|
I recently published
a spin on the theater arts versus Showdance situation
with Scott and Amy Anderson. I have heard that some
interesting responses within the dance community have
been sparked off and I thought I might get a few thoughts
on this from one of the most experienced choreographers
in the dancing world.
Frank Regan has choreographed literally
hundreds of stage and television shows over a 40 year
period. He took a sabbatical from the ballroom field
from 1978 - 1988, earning his living during those
ten years solely as a choreographer and director in
a wide variety of areas within the performing arts.
Dan: "Frank, what do you think
of Scott and Amy's spin on Showdance versus Theatre
Arts?"
Frank: "I thought they brought
up some extremely important points and I agree with
them in about 90% of what they had to say."
Dan: "So, what's the 10% that
you have a different perspective on?"
Frank: "It has to do with a
particular aspect of the proposed scoring system".
Dan: "How so?"
Frank: "The idea of evaluating
the couples based on the following format: Showmanship
1-10, entertainment 1-10, technique 1-10, originality
1-10, risk factor 1-10. It has considerable merit
from the standpoint of the judges validating their
scores and indicating to the couples where relative
strength and weakness is apparent. In this respect,
we have an excellent opportunity to avoid the pitfalls
that cause the stagnation of an art form and to guide
the evolutionary process in a positive direction.
There is, however , in my humble opinion, one vitally
important point that must be considered.
Given that theatre arts and Showdance
are dances performed to predetermined music, the dancers
have the opportunity of expressing from a context
that permits more than just physical skill. They now
have the possibility of creating a piece of art on
a level beyond spontaneous interpretation. This, accordingly,
raises the question about the much debated "risk
factor" or "degree of difficulty,"
as it is frequently referred to. Amy brought up a
good point in her analogy regarding the comparisons
to a movie musical or a Broadway show. When one goes
to the ballet or a Broadway show and witnesses the
expertise of the dancers on stage, one can most certainly
make the observation that what they do is "difficult,"
but one of the rules of theater is that the performer
must make "difficulty" transparent to the
performance. The audience should not have to put up
with someone on stage attempting to make the statement,
"Look how difficult this thing is that I am doing."
Doing difficult things is not the intention. The intention
is to generate specific emotions that result in an
artistic appreciation of every moment of the experience.
Most of my theater arts colleagues find the term "degree
of difficulty" quite objectionable.
Dan: "So basically, what you
are saying is that the true beauty of the lift is
when it is made to look effortless."
Frank: "Yes. Certainly I assert
that high level (no pun intended) adagio work is difficult.
I hasten to point out, however, that if you had been
around in the fifties or sixties and had the opportunity
to see the greatest adagio dancer of all time, namely
Francois Szony, you would have had the unequivocal
pleasure of seeing the most difficult feats executed
with an ease and artistry that would evoke tears of
joy from an audience."
Dan: "You are an old friend
of Francois Szony. I believe you two go back a long
way. Does Francois share this viewpoint about degree
of difficulty?"
Frank: "Indeed, he does, and
has shared this view with me on many occasions."
Dan: "Why do you think so many
people are caught up in this emphasis on difficulty?"
Frank: " I think it has to
do with some of the terminology that has come out
of competitive ice dancing."
Dan: " Do you think we should
be taking a page out of their book or not?
Frank: "Let me answer that
by making a somewhat blatantly simple statement...
While I have the greatest respect and admiration for
what they do, I rather prefer to think that skaters,
for the most part are copying dancers rather than
dancers copying skaters!"
Dan: "Are there any other reasons
why you think "degree of difficulty" is
a term that should not be used?"
Frank: "From time to time we
see comedy routines as part of the format. Comedy
is one of the most difficult things of all to pull
off successfully but again, the difficulty inherent
in the form should be transparent to the performance."
Dan: "Frank, with your eclectic
background in dance and theater, do you have any final
words of wisdom for us in this area?"
Frank: "When you see a truly
beautiful performance that moves you profoundly, you
will not remember very much about it. You will only
know that it was something that mesmerized you or
reached you deeply in some way. That is because you
were in the moment. You were in the domain of presence.
You were truly in the experience of it. On the other
hand, if you watch a mediocre performance you will
remember many things about it. That is because you
never reach the experiential state. You are in the
"concept" of it, not the experience. You
are eating the menu instead of the meal!" That
is when you will become acutely aware of DEGREE OF
DIFFICULTY!
There are many facets of this
subject that I could have gone into with Frank Regan,
but on this occasion time, would not permit. Maybe
we can do it again. If you have any questions on the
subject, send them in to Dance Trends. Perhaps I can
persuade Frank to enter into some more discussions.
Dan
Messenger
04-02-2001
|
