I can’t really explain it any better: all I want is to make dances that have no steps.
I think that there is something fundamental in this inquiry. The presence of steps makes me aware of a creator of steps. I am looking at the origin of the material as though the dance maker where upstage under a spot light – in my mind, always keeping me at arms length from the experience of the event.
I was having dinner last night with a friend, a very accomplished dance maker – one of his reflections this year were that he wanted to feel greater connections with the performers within a dance – a human desire to be connected. This is an internationally recognized choreographer, and he, above all, wanted to FEEL a closeness with the performers, rather than the craft of step-smithing.
My experience as a performer currently is that I must acknowledge the audience when I perform. In some way I must do this. I don’t have to literally look at them and wink, but, I energetically must acknowledge that “here we are together in this room”. You are looking at me and I am up here doing things to try to be appreciated by you. But underlying that is an essential requirement to acknowledge one another. That is really what an audience member wants. This is what I imagine what the pre-cinema vaudeville culture delivered – performers connecting in a very raw direct way with people.
[This line of thought in performance, always begins to get close to contradicting everything I believe in - a desire to deliver authenticity in within the performative environment, but within the right context, I at least imagine, that those early vaudeville shows were hysterical and at moments heart breaking.]
I wonder in those early performances, probably in basic spaces placed in neighborhoods for workers, if there was a focus on an investigation of step making, or on making people laugh, or scream or cry or to simply take a trip within the energy of the performers.
