http://lunapugliese.blogspot.com/2009/04/tiro-al-blanco-el-espectador.html
When we're dancing we wonder why we're doing ? Dancing gives us pleasure because it can bring a feeling of fullness, freedom.
Sometimes our attitude refers to the study, and this may make the dance more attractive. Appreciate the permanent control of our actions and movements obsessively perfect and timed.
When dancing sometimes we combine the enjoyment to the study. And by building a work, it might ask itself, for its meaning. Thing that happens all the time "October, a white scene , in which a group of dancers and the director does not do more than ask questions and throw them to the public that is sometimes shocked, sometimes confused or ashamed but quite entertaining.
We dance because we can not do anything else: "It is impossible not to hear this music and dance," Vicky said while moving. Then at the end of an impressive solo Florence just over two minutes, Luis (director) asks, "What do you feel?". And she explained that she could not say whether it is 'emotion' ... in that case, satisfaction by checking that the body responds to certain signal she sends to the brain. But 'feel', I felt nothing, he said.
The work wonders, say, by the very representation of the mechanics of reading the viewer, the dance itself. ("Contemporary dance is one that is asked by his own sense?) So, there are interpretation problems that arise whenever the viewer participates in a show of dance or drama. Address which it said. Risky move if any. Exposed to such an extent that the director himself choose to receive public feedback on the scene. This show is intended as a fun experiment, at least for the performers and creators, and not just spectators. Without denying some who, when given the opportunity to participate with the nextel in hand, also contributed: "You think they're smart?". Sometimes the works
not want anything to be interpreted, especially in dance, with all its forms and possibilities of abstraction. Why must always be something you have to play? How can break into the spectator this year, these mechanisms that usually always see all the works? Is it not possible to think, perhaps, that the work, each piece has its own mechanisms for reading, interpretation? You always have to 'read' anything? Celebration that question all these things. I am grateful that I break the story with an unexpected show of brilliant virtuoso (whose dancers missed not seeing me in greeting.) It amuses me to involve the people (in a contemporary dance work, a surprise). I was attracted by this attitude of risk involved in each function, I checked in I saw and I suspect in all I will not see.
Sometimes our attitude refers to the study, and this may make the dance more attractive. Appreciate the permanent control of our actions and movements obsessively perfect and timed.
When dancing sometimes we combine the enjoyment to the study. And by building a work, it might ask itself, for its meaning. Thing that happens all the time "October, a white scene , in which a group of dancers and the director does not do more than ask questions and throw them to the public that is sometimes shocked, sometimes confused or ashamed but quite entertaining.
We dance because we can not do anything else: "It is impossible not to hear this music and dance," Vicky said while moving. Then at the end of an impressive solo Florence just over two minutes, Luis (director) asks, "What do you feel?". And she explained that she could not say whether it is 'emotion' ... in that case, satisfaction by checking that the body responds to certain signal she sends to the brain. But 'feel', I felt nothing, he said.
The work wonders, say, by the very representation of the mechanics of reading the viewer, the dance itself. ("Contemporary dance is one that is asked by his own sense?) So, there are interpretation problems that arise whenever the viewer participates in a show of dance or drama. Address which it said. Risky move if any. Exposed to such an extent that the director himself choose to receive public feedback on the scene. This show is intended as a fun experiment, at least for the performers and creators, and not just spectators. Without denying some who, when given the opportunity to participate with the nextel in hand, also contributed: "You think they're smart?". Sometimes the works
not want anything to be interpreted, especially in dance, with all its forms and possibilities of abstraction. Why must always be something you have to play? How can break into the spectator this year, these mechanisms that usually always see all the works? Is it not possible to think, perhaps, that the work, each piece has its own mechanisms for reading, interpretation? You always have to 'read' anything? Celebration that question all these things. I am grateful that I break the story with an unexpected show of brilliant virtuoso (whose dancers missed not seeing me in greeting.) It amuses me to involve the people (in a contemporary dance work, a surprise). I was attracted by this attitude of risk involved in each function, I checked in I saw and I suspect in all I will not see.
LUNA PUGLIESE
0 comments:
Post a Comment