Creative Differences
I was doing some dummy-work last night, sticking things together for a bulk mailing, and I needed entertainment. On PBS, they were showing "The Mozart Dances," which were a joint-effort between pianist Emanuel Ax and choreographer Mark Morris. I'm a big fan of Mr. Ax, and I'm usually a sucker for Mr. Mozart, and I was in a dance-watching mood. Not a bad concept, exceptional dancers, and some really fine moments. However:
* Why were the girls (using "girls" and "boys" to mean grown-up dancer-types) all dressed in transparent dresses? I had no wish to see their undergarments, and it didn't seem to fit with the concept. Happily, my reception was such that I could basically ignore that.
* Why were the boys dressed in shipwreck outfits? Frilly long sleeves and knee-length shorts were distracting from what I thought the concept was.
* Occasionally, I started to think: "Gee, this is really good! What a neat seamless blend of artsy-contemporary dance with court dance!" And then something would jar -- a sudden insertion of sharp edges and angles, writhing on the floor, a total lack of cohesion between music and dance. Frustrating, because I was really beginning to like it!
* I understand that it is difficult to film dance well. I'm not sure it is done well very often, and I was willing to make allowances for the cameraman's desire to focus on one dancer (or a portion of one dancer) to the exclusion of the others. However, surely Emanuel Ax would be the first to ask that the camera not be turned on him when there are dancers to watch! Who thought that would be a good idea? He's great, of course, but he was providing the aural to the dancer's visual.
* In this day and age, when men in dance are assumed to be "little girly men," I think it's especially important that they dance in a way that is masculine. This doesn't mean a lack of sensitivity, but rather a lack of femininity. Some of the soloists managed this, despite the choreography; most did not. It was not a surprise, when they showed a bit of a rehearsal, to hear Mr. Morris instruct his men to be "dainty and feminine." Disappointing, yes; surprising, no.
The end result was that I went to bed as soon as I finished the mailer. This was probably the best idea anyway, but I was terribly dissatisfied by what could have been wonderful. Sigh.
posted by Jeanine @ 8/17/2007 10:10:00 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
Sadly, I feel your pain. I've stumbled across Morris' choreography before, and he has some nice ideas, but they are usually hidden in the middle of nonsense...He doesn't seem to get that music and dance are supposed to complement and enhance eachother, not go to war against one another!
That's unfortunate.
I think Mozart gets misunderstood a lot, and it sounds to me as though Mr. Morris is a culprit. People think that because he doesn't bang you over the head like Mahler or Stravinsky, there's something sort of sissy about him. (That powdered wig probably doesn't help.) And they think that because his music isn't overtly sensual, you have to "spice it up a bit" to sell it to a modern age that has -- well, had its eyes opened, if I may euphemize. You can see the same thing (should you wish to) in "updated" productions of Mozart operas. It's very unfortunate, because as Ruth pointed out, they end up with the music and what happens on stage completely at odds with each other. I don't suppose the "making of" segment gave Mr. Ax a chance to comment on the, um, aesthetics on stage?
I didn't get to see much of Mr. Ax's comments, unfortunately -- maybe if I'd stuck it out for longer, I would have. The only "behind the scenes" part that I caught was Mr. Morris in some sort of toga trying to get his dancers to share his vision. I wasn't entirely sure that I wanted to share it, myself.
Post a Comment
<< Home