data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4531e/4531e741967805b1815b3615798a2b615873e017" alt=""
I thought about cheating and reading the New York Times review, the ultimate standard, to compare notes. But, no. Here it is, unstructured, uneducated, honest:
The beginning of the show brings up a whole cornucopia of images of all European art and the continuity of its ideas of beauty and masculinity/femininity: Greek vase art, Michelangelo, The Three Graces of Raphael turn into Matisse’s nymphs. It’s seductive (hey, we speak the same secret language!) and feels uncomfortable (hey, let's exclude everybody else!) This Game of cultural references implies a common Cultural Vocabulary but what If I grew up In Zimbabwe or in a working-class small town in Iowa?
Men replace women in a series of tableau with classical ideas of femininity, and vice versa. They were short tunic with skirts, the women severe grey tunics.
The choreography, as in a line of dancers moving fast over the stage on a waltz rhythm, is the work of someone at the top of his form, who is brilliant, intelligent and experienced. I think. The dancers must undergo grueling practice, from the way they control their body and the movements they are able to perform. Lighting imaginative and evocative. The music by John King, striking, adds a spiritual dimension to the visuals. Usually, I prefer live music to recorded. But in this show, it sounded like it was played by the Gods and came down to us from the top of Olympus.
When the music, which arrives by dramatic bursts, becomes silent, the audience communes in its involvement with the show. Not even a cough, no kidding.
When the music, which arrives by dramatic bursts, becomes silent, the audience communes in its involvement with the show. Not even a cough, no kidding.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1da0c/1da0c8cd57c3418007fa1503f2fc1ebefb794eab" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e7cd9/e7cd9e2087f7d47c84c35813962d7661e6d9a592" alt=""
Here is the New York Times review, which is quite uncommitted, neutral, as if the critic preferred holding back what he really thought of the show... It's a small world our there. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/23/arts/dance/review-a-dance-that-playfully-brings-art-history-to-life-john-jasperse-remains-brooklyn-academy-of-music.html?_r=0
ReplyDelete