[dance-tech] Re: london dance film festival / critical debate / postchoreography

  • From: "Johannes Birringer" <Johannes.Birringer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <MEDIA-ARTS-AND-DANCE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 20:16:41 -0000

Hi all

couldn't agree more with what Doug and Hélène are saying here.

What i regret, of course, is that there is indeed very little critical and 
sustained debate,  even here, on new works or on festivals and curatorial 
frameworks.... or relations for screen dance or new dance involving 
screens/projections or developing mixed reality performances.  There are a host 
of new issues that have arisen, 
perhaps not necessarily for choreography-for-camera- productions (screendance), 
but for "choreography" or postchoreography as such, for capture technologies, 
for movement as digital (data) processing, for play/performance in virtual 
environments or worlds (Second Life has become a screen world too, and I see 
performances happen therein), for dance with wearables (wearable screens and 
flexible materials, garments, surfaces, media skins, architectures), within the 
digital and real-time processing worlds, within networked tele-plateaus.  

I don't think there is much debate here on these pages, anymore. Our maillists 
have become feeble bulletin boards, occasional news items, announcements,  and 
the dance-tech list also is in such a strange lull,  a silent phase of no 
debate or exchange of viewpoints (last summer, Mark Coniglio invited feedback 
to his latest video/performance/site specific project, but I think the piece 
was shown/displayed on a blog site or YouTube and commentators left their 
viewpoints there-else, ;  i think Marlon Barrios Solano also mentioned to our 
community a few times that he had done intereviews, and that was very 
informative and helpful and is to be commended, but I think these interviews 
and podcasts then are stored or displayed on blogs , and our attention and our 
reading/writing/communicating further dissolved/dissiciated and distributed. 
 (I  seldom read blogs any more as i have simply not time to follow up all the 
blig links i get sent),. 

so debate and controversy, as we still had it in the summer and fall of 2006 
after a series of postings, has now been replaced by acquiescence?  and our 
globalized standards of promotional etiquette  (.."superlative 
descriptions"...)?  --   

i can't quite make sense of the silence either, except that demands on our time 
and on production / R&D / and research (and on writing the superlative press 
releases and writing the grants to have funds to make something can be released 
and superlatived) have increased ..

surely there are planty of issues to discuss, and new workshops, international 
labs, festivals and encuentros, as well premieres of new works are happening 
all the time -- announcements of interesting gatherings in Portugal and Spain 
just reached us. 

After the Moves Screen Choreography Conference in Manchester (June 2007), i had 
also suggested to Simon and others that it would be good to have a review of 
the conference and the festival, so others who were not there, as well as the 
participants, could share some critical reflections on what was said and 
presented. There were some highlights, and some weak points as well, and the 
conference had an academic feel to it that surprised me -- could have been the 
environment.  Universities lecture rooms tend to have a strange effect on art, 
and on dance,   Has any review been forthcoming?   Could we hear a 
counterreview of the festival (review) that sparked Doug's reply?


Johannes Birringer
DAP Lab / Dans Sans Joux
West London 
UB8 3PH   UK

-----Original Message-----
From: Media Arts and Dance on behalf of Helene Lesterlin
Sent: Thu 11/1/2007 3:12 PM
To: MEDIA-ARTS-AND-DANCE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: london dance film festival link
*** This email has been sent from the MEDIA ARTS AND DANCE email forum. To 
respond to all subscribers email MEDIA-ARTS-AND-DANCE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ***

Hello MAD,

I have to second that comment!  I too read the article and was  
disappointed and dismayed with the level of analysis and discourse.   
I also looked at the program being shown in the festival and found it  
to be uninspiring, full of superlative descriptions (the best ever  
seen on the screen) that only diminished the seeming worth of the  
works, and with very little attempt to present what is a burgeoning  
genre with new works made all the time.  There seemed to be little  
interest on the part of the curator and in the article in truly  
experimental works.  I am revealing my bias here of course, but I  
think there are many many artists creating work that has nothing to  
do with Fred Astaire or Edouard Lock for that matter.  And there are  
ways to talk about and show that work which open up potential  
audiences to new experiences rather than, as Douglas says,  
reinforcing stereotypes.  Here here!

Helene Lesterlin

On Nov 1, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Douglas Rosenberg wrote:

> *** This email has been sent from the MEDIA ARTS AND DANCE email  
> forum. To respond to all subscribers email MEDIA-ARTS-AND- 
> DANCE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ***
> Dear MAD community,
> After reading the article and interview with Sandy Strallen at  
> http://www.channel4.com/4talent/feature.jsp?id=6207 that Simon  
> forwarded to us, I feel compelled to comment.  The article puts  
> forth a  view of dance film that is historically inaccurate, skewed  
> toward a Hollywood model an one that exhibits a complete lack of  
> understanding about film and media art culture in general.  In  
> short it furthers an agenda that pits the commerce of art against  
> the art of experimentation.  To state that,
> "Part of the "problem" of recent dance on film is that it has often  
> been a refuge for mediocre choreography using clever angles and  
> lighting to fool audiences into thinking that we're seeing  
> "dancefilm" .
> is to simply rephrase the similar argument that was directed at the  
> painting of the abstract expressionists, (for instance) ie, "my  
> child could do that".  Without making any attempt to quantify what  
> constitutes "good chorography" (is it ballet?) the text reinforces  
> a modernist ideology about the work of art and genius that we know  
> to be suspect at best.  I could go on, but I urge you all to take  
> this polemical set of poorly researched non-arguments to task. It  
> is difficult to tell which are the statements of Sandy Strellen and  
> which are the words of the interviewer/author, but taken as a  
> whole, the article irresponsibly reinforces cliched stereotypes and  
> hackneyed observations.  I hope to continue this conversation with  
> some of you at the upcoming OSVD at Findhorn.
> Best to all,
> Douglas Rosenberg
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 8:32 AM, simon fildes wrote:
>> *** This email has been sent from the MEDIA ARTS AND DANCE email  
>> forum. To respond to all subscribers email MEDIA-ARTS-AND- 
>> DANCE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ***
>> In case you didn't have a closer look at the programme and some  
>> background.....
>> http://www.channel4.com/4talent/feature.jsp?id=6207
>> http://www.riversidestudios.co.uk/cgi-bin/season.pl?f=London% 
>> 20International%20Dancefilm%20Festival%202007
>> Simon Fildes
>> Lecturer in Media Arts and Dance
>> School of Media Arts and Imaging
>> Duncan of Jordanstone
>> University of Dundee
>> 07813 714951
>> 01382 385250
>> www.imaging.dundee.ac.uk
>> www.left-luggage.co.uk
>> www.videodance.org.uk
>> www.move-me.com
>> www.hyperchoreography.org
>> www.screendance.org
>> http://videodance.blogspot.com

Other related posts: