Wow, i am writing almost after a year, but its just because life has been running so fast never got the time to log in and type.
Anyway i just want to write in some of the basic things I ve noticed about people who watch dance. Since my initial training has been in India my aesthetics of choreography were tuned to Indian audiences. That would make my piece include things like making it obvious, having a strong narrative, maybe even emotional, trying to put in whatever you've got to show off the best choreography you can do. But why? In Indian dance, Ive never seen too many experimental pieces, all pieces seem to have a hit formula. Like most of our Hindi films. Maybe films just corrupt the audiences mind so much about arts and aesthetics that everyone who is watching your piece is 'trying to understand it'; making sense of a story; or even thinking why didn't she/he use splits or leg raises to make her piece look even better not thinking maybe the piece didn't require it? maybe the piece isnt about that. Maybe its time you open your mind to other possibilities or abstract explorations of a theme or topic.
Well, iam not sure if classical dancers in India are truly opening their minds to contemporary choreography. I don't blame them. From day 1 mythological stories are explained. As you start learning abhinaya you learn how to enact them, and told how everything you do happens for a reason and then when you feel its now time to contemporise it all you do is bring contemporary issues like Aids, drugs, gender, feminine issues and work a story around it so it make sense and take it to the audiences, who if are the Indian audiences would love it. But is this really contemporary?
One of my very respectable teachers in school argues that classical dance in India hasn't changed since after Rukmini Devi Arundale's time. I agree and disagree. I disagree because i have seen some really fantastic work, with very important issues tackled, great choreography with good use of space and maybe even different costumes. But has the dance evolved? The dance remains the same, with the same concept of having a narrative at all, be dressed like temple goddesses, having the same sort of abhinaya-pure dance-abhinaya-pure dance exchange structure, having a range of emotions, having surprising quick intricate footwork to get a 'wow' from the audiences.
And i am annoyed, because when you are trying to bring new things to it people still ask ' so what are you trying to say in this piece?';'Iam still trying to understand it',and by people i mean Indian audiences. Damn this is not Ramleela you know. Try and open your mind and notice the details and not look for the main story. The details should be strong enough to tell you a lot about the piece, and that's what the audiences here do. Plus the art scene is developed here and audiences have watched a lot already to appreciate things that are different that a normal narrative piece would probably considered tacky!
You would probably be thinking by now that okay, she is a classical dancer from India and just because shes in London now shes acting all snobbish or something but trust me its like someones thrown a hot water balloon over your head and all the iced barriers in your brain have melted! ok no idea if that made sense to you but I'm not trying to say that i have become a supernova in aesthetics and know what is a great piece, maybe this post has come as a reaction to what some people have said to me earlier, but i really think if you need to develop something, you have got to get into the details, have an open mind and accept different things rather than sit there and say i cant understand it!
Sometimes i feel it is so pointless spending hours and hours explaining people what contemporary is, i mean if i have to explain everything i do and make sure that the audiences understand it then how is it contemporary? It then becomes the usual obvious and narrative piece.
I think a part of keeping a piece contemporary is to leave it open ended for the audiences. After all there should be some audience participation isn't it?
Anyway i just want to write in some of the basic things I ve noticed about people who watch dance. Since my initial training has been in India my aesthetics of choreography were tuned to Indian audiences. That would make my piece include things like making it obvious, having a strong narrative, maybe even emotional, trying to put in whatever you've got to show off the best choreography you can do. But why? In Indian dance, Ive never seen too many experimental pieces, all pieces seem to have a hit formula. Like most of our Hindi films. Maybe films just corrupt the audiences mind so much about arts and aesthetics that everyone who is watching your piece is 'trying to understand it'; making sense of a story; or even thinking why didn't she/he use splits or leg raises to make her piece look even better not thinking maybe the piece didn't require it? maybe the piece isnt about that. Maybe its time you open your mind to other possibilities or abstract explorations of a theme or topic.
Well, iam not sure if classical dancers in India are truly opening their minds to contemporary choreography. I don't blame them. From day 1 mythological stories are explained. As you start learning abhinaya you learn how to enact them, and told how everything you do happens for a reason and then when you feel its now time to contemporise it all you do is bring contemporary issues like Aids, drugs, gender, feminine issues and work a story around it so it make sense and take it to the audiences, who if are the Indian audiences would love it. But is this really contemporary?
One of my very respectable teachers in school argues that classical dance in India hasn't changed since after Rukmini Devi Arundale's time. I agree and disagree. I disagree because i have seen some really fantastic work, with very important issues tackled, great choreography with good use of space and maybe even different costumes. But has the dance evolved? The dance remains the same, with the same concept of having a narrative at all, be dressed like temple goddesses, having the same sort of abhinaya-pure dance-abhinaya-pure dance exchange structure, having a range of emotions, having surprising quick intricate footwork to get a 'wow' from the audiences.
And i am annoyed, because when you are trying to bring new things to it people still ask ' so what are you trying to say in this piece?';'Iam still trying to understand it',and by people i mean Indian audiences. Damn this is not Ramleela you know. Try and open your mind and notice the details and not look for the main story. The details should be strong enough to tell you a lot about the piece, and that's what the audiences here do. Plus the art scene is developed here and audiences have watched a lot already to appreciate things that are different that a normal narrative piece would probably considered tacky!
You would probably be thinking by now that okay, she is a classical dancer from India and just because shes in London now shes acting all snobbish or something but trust me its like someones thrown a hot water balloon over your head and all the iced barriers in your brain have melted! ok no idea if that made sense to you but I'm not trying to say that i have become a supernova in aesthetics and know what is a great piece, maybe this post has come as a reaction to what some people have said to me earlier, but i really think if you need to develop something, you have got to get into the details, have an open mind and accept different things rather than sit there and say i cant understand it!
Sometimes i feel it is so pointless spending hours and hours explaining people what contemporary is, i mean if i have to explain everything i do and make sure that the audiences understand it then how is it contemporary? It then becomes the usual obvious and narrative piece.
I think a part of keeping a piece contemporary is to leave it open ended for the audiences. After all there should be some audience participation isn't it?
I agree totally!
ReplyDeleteI dont know about your PC but on mine this thread doesn't display properly. There's no text just small icons. No problems with other posts though.
ReplyDeleteWeird, it should work, works on mine, try again later maybe.
ReplyDeleteIt works on another PC but the font type is obviously different from the other posts. If you can change it to the same font type it would be best in case some of your millions of fans have the same problem I had. ;)
ReplyDelete