Dirac's comment about Petit may contain one of the secrets the better story-tellers have.
dirac, on Apr 5 2007, 06:02 PM, said:
he holds the stage and has many of the old fashioned show business virtues, things that don't go out of style.
For example, about Bintley's Hobson's Choice:
scherzo, on Apr 9 2007, 04:22 PM, said:
it has great warmth, a good sense of comedy and a good balance between mime and pure dance which sustains the audience's interest (which, for example, Macmillan did not always achieve). Above all, Bintley takes care creating his characters and each has clear personality, dramatically and choreographically, thanks to his inventive use of steps - so we care about what happens to them.
Or the importance of choosing the music:
JMcN, on Apr 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:
For his narrative works, David Bintley has used commissioned scores and because of this he seems to get exactly the music he needs to enhance the story-telling.
Also, from what scherzo and JmcM write, Bintley seems to be inventive in his choice and development of steps. Even when repetitive, as in the dance for the barons in Edward II, there seems to be a narrative purpose that works, and which relates to the music. (I couldn't help comparing this with the limited dance vocabulary of Matthew Bourne, who certainly DOES have the show-business virtues -- or the aimlessness and arbitrariness of the steps, often not really bound to music or story, of Val Caniparoli's otherwise well-told "Lady of the Camellias" or even his more successful "Othello.")
The result of this kind of work seems to include (a) emotional satisfaction (not just admiration at the movement) and (b) lingering and pleasing memories. That is precisely what so much contemporary choreography -- lacking the human dimension; involving endless and seamless movement, so much of it acrobatic -- cannot provide. To me, at least.