Contact improvization is a form of dance where dancers move with each other while always maintaing contact. This form of dance focuses on the varied interactions human bodies can have with each other while also interacting with the world around them. Due to the minimalist aspects of post-modern dance, however, these interactions take place not through props but through forces, and the dancers’ greatest tools here are their manipulation of gravity and inertia. Paxton’s contribution to post-modern dance is significant and illuminating, because his dance style both aligned with post-modern dance’s aesthetic ideas and forged new ground in how and what dance can exist.

-Milan Bien-Aime (Blog B)

Brian Seibert’s review of several of Alvin Ailey’s dance performances under the guidance of multiple directors focuses on the impact the directors and dancers have on the feel of the performances. Seibert’s review mainly focuses on what Robert Battle’s artistic hand brings to the performances as the new artistic director of the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater.

Seibert describes Battle’s work using Feldman’s model, using the four aspects of dance criticism to accentuate his review. He describes the dancers as large and bare-chested, wearing long skirts and backed by a heavy drum beat. He analyzes the dances to reveal the solid, powerful feel of the dance, and interprets it as overblown and too bombastic. Aspects of the dances, such as silent screams and oddly feminine gestures, are seen by Battle as out of place and too grandiose for an otherwise solid and masculine dance performance. Overall, Battle interprets Alvin Ailey’s dancers as strong and heroic, but a little too stiff and bombastic to fully realize the gracefulness of the dance numbers. Additionally, Battle regards Alvin Ailey as at their best when they are energetic yet precise, acting in bursts of grace and power backed by drum beats and spirituals.

Wendy Oliver’s text helped me greatly with understanding the review, as I have little experience with dance and dance review. Feldman’s model for dance criticism does a fantastic job of explaining how to truly convey the emotions and atmosphere that dance evokes onto text. Through this text and Seibert’s review, I feel as if I have learned how to be able to accurately convey my own feelings and experiences towards dance when I one day go to see a performance.

Milan Bien-Aime (Blog B)