Sunday, May 25, 2008

New and Improved

Kelly Brown, a Boise-based dancer, choreographer and dance educator, presents a concert of four works at Stage II, Morrison Center, BSU, May 23 and 24, 2008.

Kelli Brown delivers an engagingly varied program with both directorial breadth and accessible choreography, generously sprinkled with moments of exceptional beauty and compositional effect. Three of the four works on the program fit within the genre of modern repertoire—dances that are dancerly, whose movements are closely linked to the music, and involved in a poetic/kinetic narrative. The last of these works, and the concert namesake New and Improved, seems to anchors all the works, presenting the clearest statement of what just might be on Brown’s mind—cultural critique from a woman’s pov.

In New and Improved, the cast of five women frantically drive their 4-wheeled kitchen stools pell-mell across some imaginary suburban landscape, stopping suddenly only to strike tableaux of 1950s pinup poses. The Bing Crosby songs propose a veneer of domestic tranquility, ironically soothing a subliminal Stepfordian dystopia. Added are audio tracks from radio and TV commercials of the 50s. The cleaning products advertised are those needed by every modern homemaker, to maintain a praiseworthy household.

These iconic assumptions regarding women’s roles in the 1950s create the emotional bottleneck of the piece, and the impetus for this kinetic unwinding. “It’s hard to be pinup-pretty and to keep the kitchen sparkling clean” goes the familiar rant.

With hope, and tongue in cheek, Brown proposes better living through medication. It is cigarettes--and their soothing narcosis, with one dangling from the perma-smiles of each of the dancers—that provides the relief for our cultural binarism. The ridiculousness of the solution somehow undermines the severity of the problem, but it’s all in good fun. Brown never takes things too seriously.

Duende, a quartet for four women, is the lyrical work on the program, technical and formally decorous. Based on Latin rhythms, with movement and costuming suggesting Latin ballroom dancing, the piece cycles through partnerships created among the four women, with nary a male, hip-swiveling, ballroom-lothario in sight. Compositionally, the piece works on its own: sensuous, well-crafted and straightforward. Brown’s characteristic irony and comedy takes a break.

Taken “in concert” with the other works on the program, Duende champions women’s sexual empowerment, a party-line approach to the problems located in feminist critique. Duende serves also to feature Brown’s considerable musicality, sculptural craft and her gentlest of an always-gentle touch.

The opening work, Sisters and Brothers, is the most narrative work on the program. It combines several poetic/kinetic episodes evoking the life of evangelical Aimee Semple McPherson and her congregations in early 1900s America. The cast of ten dancers engage in a lot of frenetic movement, running in circles, skipping, flopping over from the waste, shared weight, rolling on the floor, pushing and catching one another; movement easily recognized, by any good Christian, as the dance of spiritual revelation. In contrast to this, the solo figure of McPherson is revealed, sometimes alone, pondering the problems in promoting her anti-rationalism. “Sometimes to gain faith we must give up our logic,” as stated in the program notes.

In Sisters and Brothers, Brown’s choreography resembles works we’ve seen by Mark Morris; sharing a method of painting movement with broad strokes, building kinetically on the synergism of continuous movement. We are overwhelmed (or so the intent) when confronted with the repeating roil of bodies engaged in muscle release. (Typically, we understand dance as a product of muscle contraction, not release.) We witness, both as audience and, by implication, as a member of the McPherson congregation, an emotional and spiritual exhaustion. Thus, the piece offers an invitation: to destabilize the rational for the promise of spiritual gain. Stated in secular context, Brown suggests replacing the process of living with the experience of living—well-chosen themes for exposition in dance.
 
Amidst the three modernist works, the fourth work, SWF (single, white, female, as in personal ads) stands apart, heading straight for a postmodern mix of performative text, first person declamation, pedestrian movement and in your face (although mild) transgression. The piece is spare, raw, and presentational—far from the technique and musicality of the other works.

In SWE, the three women perform a round robin of verbal/movement invectives; one allowing us to sneer at the de-humanizing language of the personal ad, another extolling the sublime addiction/risk of falling in love. Before long, a token Everyman is moved onto stage, a cast member, yes, but a prop with which the women explore the proxemics of contemporary sexual relationships. Kudos to Janelle Wilson who mixes things up by bringing her performance experience in hip-hop and poetry slam to stage, and for her contribution of original poetry.

So, in program order, we see a woman who wields spiritual power, women who celebrate their sexual power (defined in the absence of men) and women brought the verge, both now and as it has been. The polemics borrowed from feminist critique ties the four works together beautifully. Brown is never heavy handed; instead, she makes her arguments with comic irony and a metaphoric wink of the eye. Brown moves ably across the spectrum of dance/music genres and performative modalities. There are many, noticeable, good decisions made by her discerning directorial eye, indeed, a concert of work linked temperamentally and thematically.

The talented “pick-up” cast of dancers Brown assembles rivals those of established dance companies around town, in particular, fine performances from Katie Ponozzo, Lesley Thompson, Echo Waldron, Amanda Watson, and Teresa Vaughan. Thanks to the dance program housed in the BSU Theater Department, for its production support and for nurturing, in some way or another, the talent of every member of the cast. The Dance program has, and continues, to develop and influence dance in our community. 

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Catharsis inturruptus: Are the Metropolitan Opera Live HD Transmissions authentic theater?

Last Saturday (01/12/2008) I attended my first Metropolitan Opera HD Live performance via a high-definition transmission at our local Edwards 21 movie theater. Giuseppe Verdi’s Macbeth was the opera.

I was full of anticipation of every sort, but I wanted to focus on similarities—and differences—between sitting in the audience at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City, and sitting in a movie theater in Boise watching the simultaneous stream of the HD transmission. In other words, it was time to consider the authenticity of the out-of-theater performative experience: Are aesthetic appetites sated in HD? Who is the target of our bravos? What would Verdi do? Will I be able to enjoy this?

The house lights dim. Oh, wrong... those were the house lights at the Metropolitan. Why didn’t Edwards try to dim the house lights in the movie theater at the same time? Wouldn’t be nice to coordinate lighting calls in an effort toward an authentic experience? I’m I the only person to be distracted by this? I make a note to send a pointed letter to Edward’s management, and then try to relax. I take a deep breath and think buffo thoughts. But just as unwillingness begins to destabilize suspended disbelief, the house lights at Edwards dim. Things are moving forward. Willingness returns in the forgiving darkness.

Act one, scene one: a large close up of the singing character of Macbeth fills the giant screen, followed by a quick cut to the same character from another camera. Then, there is a sequence of cuts, from many cameras, each from their own angle and degree of zoom. Violations of the rule of performative authenticity mount, and we're heading for multiple citations.

After all, brick-and-mortar audiences don’t have the option to vary their sight lines. At the opera our seats are fixed, our heads face one direction, in the dark, and oblivious to others sitting around us (ideally). And, on the other hand, brick-and-mortar audiences can focus on anyone or anything on stage as they choose.

But not so, with cameras and video directors who limit our options. The multiple and oblique camera angles, quick cuts, mediated POVs and the added sense of movement that this creates begin to chip away at the authenticity of the experience. It destabilizes our internal, self-directed, connective experience; the very reason live theater was invented in the first place. (You remember then.)

If producers were sincere in their attempt to recreate the experience of sitting in the Met, then they should limit camera movement, or at least make dramaturgical choices. For example, if I want to focus Macbeth’s reaction to his wife’s meltdown, then frame both characters, not just the soloist. Request denied. The apparent directorial rationale—amount of screen time is equally proportional to body weight—forces me to focus on the single character of Lady Macbeth, and Macbeth's reaction (contrived to reflect my own) is hidden from view.

By and by, I witness the most exquisite aria in the operatic repertoire, performed by the supreme diva du jour. It stopped the show on stage in New York, but the local theater is completely quiet. 

Great performances incite thunderous applause, bravos and bouquets of flowers raining upon the stage. Being part of that energy is thrilling; the shared experience an important element of theater. But the relative quiet at Edwards is disquieting. I want rise to my feet and howl “bravo,” but I don’t. Why? why not? whatever. When composing this area, Verdi had loftier intentions than to challenge my esprit. Do I applaud or not? How else am I to put a lid on the fervor that burns within?

So, is there any hope for HD transmissions? Of having an authentic experience as if attending live opera? Can I enjoy the music as drama as Verdi intended without the distraction of technology and obstacles to my full participation? Well... yes.

By Act II, I was properly transported, mostly by the incredible vocal performances of the artists on Metropolitan stage. The audio and visual quality is excellent and being technically enhanced, it could be argued, to surpass anything one could experience in the theater. The distraction of camera angles evaporated, as it does for a well-directed film. For the most part, technology serves performing arts very well. Verdi wrote so his audience could touch the sublime and, damn it, I’m there, even if I don’t show it.

Pragmatically, I consider comfort and convenience: a short drive from home, a $22 admission cost, enjoying an in-show mocha and biscotti. Think briefly on the cost of traveling to New York, hotel accommodations and the price of a ticket at the Met. ‘Nough said.

As far as my intrapersonal catharsis, I’m there. My communal expression of choice...tears. I have no problem with tears. I cry at good theater, even if no one else is. For me, a well performed opera touches the sublime. The music, text and spectacle have a cumulative effect that short-circuits my emotional center. The best will bring on the tears: tears of sadness, tears of joy, tears of orchestral richness, tears of exceptional set design, even tear of vibrant gel colors! It doesn’t matter the cause because good theater is non-rational. Today, several arias touched my t-spot and, as the house light came up, I saw I was not alone. A darkened theater is the sanctuary for the exposed heart...very real, very communal, HD notwithstanding.

So I’m a believer. The Met’s HD Transmissions are an exceptional opportunity and I look forward to continued and expanded programs in future seasons.

In this production: Lado Ataneli as Macbeth, Maria Guleghina Lady Macbeth, John Relyea Banquo, Dimitri Pittas MacDuff and whose performance of "Ah, la paterna mano" is among those sublime. Conductor James Levine is the world’s greatest lyric-theater conductor, no contest.