4 x40 or an everlasting performance (Audron? Motiej?nait? about DANCES OF THE LOST)

06/26/2011

?Audron? Motiej?nait? (During experimental project “Dance in word – not vs. new criticism”)

The man and the environment. How does a person change in unusual conditions, how is the space perceived? How does a professional dancer change being expelled on the asphalt instead of official, enclosed places (theater stage)? There was an attempt to answer this question. Each of us can interpret their feelings in our own ways, but let’s not look at it so bluntly and peripherally. Let’s imagine that we are in the woods of Crimea…

Enthusiasts of the street dance support dancing in the streets, where it was born, and not under a roof. One feels differently when dancing under the clear sky. One feels unchained, not unconstrained by the “box” frames. The lighting is the sun, your scenography – is a canvas and the things holding it, your costume – the every day clothing. Everything is very natural. Dancers are at the reach of a hand. They are alive here and now. You look at them in the daylight and no stage lights can hide their imperfections. By not isolating the stage they immerse you into the action of the play.

The dancer’s decision (or maybe even an improvisation) to identify the spectator (further on called the passerby) with a stage character by immersing him into the action and handing the girl dancer over to him seemed playful. The passerby didn’t flounder and the girl dancer migrated from the hands of one person to another. Valentinas Masalskis, an actor and director, has once said that even the shortest “conversation” with the spectators, can ruin even the best performance. Then, the hole in a curtain through which we should peep into the action on the stage vanishes. However, this decision of the actor wasn’t poor; on the contrary it was received with joy.

Olga Žitluchina alerted with her idea: “Human, in acting (and dancing) we live ”. WE are all actors and each one of us has his personal life plot. We can all share our experiences as there are so many ways to express them. Art here is the first aid.

It’s a demonstration of the intercommunication: respect, support, help. Really, it means so much to have a friend. A good friend. And the loneliness of heroes wasn’t emphasized and prolonged too much. The loss? The stagnancy of the music itself (from the playful contrabass pizzicato accompanying the sorrowful piece of violin, moving to tranquility – continuous synthetic and natural tones) at some point accurately reflected the name of the project.

The dance (most often in pairs and without leaving too much space for individual self-expression) captivated by its subtlety, sentimentality, simplicity i.e. not demonstrating something SPECIAL. However, the synchronic fall of two people could be called a dangerous trick considering the possibility of constriction. In solo dances the emphasis was put on the character, expression and performance. Dancers, who knew their turn, changed one another during the performance as if substituting each other. In this way an organic, incessant development of action was constituted.

Professor Juozas Antanavi?ius declared in the conference of the musicologists while I was presenting the contemporary dance festivals, that the dance unlike music is very limited. Its potential was exhausted long ago and what is now happening on the stage of the contemporary dance is simply a repetition because it is difficult to invent something new. But is this true?

Back in the beginning of the 20th century one artist (for more concrete information contact Ar?nas Vasiliauskas) talked similarly about the contemporary art, and look how many things have happened since that time! After all, Latvians showed us something new – a marathon of performance: 40 minutes of action being repeated four times in a row. Without a break. It is true that during the last of them the “scene” migrated closer to the gates of the Arts Printing House. The cold and inconvenient watching conditions with people standing in parallel and the last row not seeing anything at all prevented from concentrating, but it did not disturb the idea itself. The thought that you can come and go whenever you want created an illusion of the freedom of choice i.e. the time does not have boundaries here. I can only confirm one more time but in a different way: the end of the performance was not clear. The music still played after the dancers formed a line and marched to the Šiltadaržis square. Some spectators – enthusiasts, though with blue noses, still were looking around and as if waiting for more or maybe out of pure curiosity (is that it?), didn’t desolate their “posts” that quick. As well as the security officer long and energetically marching as if the dancers were still dancing.

The dancers – performers were disadvantaged. They didn’t hear any applauds or “bravos”, or maybe such a reward wasn’t even required. The ending without and actual end warned – the action continues, nothing ends, even when we are all traveling to some other place.

There are always people who whine (So that’s it? That’s the show?) when the ability to take the gift from the performer is everyone’s personal business. Everything depends on our diversity of understanding and wish to have an insight.

Video from the premiere on October 3, 2008 in DFab, Riga, Latvia