Photo: Kegan Marling |
FACT/SF presents
Relief
co-produced by the Joe
Goode Annex, San Francisco
May 9th, 2015
As a genre, Dance
Theater walks a precarious tightrope. The components in a Dance Theater work
often fit together in unexpected, strange or even odd ways. It can feel
elusive, even for folks who are used to seeing it. At the same time, Dance
Theater tends to explore common, relatable themes that speak to a vast
audience. Dance Theater is most successful when it can do both - stay true to
its compositional form and characteristics and allow the identifiable messages to
shine through.
FACT/SF’s current
production, Relief, tackles this
tricky task with sensitivity, thought and gumption. Choreographer and Artistic
Director Charles Slender-White has constructed a diverse Dance Theater work that
also reveals an important message. Lines that divide are blurry, and the
blurriest place between two extremes is also the most interesting.
Relief
partitioned the Joe Goode Annex into two sections: the gathering area and the
performance space. Streamers of large square paper sheets hanging from ceiling
to floor. As the audience mingled and chatted, the dance started, behind this
porous ‘wall’. FACT/SF’s company of six dancers was partly obscured, partly
visible. Immediately, the notion of division, and the blurriness in division, was
established.
One of the streamer
panels was folded up and we were invited into the main space. Once everyone was
seated, a new movement phrase began. From their chairs, the dancers dropped
onto the floor with intensity and speed, whipping their bodies back and forth,
over and over again. Here, Relief was
exposing the state between calm and collapse. A balancing section examined
obedience and rebellion and fed directly into a delicious old-school jazz dance
sequence. The dancers traveled through the space with pas de boureés, parallel
pirouettes, piqué turns and fouettés. Pasted-on smiles produced a creepy runway
feeling, and a simultaneous expression of reality and pretense.
The mood shifted and the
company filed into one line. With their heads down, they shuffled around the
perimeter of the stage, very close to the audience. Visible and invisible in
the same instant. When this shuffling motif recurred later in the work, it was
cadenced by a confrontation segment. Performers went right up to various audience
members, looking them directly in the eye while they continued through a series
of gestures. This moment challenged the idea of and the relationship between
participant and viewer – the original post-modernists would be proud.
Photo: Kegan Marling |
The company was on stage
and dancing full-out for Relief’s
entire seventy-minutes (with only a few brief periods of rest). It was quite a
feat. And the technique demonstrated by all six was very, very strong. This was
particularly apparent in the last third of the piece during a set of
beautifully flowing movement phrases. This collection was constructed as a
cycle - dancers would join, complete the circuit, sit down and another would
take their place. A sense of fluidity and continuous motion took over, yet
there was still reference to division. The choreography was performed in
unison, so the group was working collectively. But the majority of the phrase
occurred in the corners, in the periphery, which equally spoke of individualism.
This section was my favorite of the evening, though with its multiple cycles,
it did go on a little long. And as Relief
closed, the opening running phrase returned. Except this time, we were in the
space with the dancers, and could experience it in its entirety and fullness. No
division was present.
No comments:
Post a Comment