Author: Robert Bettmann

Founder of Day Eight, and the DC Arts Writing Fellowship.

Classy.

 

On the third season of The Muppet Show, Rudolf Nureyev was a guest star…..

 

 

There’s something trenchant in his difficulties with the ‘large ballerina’.

Many readers will remember the issue of the Bolshoi dancer who was fired a few years ago for being too big. For those unfamiliar, first few lines from Chicago Sun posted below, and more here.

 

MOSCOW — A top ballerina threatened Thursday to sue the Bolshoi Theater over her firing and accused it of spreading lies that her dance partners found her too heavy to lift.

Anastasia Volochkova alleged the Bolshoi violated Russian labor law by announcing this week that her dismissal was retroactive to June 30. She said that her lawyers were preparing a suit.

 

Physics is a part of the world, and the reality is that more weight is harder to lift. This leads to abuses on both employer and employee sides of the equation. Hard to figure out how to stop it though. 

On the other side: does anyone in the audience really care if a lift is high as can be? I’ve noticed that bad choreography frequently tries to hide itself under as little clothing as possible. Sex – and by that I mean lithe young bodies – sells tickets, and companies afraid that they can’t (or won’t) sell tickets based on talent reliably fall back on flexibility, strength, and ‘beauty’.

I noticed – and others have noticed – that as non-traditional companies get more successful and grow past their founding members – Bill T. Jones, for instance –  ‘unique’ dancers are replaced by more ‘traditional’ bodies. It’s gotta be a wrench for the directors of the companies. Frequently original repertory involves very unique movement. So to keep old rep and make new stuff….. many companies seem unable to fight the gravity toward easier-to-use bodies.

 

 

Judson Laipply

I know this isn’t high art, but Judson Laipply’s “Evolution of Dance” video on Youtube has over 90 MILLION hits. They say that the dance Revelations by Alvin Ailey has been seen by more people than any other dance on the planet. But I’m pretty sure more people have now seen Judson Laipply’s history of dance — ironic, isn’t it? 

I actually enjoyed watching it myself, and went to his website to check him out. I found that he is actually a motivational speaker. He describes himself as a cross between Anthony Robbins and Robin Williams…. I enjoyed his description of how he came up with the idea. You can read the whole thing on his site. The short version is:

“I had already begun to explore the understanding that life is change. I felt that this was a first step to creating the life you want by understanding the simple idea that life is change. So I wanted to do something to make sure that message stuck in the minds of my audience. I milled this over in my head for about 6-9 months when I was finally hit with the idea of how much dancing had changed. I began to think about how funny it would be to visually see all of the dances and thus the idea was born.”

In case you haven’t yet seen it: here is Jud’s Evolution of Dance.

I have had a number of discussion recently about the European acceptance of change in the arts, and an American pull towards a bizarre, hopeless, ‘preservation’ of the arts. I appreciate that this man understands that dance – as a field – reflects an ongoing, unstoppable, change. I think it’s funny, too, that his first name is Judson. For the uninitiated, or uneducated, I recommend a pilgrimage to the Judson Memorial Church. Or at least a few minutes reading up about it – maybe here.

I actually wrote this post in April and posted it on Bourgeon. But it doesn’t really belong there. Bourgeon is not supposed to be a site for random me-ness. It’s hard to get material regularly, though, what with having a job, training, dancing, etc… so I had posted it simply to get some fresh material up. 

If you haven’t been to bourgeon, please check it out. If you are an artist of any sort, and would like to publish something on bourgeon, please contact me. I’d love to hear about it. 

The Middle Fourty

They say in baseball that every team wins fourty games, and every team loses fourty games. It’s what you do with the other fourty games that matters.

The democrats have their fourty, and the republicans have theirs (in part due to Palin.)

How can the democrats get the other fourty? How can the republican’s get the other fourty?

Republican’s – from recent news – seem to be hitting at national security. Trying to get the middle fourty not to feel secure about Obama.

Democrat’s – from recent news – are trying to make people believe that the Republican’s vision isn’t good.

Unfortunately, the Republican message is much simpler. In mass media, it’s necessary to be able to find the point quickly. What is the Democrat’s point? I have a sense. But it’s a bit high-minded, I worry, to win the middle fourty.