Out There 20 at the Walker At Center
Claude Wampler is totally OUT THERE
I saw the third installment of the Out There Series on Thursday night. The premise can be described very simply. Cue the haze…. cue the projections….The audience watches a trio of musicians rehearse a new song… I’m no scholar of music… it sounded to me like some fusion of The Who, The Stones and Concrete Blonde…. sort of like sex music with a bad Beach Boys refrain of “bah bah-da-bah bah”. They exchange pithy comments like “the high hat is too trashy”. The projections floated on the haze, giving the omnipresent musicians a ghost like quality as they floated above their instruments. Cue replenish the haze…The effect was often very cool…After the 50 minutes rehearsal, are rewarded a payoff as the Maguire transforms and the ghosts of the rehearsal dissipate. Suddenly we’re at a rock show. The band members return in spandex and perform live. The crowd loved this moment, enthusiastically assuming their new role as rock show audience.It was very difficult to tell when the show was over. The tension held the crowd cheering and shrugging shoulders for nearly 10 minutes. The house light finally came up and suddenly we a group of baffled (or punk’d) Walker goers.I was pissed and irritated through most of the performance. The audience is wedged into a seating arrangement. I was moved by the house management twice according to the specifications of the director. Visibility was apparently essential to our enjoyment of the project. It was obvious all we needed to see was the set up for a 70s rock/funk on-stage… Apparently, there were “demands” from the director. I’m not sure how the seating arrangement would have affected the already listless concept.Reflecting, though I didn’t enjoy it at the time, I’m very glad I attended. I can’t speak for any intention; there was certainly an unusual practice on display. www.claudewampler.com
We Welcome the TEAM to the Mid-West
We’re onto the 2nd installment of the Out There Series. Last night I saw Particularly in the Heartland by another young company from New York City—The TEAM (Theatre of the Emerging American Movement). Initially, I had high expectations. It’s right up my alley. It’s an ensemble creation featuring a cast of six, including five of the founders of this young company (and most of the founders are women—and I have an on going curiosity in feminist collectives—not that The TEAM is such a collective, but their workshop promises to explore the principles of democracy within the creative process). It promised high physicality, audience participation, and content charged with “the now”. Indeed the piece felt very current and offered two hours worth of colorful characters, theatrical tricks and comfortable ideas. At the center of the piece are three fundamentalist siblings (orphaned in the opening of the play) who speak of the rapture and the ”end times”, read the Left Behind series, and play games like “base”. Thrown into the mix are an east coast advertising executive, the ghost of Robert F. Kennedy and an alien (an Asian woman). Very compelling ingredients! This seemed to be exactly the piece I’ve been waiting to see—a theatrical response to the divisiveness that defines our country. I also assumed I’d be challenged or at least entertained. Journalists and sociologists have put out quite a bit of work about divisiveness and alienation in our current climate–Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas and Robert D. Putnams’ Bowling Alone are good examples…. I’m sure the Claremont Institute has put out some stuff about this too… I haven’t touched that yet). I’m not expecting any answers, but certainly some fun can be had with these ideas. But after two hours, The TEAM did little but reinforce the view that fundamentalist Christians living modestly in the heartland are nothing but hicks with a disposable belief system and consumption habits that usher in the death of small town America. The east coast characters were even less convincing (and less interesting given so little development, they say things like “everything’s easier with a Harvard education”). But the production gives the educated/creative classes the upper hand. Kennedy and the ad exec become the parents of this family-brought-together-by-fate. These “Brooklyn based” performers certainly make a lot of assumptions about those who live thousands of miles away. But somehow the discourse and rhythms and colors of the urban spectrum of our nation had no place in this production. These dogmas must be untouchable (even the costume and styling for the ad exec was dull). Were these dramaturgical holes? Missed opportunities? I’m not sure, but it won over people in Europe I guess—and a lot of the audience on opening. There was certainly a lot to love about this production. The actors had incredible ease interacting with the crowd on opening. Like impervious substitute teachers, they won our affection quickly and were able to facilitate audience response naturally. The staging was very effective. They pulled out a lot of tricks, from the sobering opening which moves quickly from a rousing version of the Battle Hymn of the Republic (a sharp reference to the moral superiority that defines our foreign policy) to the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. The group borrows a lot (again) from Anne Bogart (plastic sheets, food smashing, American flags, competitions, extended dance breaks, cultural references… I’m surprised they got away with it… it doesn’t really feel that fresh anymore). Playfulness was king, earnestness was queen. The actors shift gears quickly, breaking narrative fluidity. They create a universe on the Maguire stage, with intentions so clear the props, tables and chairs move according their creative whims. Most outstanding in the cast was Kristen Sieh as Anna, the youngest of the siblings. I only wish her jump rope showcase had actually been 15 minutes long. Libby King, as middle sibling Sarah Springer, was also excellent, totally authentic. Again, I must say, I LOVE the Out There Series. I love the youth of the first two pieces in the series: two companies demonstrating great stage craft, compelling ideas and a full commitment to their process. I just didn’t eat it up. I was hoping for something a bit more difficult to swallow. www.theteamplays.com Miguel Gutierrez went shopping for Denim The Walker Art Center’s 20th Annual Out There Series kicked off with a dance / theatre creation by Brooklyn based choreographer Miguel Gutierrez and his company, The Powerful People. I’m writing in response to this work—as the nature of the Out There Series is to bring in boundary crossing material that begs response and discussion. The piece was titled “Everyone”. The piece used a lot of familiar conventions: · attractive young performers in street clothes, they looked straight out of an American Apparel advertisement—ethnically ambiguous, pleasingly fit without too much bulky muscle so they are pleasingly androgenous, well styled hair and familiar well worn sneakers · Minimal music, mostly repetitive drones that the movement can ride upon · Choral text, words spoken in unison, mostly expressing mundane observations on urban existence, pithy comments on the state of the times, references to the angst of an artist hoping to “connect”. EXAMPLE: I talked to my friend on the phone. He said “real estate, real estate, real estate”. I thought, “Ummmm…” · Challenging use of the space and architecture, placing the audience on-stage and performing in front of a closed curtain, until the last 1/3 of the piece when the drape opens and the performers have new terrain to explore · a manner of movement that was repetitive, playful, sensual, improvisational I am a theatre artist who genuinely enjoys all things playful, kinesthetic, explorative. I found the content extremely underwhelming. I was captivated, though not by choice. I was forced to be captivated—always expectant of some moment when the clichés would subside. There were unending repetitive moments (for example the opening when each performer enters one by one each with great focus, and they stand and stare at the audience for 15 minutes)—I was captivated in anticipation for something (I’m not sure what) but I was compelled to leave just to see if, upon my reluctant return, I had possibly missed anything. By my estimation, the content was generated from a series of improvisation structures and ensemble exercises. The exercises seemed very transparent to me. (This section is about partnering, this section is about playfulness, this section is about jumping, this section is about hands). I can only compare it to what I’ve encountered in my studies, but Miguel Gutierrez work was reminiscent of work pioneered by Pina Bausch, Anne Bogart, Ruth Zaporah (Action Theatre) and Butoh exercises. And perhaps Gutierrez has a new approach to ensemble generated performance—but his exercises added up to little more than what one might see in a college level movement performance class. A friend of mine described it as “Napoleon Dynamite teaching Viewpoints”.” The company of performers were very well in synch, but to my viewing only Minneapolis’ Otto Ramstad performed with a spontaneity that evoked genuine raucousness, pedestrian passiveness and human desire. It has been stated in various forms that this piece is about “connection… performer / audience relationship”. Gutierrez may have been successful in creating a piece striving to “connect / not connect”. But for me as an audience member, 90 minutes of clichés was not a compelling route for connection. The Walker’s blogger Charles Campbell stated that the piece “surpasses or escapes our ability to articulate a message, subject or agenda”. For me, this suggests everything is excusable, regardless of the content. Gutierrez has an enviable arsenal of funding and laurels from NY press but his gaze, a NYC hipster yearning for connection / vitality feels tired. (can we have discussions about the greenhouse impact of their travel to Minneapolis? A pal of mine suggested that if Minneapolis’ own Hijacks could explore similar themes with greater success and for my part speak from a broader range, perhaps multi-generationally). Friends of mine have said there were times during the piece when they felt compelled to participate, to run up on stage and add gestures to the composition (and perhaps that would have been more interesting—exercises like the ensemble was executing can be fun and liberating—and watching them in action suggests the endless potential of a human ensemble existing in space and time). Last year I was spoiled by the Out There Series. 2007 was full of pieces of a more recognizable theatrical leaning, relaying heavily on text, music, dramatic situations. This year’s series seems to favor movement. Dancers might enjoy “Everyone” for its reductionist quality, relaying heavily on simple moments, gestures, focus, intention and shifting relationships. If what you were looking for is another meditation on the shallowness of human interaction, a chance to be in the same room with a gang of much heralded Brooklyn hipsters, this piece might satisfy. If you are looking to latch onto something, you might leave saying “… and no one was ever wearing their jeans that well.”
More info….
(hope these links work)
No Comments
No comments yet.
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
