I'm always heaping praise on Cedar Lake, especially for how they've embraced the Internet and reached out to dance bloggers. But this time, I think that Cedar Lake has missed an opportunity to connect the themes and explorations of this new work, choreographed by Jill Johnson, to the participatory nature of the Internet and the desire of audiences (at least some) to be more directly involved in the creative process.
I expand on this disconnect below. But first here are two videos about this upcoming installation:
"The Copier" explores basic ideas of copying, following and replication by using the traditional photocopier as a springboard for their investigations.
But what I've learned so far about this upcoming installation leaves me wanting more.
First, why am I not being asked to participate in a creative fashion in The Copier? I stand on-line in Starbucks. I forward emails. I see examples everyday of replicated patterns. Do I and others have nothing to contribute to these explorations?
Here's Evan's description of a movement-generation exercise led by Jill Johnson:
The studio was silent on Monday afternoon as four clusters of Cedar Lake dancers were weaving their arms together, paying attention to the way their wrists, elbows, and shoulders folded into or retracted out of the others. The complexity of the movement and resulting image would come from the layering of the limbs. "Don't move until you're moved", instructed Jill Johnson, the Canadian choreographer of Cedar Lake's upcoming installation The Copier. "Think of all sides of your arm, not just the inside and outside." This exercise, which later Jill told me was informally called "spider-hands", was one of several tasks that Jill gave the dancers on the first day of rehearsal.
Well, why doesn't Cedar Lake and Johnson invite the Internet audience to create their own "spider-hands" videos and upload them? It would be fun to participate in a project of creating improvisational snippets of interwoven hands and arms.
Second, Evan highlights how Cedar Lake wants to cultivate a new type of audience that is engaged in a non-traditional setting with a dance work:
Additionally, the installation is an interactive piece between the audience and the dancers. Without a defined boundary between stage and seats, the audience - collectively and individually - will become part of the composition, resulting in a slightly different performance each time. "I'm curious to see how the public will circulate. Hopefully I've designed a space where people will do that."
Clearly, Cedar Lake is not the only dance company to explore non-traditional environments for showcasing dance. In addition, I don't understand how specifically the audience will become part of the composition. Simply by standing in one location instead of another the flow of the work will change?
I want more. I want to be involved. I want to be part of the action.
For me, the ideas and themes that are being explored in conjunction with how the Internet is being used to promote this piece, simply call out for a more proactive way to engage the audience.
Posted by
Doug Fox on August 6, 2008 7:50 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://greatdance.com/mtadmin/mt-tb.cgi/2937
Interesting post, Doug. It sounds like you want much more hands-on involvement in the process, whereas I feel like an audience's involvement is more about altering the way they watch a performance, which to me is a very individualized, internal experience.
I think the audience will definitely be "part of the action", but it might not be visible right away. By watching the dancers, the audience won't grasp the copying that is inevitably occurring as people copy other people shifting around the space. This will only become visible if you remove yourself from the process and observe the whole picture. It might be worth viewing the installation at least twice: once as an audience member, and a second time as an observer of the interaction between the audience and dancers.
When I chatted with Jill, she explained that an installation forces the audience to be selective about what they want to see. So I think it really is a proactive viewing experience. And the improvisational component of The Copier will certainly be affected by how the audience "gets in the way" of the dancers or shifts away from them. This could affect the dancers' movement choices and patterns. It would be interesting to hear from the dancers - via the website or in person - what it's like for them to interact with and navigate a different audience at each performance.
To be fair, I think you're asking too much of any creative organization or artist to innovate on so many different tangents within one project.
What Cedar Lake is creating sounds to be a very interesting work. Therefore, do we, as an audience, want the creative energies focused on external tidbits that frankly, deliver no upside to the artistic quality of the piece? Is it worth polluting the work with a handful of lousy user-gen videos of replicated movement? It's certainly one thing to ask users to upload home videos where they illustrate how much the stain fighting benefits of Tide have made their lives better. It's another thing entirely to ask for commentary on or participation in an artist's vision when that vision has yet to be made accessible.
Sure, the common audience member may have something they can proactively contribute, but that doesn't mean that accepting those contributions is the right artistic choice.
I definitely do like the idea of being involved in some type of direct, physical way, or, alternatively, being able to contribute in some manner online.
Thanks for expanding on your thoughts and Jill's about the proactive nature of the audience viewing experience. And it would be good to hear from dancers about how they interact with the audience.
I think that main point I was making is that personally I want to be offered the opportunity to be more engaged with the ideas of a dance work on physical, emotional and intellectual level. Being an audience member at dance installation is one way of experiencing a work, but definitely not the only one, especially when the themes are very much part of all our daily lives.
I don't think I'm asking too much, but I may be asking something of Jill and Cedar Lake that they are not interested in pursuing.
Putting aside the Internet for a moment, there have been dancers and dance dance companies that have pursued a variety of different approaches to community dance that incorporate non-professional dancers in performances and other types of dance-events. It's up to the individual artist/group to decide whether this is an avenue that they are interested in.
In 2006, I had the opportunity to perform, as a community member, in Liz Lerman Dance Exchange's "Still Crossing" - here's my post.
For me, this type of engagement is wonderful.
You wrote following above about user contributions:
"Therefore, do we, as an audience, want the creative energies focused on external tidbits that frankly, deliver no upside to the artistic quality of the piece? Is it worth polluting the work with a handful of lousy user-gen videos of replicated movement?"
Yes, there are many examples of terrible user-generated content that doesn't offer much value or insight. But the general paucity of quality user submissions does not by necessity lead to the conclusion that it's not worth it for artists to engage audiences in new ways online.
But there are clearly challenges that artists will want to address so that they don't fall into the common pitfalls when exploring ways that Internet users might participate.
Obviously, Jill and Cedar Lake may or may not be interested in this idea, but I'll use the "spider-hands" movement-generation exercise that Evan described in her post (and I quote from above):
Why not invite a group of Cedar Lake fans - dancers, dance students and non-dancers to their studios for two hours to work directly with Jill Johnson and her dancers. While at the studio, the guests would participate in a handful of movement exercises such as the "Spider-hands." And all participants would agree to be videotaped during these activities.
Multiple segments of these clips would then be uploaded to popular video sites. And these videos would then be the basis for inviting online audiences to create their own videos based on similar movement-generation exercises.
Essentially, by first creating video content of amateur dancers and non-dancers in their own studio, Cedar Lake is essentially modeling what they want others to create and is setting the bar high which will lead to better quality contributions in the end.
Marc, to address your last point about accepting contributions, I think that is completely up to the artist. Sticking with the "spider-hands" example, say that a number of interesting videos were submitted online - especially videos in HD format - that showed arms, hands and fingers weaving in and out.
Imagine walking into Cedar Lake's great space where the installation will take place this month, and you see large projected videos of these interweaving hands on multiple walls and surfaces. That would make for an intriguing opening to the The Copier.
The Kinetic Interface blog on Great Dance starts with the premise that by focusing on the body and movement we can better understand, engage with, and contribute to many of the technological and scientific changes that are reshaping our daily lives.
To share stories and ideas, offer feedback, and ask questions, please email Doug Fox.
4 Comments
Interesting post, Doug. It sounds like you want much more hands-on involvement in the process, whereas I feel like an audience's involvement is more about altering the way they watch a performance, which to me is a very individualized, internal experience.
I think the audience will definitely be "part of the action", but it might not be visible right away. By watching the dancers, the audience won't grasp the copying that is inevitably occurring as people copy other people shifting around the space. This will only become visible if you remove yourself from the process and observe the whole picture. It might be worth viewing the installation at least twice: once as an audience member, and a second time as an observer of the interaction between the audience and dancers.
When I chatted with Jill, she explained that an installation forces the audience to be selective about what they want to see. So I think it really is a proactive viewing experience. And the improvisational component of The Copier will certainly be affected by how the audience "gets in the way" of the dancers or shifts away from them. This could affect the dancers' movement choices and patterns. It would be interesting to hear from the dancers - via the website or in person - what it's like for them to interact with and navigate a different audience at each performance.
Doug,
To be fair, I think you're asking too much of any creative organization or artist to innovate on so many different tangents within one project.
What Cedar Lake is creating sounds to be a very interesting work. Therefore, do we, as an audience, want the creative energies focused on external tidbits that frankly, deliver no upside to the artistic quality of the piece? Is it worth polluting the work with a handful of lousy user-gen videos of replicated movement? It's certainly one thing to ask users to upload home videos where they illustrate how much the stain fighting benefits of Tide have made their lives better. It's another thing entirely to ask for commentary on or participation in an artist's vision when that vision has yet to be made accessible.
Sure, the common audience member may have something they can proactively contribute, but that doesn't mean that accepting those contributions is the right artistic choice.
Evan,
I definitely do like the idea of being involved in some type of direct, physical way, or, alternatively, being able to contribute in some manner online.
Thanks for expanding on your thoughts and Jill's about the proactive nature of the audience viewing experience. And it would be good to hear from dancers about how they interact with the audience.
I think that main point I was making is that personally I want to be offered the opportunity to be more engaged with the ideas of a dance work on physical, emotional and intellectual level. Being an audience member at dance installation is one way of experiencing a work, but definitely not the only one, especially when the themes are very much part of all our daily lives.
Marc,
I don't think I'm asking too much, but I may be asking something of Jill and Cedar Lake that they are not interested in pursuing.
Putting aside the Internet for a moment, there have been dancers and dance dance companies that have pursued a variety of different approaches to community dance that incorporate non-professional dancers in performances and other types of dance-events. It's up to the individual artist/group to decide whether this is an avenue that they are interested in.
In 2006, I had the opportunity to perform, as a community member, in Liz Lerman Dance Exchange's "Still Crossing" - here's my post.
For me, this type of engagement is wonderful.
You wrote following above about user contributions:
"Therefore, do we, as an audience, want the creative energies focused on external tidbits that frankly, deliver no upside to the artistic quality of the piece? Is it worth polluting the work with a handful of lousy user-gen videos of replicated movement?"
Yes, there are many examples of terrible user-generated content that doesn't offer much value or insight. But the general paucity of quality user submissions does not by necessity lead to the conclusion that it's not worth it for artists to engage audiences in new ways online.
But there are clearly challenges that artists will want to address so that they don't fall into the common pitfalls when exploring ways that Internet users might participate.
Obviously, Jill and Cedar Lake may or may not be interested in this idea, but I'll use the "spider-hands" movement-generation exercise that Evan described in her post (and I quote from above):
Why not invite a group of Cedar Lake fans - dancers, dance students and non-dancers to their studios for two hours to work directly with Jill Johnson and her dancers. While at the studio, the guests would participate in a handful of movement exercises such as the "Spider-hands." And all participants would agree to be videotaped during these activities.
Multiple segments of these clips would then be uploaded to popular video sites. And these videos would then be the basis for inviting online audiences to create their own videos based on similar movement-generation exercises.
Essentially, by first creating video content of amateur dancers and non-dancers in their own studio, Cedar Lake is essentially modeling what they want others to create and is setting the bar high which will lead to better quality contributions in the end.
Marc, to address your last point about accepting contributions, I think that is completely up to the artist. Sticking with the "spider-hands" example, say that a number of interesting videos were submitted online - especially videos in HD format - that showed arms, hands and fingers weaving in and out.
Imagine walking into Cedar Lake's great space where the installation will take place this month, and you see large projected videos of these interweaving hands on multiple walls and surfaces. That would make for an intriguing opening to the The Copier.
Leave a Comment