Kelly Kemp & Company / Number 9

"7 ways to hide your self from the rest of the world"
ODC Theater, San Francisco, CA
January 30, 2011

ODC is filling San Francisco's Mission District with decadent dance performance in this, the inaugural season of their new theater and campus space.  Most recently, Kelly Kemp & Company / Number 9 graced the stage with "7 ways to hide your self from the rest of the world".  Well-developed structural modern choreography paired with an investigative narrative generated probing questions about how personal history informs current action.

One dancer began the piece by reciting a list of situations that happen in life; every sentence starting with the word 'when'.  Existing on different parts of the seriousness spectrum (i.e. 'when they got divorced' versus 'when I lost my keys'), some of the circumstances clearly occurred long ago while others may have transpired just last week.  The intoxicating part of the piece was not the introduction of these 'when' statements but instead the treatment of the 'then'.  Rather than responding with 'then I' or 'then this happened', the 'then' was expressed choreographically.  In the forty minutes that followed this first verbal segment, Kemp demonstrated that the reaction to specific instances can be so different: ambiguous, defined, slow, contentious or peaceful.

A long passage from the middle of "7 ways to hide your self from the rest of the world" really captured Kemp's narrative purpose.  A male soloist began onstage with three women and performed very freeing choreography, almost as if he was metaphorically purging these 'when' events from his consciousness and being.  Eventually the entire cast joined him, dancing in circular, expansive and uninhibited patterns.  Not everyone was moving at all times, in fact, some of the cast was at rest while others became swept up in their physicality.  Regardless, the whole scene was one of hopeful and successful cleansing; almost an exorcism of persistent demons.  However, Kemp did show that moving on is not always possible for everyone.  The recapitulation of the 'when' stories at the end of the work symbolized that sometimes what has happened in our lives still rages on in the head, heart and the soul no matter how hard we try or have tried to work past it.

Overall, the company was very impressive in their ability to translate the content through text and dance, though a couple of the company members were not as technically sound as the others.  I agree that not everyone in a given group needs to be the same; cookie cutter dance companies are a little predictable and boring to watch.  But, a general base level of technique is a good idea.          

"Giselle" - San Francisco Ballet

War Memorial Opera House, San Francisco, CA
January 30, 2011

More than any other classical story ballet, the success of "Giselle" rests on the shoulders of the ballerina cast as the tragic heroine.  Last Sunday afternoon brought us Sarah Van Patten in the title role and because she was Giselle, San Francisco Ballet's "Giselle" was fantastic.

Van Patten's first variation was stunning - her balletés delightfully springy; her long arabesque light and airy yet full and gooey at the same time.  Because of her attention to detail and mastery of technique, we were spared the thud of pointe shoes hitting the stage at the completion of each step; no unplanned audio distracted from Tomasson's choreography.  Some of her subsequent petit allegro sections needed more plié and heels that closed completely to the floor because when her heels are released, Van Patten has super relevé power.  It is those split seconds of repose that are exciting - when the weight is distributed on the whole foot in between each quick, intricate movement.  Van Patten plays the village maiden with a perfect level of navieté and anticipation.  But, I must admit, I was skeptical whether she would be able to pull off the 'mad scene'.  I was wrong.  She gave levels to that scene that I had never witnessed before: a delusional remembrance of innocence, a quiet descent toward psychosis, a maniacal laugh, panic and paranoia.  

Tomasson's movement passages for Act II revealed two sides of this complex character.  When Giselle was dancing amongst the Wilis without Albrecht, there was a very academic interpretation of the movement, almost lacking any feeling.  This is a complement not a criticism - there was a perfection of physicality, yet an emptiness of expression.  As Albrecht became part of the action, Van Patten's upper body immediately opened up with communicative freedom.  And the lifting of her leg in relevé long as she first sees him was the perfect representation of expansive searching. 

Of course, there were other notable moments in San Francisco Ballet's "Giselle".  Daniel Baker was probably the best Hilarion I have ever seen, and Frances Chung was appropriately stoic and calculating as Myrtha.  The corps women had a wonderful performance last Sunday; they have begun to gel as a group, a definite improvement over last month's "Nutcracker".  Tiit Helimets, as Albrecht, was the superior technician of the group, though his acting was not as convincing as it could have been. 

Company C Contemporary Ballet - Winter Program 2011

Castro Valley Center for the Arts

January 29, 2011

Today's choreography makes a lot more sense when it is paired with some historical understanding of form and content in American dance. And, looking backward definitely sheds some light on what we are now seeing in the twenty-first century. The modern dance giants (Graham, Humphrey, Weidman, etc.) were committed to their own defined, specific movement syllabus and created dances using that vocabulary. Though they had this set physical language, their pieces seemed to primarily revolve around the narrative, so much so that the structure (the choreography) became subservient to the story; more of a vehicle for the expression of their epic, high-level narrative. The second generation of modern dance choreographers (Sokolow, Maslow, Dudley, Tamiris, to name a few examples) saw the value of their predecessors work, yet their choreography sought a more equal treatment of form and content; a better merging of these two elements in performance so that the steps remained significant in their own right and could support more relatable stories without becoming lost within them. Then came the 1960s, and the post-modernists turned everything inside out, abandoning the narrative altogether and adopting the notion that dance should be valued for what it is – pure human movement, not saying anything or meaning anything, just existing. They also re-defined the assumptions of what type of movement could be dance, who could do it and where it could be viewed. They stripped away all the peripheral elements (especially the narrative thematic) and de-constructed dance to its physical essence. At the same time in the land of ballet, Balanchine was all over the form/content spectrum: linear story ballets, abstract expressions of music and instances of deconstructed narrative where an idea, concept or image served as the jumping off point for his movement vision.

One paragraph does not even scratch the surface of choreography's longstanding relationship with both story and structure, but it does provide some helpful insights that inform where we are now. And, every once in a while a dance program comes along that really speaks of this historical chronology. Company C Contemporary Ballet's Winter Program 2011 was just that – a stunning, multi-faceted visual journey through form and content, told through four pieces choreographed in the past fifteen years.

We begin in the land of the deconstructed narrative, where no linear story exists, and concepts, notions or ideas take center stage. Daniel Ezralow's “Pulse” had the dancers sliding in and out of the performance space in a wide second position, not just as a recurring motif, but overwhelmingly present throughout the entire work. Here Ezralow was demonstrating impermanence and lack of commitment – how today we leave a situation as quickly as we enter into it, and the difficulty we face in fully giving of ourselves; instead choosing to stay very much on the surface.

James Sewell's “Appalachia Waltz” was an ode to several different styles, including Graham, Balanchine, Mark Morris, Robert Joffrey and Gerald Arpino. This amalgamation really makes sense because the Appalachian region itself was and is a rich cultural compound. The costumes brought visions of Graham with the leotard-style, long-sleeved, full-length dresses; the poses evoked Balanchine's three muses (“Apollo”); the canon sequences brought Morris into the mixture; and the floorwork spoke of Arpino and Joffrey.

“Indoor Fireworks”, by Charles Anderson and Benjamin G. Bowman, opened with a 1960s scene; the entire cast channeling youth, joy, exuberance and society, and the piece definitely channeling Twyla Tharp's “Deuce Coupe” (although I would argue that “Indoor Fireworks” is maybe better than “Deuce Coupe”). Its purpose was not to fuse ballet and modern dance vocabulary together under the common force of youthful vitality; rather, it showed the passion, desperation and explosiveness (hence the title) of this generation. Of the nine sections, “Poisoned Rose” and “Baby Plays Around” particularly stood out. The former, a duet between Edilsa Armendariz and Robert Dekkers was a sexy, smooth stream of consciousness from beginning to end; seamless transitions with no stops or pauses. And Dekkers solo - “Baby Plays Around” - reminded us that a simplistic position can be so powerful. At several points, he stood on a high relevé in fourth - solid yet searching at the same time. “Blame it on Cain”, a trio for Kevin Hockenberry, David Van Ligon and Jeffrey Ware was the only segment that needed a bit more rehearsal. Their footwork was not well-synchronized and the spacing was off the entire time. They just didn't seem to be working together as one unit.

Robert Dekkers of Company C Contemporary Ballet in the premiere of Charles Anderson and Benjamin Bowman's "Indoor Fireworks".  Photo by David DeSilva

I have purposely left “Ominous Rumblings of Discontent” (choreography by Maurice Causey) out of the discussion, because the piece itself was confused. Not confusing, but confused. There was too much happening (both formally and narratively) to possibly converge into a cohesive piece of this short length. I think one of two things would be helpful for this work and am not really sure which would be the better option. Either some serious editing needs to happen so that the focus is stronger and clearer, or the piece should be expanded into a full-length work, so that all the information and material can be spread out and presented more convincingly.