The founder of the famous group Krapp, likely to return soon, has a "no-work "that breaks all the canons of dance, which is supposed to make the public and even its own status as author and director.
If someone seems to have understood the concept of "open work" by Umberto Eco, this is Luis Biasotto. He and Krapp-famous group from Mendiolaza, the piece that led to travel the world, is characterized by mounting plays without a script, choreography without steps or a particular technique, since they exhibit their seams, which are assembled and disassembled before the eyes of the beholder. Scenic products are not simply the result of lengthy research process, with structures that are more like an eternal flow than a story with a beginning, middle and end, works that in no way close their senses, but allow these proliferate at ease and pleasure in every viewer's head. Today, Biasotto will find something away from Krapp-just for a while, but it may soon join the group again, "and this year has been released by his attempt to bring a show that all these premises to the end : October (white on stage), to be presented today and next Thursday 15 to 21 in the Teatro del Pueblo (Roque Sáenz Peña 943).
October: his name already sounds like a revolution. And indeed, the intention was to break with all the fees, which are supposed to be a dance work, which is supposed to make the public, which is supposed to dance, act, go to theater. Biasotto put everything in question to its own status as author and director. After having spent time in the lineup at the Cultural Center of Cooperation, opened the debate and work with it installed two sides with opposing views: on the one hand, those who praised the courage of Biasotto, the other, which complained of such anarchy. In the middle were those who appreciated that "art is contemporary, but that is not understood anything." Sure it was not just "understand" what the public should do the work. Rather, Biasotto sought the opposite: disorienting. And above all, to think. "What place is the art today? How can we stand ourselves against it? What happens to the viewer? "Are the questions that functioned as triggers of this piece to your operator defined as anti-entertainment or non-work. He explains it: "This idea of \u200b\u200bfreedom from work, the starting point for work was the moment when the dancer stops being a dancer to be an interpreter by name. Heiner Müller spoke of the death of actor and that led me to think about the death of the author who proposes Roland Barthes. "
- And how to put that concept into practice?
-my point here is that any role is interchangeable, replaceable. The work, beyond that I lead, is all. Everyone has some people around us in everything we do, the influence is constant. This means that once it is put into play the scenic work, somehow the author disappears.
- does that mean also review site dance and their means of production?
realize a critical-especially the old dance focus on the object, the autonomy of dance as an art. I'm pretty tired of seeing the same thing, you know what I will do before taking the entrance, only to point to market success and few will risk looking for a change. I am saddened to see that managers always play it safe.
-October seeking public participation. What do you expect of him?
I do not know if I expect something from the public. But the viewer can no longer remain a spectator Kant, where the axis passes only by what you see. Elena Olivera talks about the twenty-first century viewer to see some type of work, you must know a little art history, philosophy and other things. For there is much to ask, but I think the public should handle certain information and get used to not only go to the theater to entertain or to tell you a story. Should go home with questions and not talking about how nice it moved the dancers. In some sense, dance is a mirror, inverted or convex, of society. But think should be the responsibility of everyone and not a few. More than a participatory audience, I expect an active public.
"Some criticism to work really wondered if it was a dance work, if such freedom was not "dangerous" is also argued that the piece appeared on television because "idiot" and many called it "one of those works the viewer does not understand. " Would you like to answer that?
"The artist's freedom is the basis for the creation, is the reason why most of us involved in it started working. To say that freedom is dangerous sounds a bit fascist. Other criticisms are fairly trivial for me enter the game. For example, a magazine wrote that the mine was a show of contemporary art but of those you walk to see and understand nothing. "But what makes a urinal in a museum?!", Had said the same critic. People are used to see traditional performances or at least quite apprehended, seeks to understand what they are seeing. Believes that dance is a certain way and you must meet certain requirements, such as dancing, for example. Not that my work is cryptic or anything, but my show does not have the usual look of the dance. You have to look at it from another location. Find a distant edge of the common and at the same time is very simple: it is outside of the recognizable aesthetic. And I think the most difficult for the critic is that the show presents its own critique. It is radical and that causes some anger. Comes as a surprise to the public, found that instead of being mere voyeur is co-creator and should look at himself.
"Then you consider that a work can be choreographed to include steps despite not belonging to any technique developed?
I do not know. Before, I would say yes, because I come from the dance and in my work speak from the dance. This work is dance, but with little sense of going out dancing.
- Can you reflect upon your work on the road that takes contemporary dance today?
"Except for some cases, current contemporary dance is very risky, very stuffy, devoid of reflection. My contribution can be very large or negligible, depending on who you look, try the viewer aware that dance is not less than other arts and the dancers not only dance, and to assume certain responsibilities, to review its position respect to the subject intellectual dance.
- you surprised that the work could be so controversial?
-I sensed that something would happen. But the intention was not polemical work or impact, but to present what I believe is happening today with certain languages, such as dance. The polemic is angry or is the average viewer who refuses to change her chocolate bread. Go to the theater is a gamble, perhaps to come bet the wrong animal, but those who want to see always the same horse win not interest me.
