Entertainment

Dance Moves (and Objects) to See This Fall

No! No! No! Every generation of modernist artists has applied a firm negative to points championed by the previous generation. In the 1960s, when large parts of the world were still taken aback by the dance negations implied or stated by Martha Graham (no to frivolity or merely surface psychology), George Balanchine (no to most décor or costume excess), and Merce Cunningham (no to conventional musicality), the young rebels around the Judson Memorial Church in New York went further.

Posted Updated
Dance Moves (and Objects) to See This Fall
By
(Tag bylines with individual items.)
, New York Times

No! No! No! Every generation of modernist artists has applied a firm negative to points championed by the previous generation. In the 1960s, when large parts of the world were still taken aback by the dance negations implied or stated by Martha Graham (no to frivolity or merely surface psychology), George Balanchine (no to most décor or costume excess), and Merce Cunningham (no to conventional musicality), the young rebels around the Judson Memorial Church in New York went further.

In a now-famous manifesto, dancer-choreographer Yvonne Rainer wrote “No to spectacle. No to virtuosity. No to transformations and magic and make-believe ...” and 10 further “noes.” She, Trisha Brown, David Gordon and other dance experimentalists became associated with paring dance down to new essentials. Their influence has grown, both in New York and internationally; there are young and youngish choreographers today who seem inhibited by the Judson legacy, eager to keep earning their Judson qualifications.

Now the Museum of Modern Art presents “Judson Dance Theater: The Work Is Never Done” (Sept. 16-Feb. 3). By means of live performance, film, photography, sculpture, musical scores, poetry and archival materials, it will chart Judson Dance Theater’s history. The filmmaker and multidisciplinary artist Charles Atlas will be a central link.

The exhibition is to feature several core Judson figures in successive waves: Yvonne Rainer (Sept. 16-23), Deborah Hay (Sept. 24-Oct. 7), David Gordon (Oct. 8-21), Lucinda Childs (Oct. 22-Nov. 4), Steve Paxton (Nov. 19-Dec. 16) and Trisha Brown (Dec. 17-Jan. 16). For those who missed the original Judson moment and who have experienced these artists in separate contexts, the MoMA show will be an opportunity to reassess and rethink history and to watch works, long unperformed, that once seemed to redefine dance: Do they still seem challenging and important? Performances, sometimes two or three a day, will be accompanied by historical film footage.

In recent years, Rainer — whose “Trio A” has become the seminal work of postmodern dance — has been wildly inconsistent; but at her best she’s been witty, mischievous, inventive. Were those virtues present 57 years ago? Most of this exhibition’s Rainer choreography derives from 1961-69; the earliest, “Three Satie Spoons” (1961), has a title I can’t resist.

And I’m keen to improve my scant acquaintance with the work of Hay, who has been a singularly inspiring figure for many connoisseurs of dance postmodernism. Childs’ best work, in my view, was all pre-1980, but we seldom see it; four of her 1963-78 creations will be performed here. Brown, often the most sensuous, as well as among the most cerebral, of the group — and eventually its most celebrated artist — died in 2017; several of her 1968-85 dances will be revived Oct. 10-13 at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, while for this Judson exhibition Atlas is preparing an installation of films of her work.

Among the living, I have highest hopes for the work of David Gordon and Steve Paxton. Gordon’s “Live Archiveography” was a 2017 highlight for me; he has often specialized in constructing Pirandellian or Stoppardian mazes from the meetings of art and life. Whereas others are being represented by anthologies of shorter works, he is taking just one, “The Matter” (1971, originally for 40 dancers, some trained, some not) and reworking it. In terms of sheer scale, this is likely to be the most substantial single piece of this Judson retrospective.

Paxton was an exceptional performer (apart from the ballerina Lynn Seymour, the only dancer I’ve known to share a program with Mikhail Baryshnikov and make a yet more remarkable impression); and in 2017 he passed on much of his electrifying intensity and vivifying detail to the Stephen Petronio Company, when it revived his “Goldberg Variations” (1986-92). Now Petronio and Co. will perform Paxton in this Judson show.

Alastair Macaulay
Expanding the notion of choreography

William Forsythe would like the world to understand a thing or two about choreography — not from the distance of a proscenium stage, but from the inside out. In “William Forsythe: Choreographic Objects,” which opens at the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston, on Oct. 31, Forsythe expands the notion of choreography with a selection of interactive sculptures, participatory objects and video installations that span the past two decades.

The first comprehensive show of Forsythe’s installation pieces in the United States, “Choreographic Objects” involves viewer participation. Don’t be put off: It’s an adventure waiting to be experienced. In “Nowhere and Everywhere at the Same Time, No. 3” (2015), Forsythe has created a maze of 80 hanging pendulums — giving the spectator the playful (and humbling) task of navigating through them. “The Fact of the Matter” (2009) features gymnastic rings, hanging by the ceiling at various lengths. The aim is to move through space using only the rings.

And in “Towards the Diagnostic Gaze” (2013), the trick is to hold a feather duster absolutely still. It’s impossible — you find that you’re suddenly a bundle of micro-movements. In all of his experiments, Forsythe gives you a rare gift: a chance to rediscover your body.

As the director of the Frankfurt Ballet from 1984 to 2004, and the more experimental Forsythe Co. from 2005 to 2015, Forsythe stretched dance to daring extremes. Recently, his interest in ballet has been renewed. In October at Sadler’s Wells in London, he will present “A Quiet Evening of Dance,” described as a “distillation of the geometric origins of classical ballet.” In March, he will unveil a premiere at Boston Ballet. And for something closer to home, New York City Ballet’s winter season features the return of Forsythe’s “Herman Schmerman.” Here, his choreographic objects are the dancers.

Gia Kourlas
When Balanchine began in New York

It’s a central story in the history of ballet — how, in 1933, Lincoln Kirstein brought Russian choreographer George Balanchine to the United States, and how, after a long struggle, they finally founded New York City Ballet, as a resident company of New York City Center, in 1948.

The company moved in 1964 to the New York State Theater (now the David H. Koch), much larger and designed to Balanchine’s specifications, in then-new Lincoln Center, where it still performs. But it’s those early years that will be celebrated this fall (Oct. 31-Nov. 4) at City Center as part of the theater’s 75th anniversary events. Joining the festivities are dancers from many of the world’s greatest companies: Mariinsky Ballet, The Royal Ballet, Paris Opera Ballet, San Francisco Ballet, Miami City Ballet, Joffrey Ballet, American Ballet Theater and, of course, New York City Ballet.

All 13 works are by Balanchine — big and small, widely performed (“The Four Temperaments”) and somewhat rare (the “Glinka Pas de Trois”). Just over half had their debuts at City Center, and history buffs will pine for omissions from a fertile period (“La Valse,” “Orpheus,” “Episodes,” the list of the left-out is long).

Yet the festival is likely to be less about how the City Center years were distinct than about distinctions among the participating troupes. As with the three-company performances of Balanchine’s “Jewels” last year, dancers from different traditions will bring out different facets of Balanchine style — all illuminating but not all equal. Even at City Center, New York City Ballet will again have the home advantage, and not only because its orchestra will be accompanying everyone. Wherever City Ballet performs, Balanchine style is its home.

Brian Seibert
‘The idea of being watched’

When it comes to making art, a specific prompt can be both inspiring and limiting. For last year’s “We’re Watching” series at Bard College, the prompt was to create a work on the theme of surveillance — to explore the question, as the curator Gideon Lester put it, “What is the effect of the surveillance state on the experience of being human?”

The choreographer Will Rawls, the poet Claudia Rankine and the filmmaker John Lucas — collaborating for the first time — responded with “What Remains,” in which they considered the relationship between being watched and being black in America. Rankine’s “Citizen” and “Don’t Let Me Be Lonely” served as jumping-off points for a haunting work of poetry remixed with movement, song and video.

On Sept. 25 the piece will have its New York City premiere at Danspace Project, as part of the French Institute Alliance Française’s Crossing the Line Festival. But since the Bard festival, its creators have been diving back in and reworking it. One big difference, as Rawls explained in a phone interview: Outside of the “We’re Watching” context, there’s less pressure to stick to a theme, more room to experiment.

“I think the audience came to it looking at it through that lens, and Claudia, John and I all had to play to that question,” he said of the surveillance premise. “Now that frame is gone, and I’m sort of relieved.”

“We’re able to really push past that question and be a bit freer with how we tackle the idea of being watched,” he added.

Incorporating new text by Rankine, Rawls and the performers — Leslie Cuyjet, Jessica Pretty, Tara Willis and Jeremy Toussaint-Baptiste, who is also the sound designer — are approaching this version more playfully, he said. Through what he calls “game structures that allow for live decision-making,” they have been finding ways to surprise themselves and keep the work from becoming too fixed.

“I think we’re all just having a bit more fun this time around,” he said. “Serious fun, serious play.”

— Siobhan Burke

Copyright 2024 New York Times News Service. All rights reserved.