Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

Modern Dance Company Survival Rates Since the 70s


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#16 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,835 posts

Posted 19 January 2015 - 08:35 PM

"I find it interesting that three of the four surviving companies from the Dance Posters list are associated with techniques than can be methodically taught: Graham (Martha Graham Company), (Lester) Horton (Alvin Ailey Company) and Humphrey-Limon (Limon Company).  " ~ Miliosr

Is it because they cultivated techiques or because they built up an institution (in the form of a school) and that institution perpetuated the company?

#17 sandik

sandik

    Diamonds Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,088 posts

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:31 AM

Not all the same.  Graham was reluctant to develop anything like a codified technique -- she wanted to dance, and so she made material on herself.  And when she wanted to dance in a group, she taught herself to other people.  There are still aspects of the technique that are only done to one side, because those elements are only performed to one side in the repertory.  The school gave her a home base -- the company members were the ones that really took on the tasks of teaching.

 

Of all the people you mention, Humphrey was really the one that wanted to create a singular, independent dance technique.  She loved to dance, and loved to make dances, but she was a methodical soul, and put an amazing amount of effort into the development of the technique, thinking about it particularly as an alternative to ballet.  She (and Weidman) spent an incredible amount of time teaching, first with Denishawn, and then with their own studio.  I think that her (relatively) early retirement from performing really helped focus her work on others.

 

Horton's school was more ad hoc, but as I understand it, he developed his technique separate from his choreographic life.  But it was the consistent take-away that Ailey and others carried with them from LA to NYC -- they didn't really restage his repertory, but they did continue to practice the style.



#18 miliosr

miliosr

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,680 posts

Posted 25 January 2015 - 02:40 PM

I think of Limon technique as evolving in three separate stages:

 

  • The first stage, in which Doris Humphrey and (to a lesser extent) Charles Weidman, used the Humphrey-Weidman company as a laboratory to develop the primary building blocks of the technique: fall, recovery and suspension.  This was also the stage in which Humphrey developed the whole notion of breath rhythm.
  • The second stage, in which Jose Limon, through his teachings and repertory, extended the technique further by adding the notions of isolations and "the body as an orchestra".
  • The final stage, in which the first generation of Limon dancers began teaching and, in the process, honing the technique.  Betty Jones, who was the original Desdemona in The Moor's Pavane and who teaches to this very day, was instrumental in this regard as she became very concerned that the technique harmonize with sound anatomical ideas.


#19 sandik

sandik

    Diamonds Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,088 posts

Posted 25 January 2015 - 03:00 PM

Interesting -- I generally think of Limon in two eras. When Humphrey was still offering him direct advice, and after her death. But yes, by the time a technique has developed to the point that it's taught by people other than the creator, it's become more codified.

#20 miliosr

miliosr

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,680 posts

Posted 25 January 2015 - 04:28 PM

Oh, I absolutely think of Limon as two eras (in terms of the company and his repertory) while he was alive -- with Humphrey and without her.  In fact, you can almost divide the company timeline perfectly into halves -- 1946-1959 (w/ Humphrey) and 1959-1972 (without her).  The second half proved problematic for Limon because, for the first time, he couldn't rely on Humphrey for advice about which pieces to make and no longer had her critical eye in the studio.  He had a fairly high number of flops in the immediate aftermath of her death (say, 1959-1963) which, unfortunately for Limon, coincided with the rise of post-modernism in dance.  He would right the ship somewhat in the mid-60s with A Choreographic Offering, The Winged and Psalm but even these were judged as being much too long.  (The Limon company now performs A Choreographic Offering in suite form and they've reconstituted The Winged and Psalm by lopping off half their lengths.)



#21 miliosr

miliosr

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,680 posts

Posted 16 February 2015 - 08:23 AM

Interesting article in The New Yorker about modern dance preservation and succession:

 

http://www.newyorker...taylor?mbid=rss



#22 Stage Right

Stage Right

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 06:12 AM

There's now a Facebook page devoted to Louis Falco and his now-defunct company:

 

https://www.facebook...lcodancecompany

 

Perfect example of how perishable dances are and how a repertory can disappear.

 

Louis Falco! Now there's a name I haven't heard for a long time! I took some classes with him at one time, and although I was a ballet dancer, I really loved the movement.

 

Also, does anyone know why Laura Dean no longer allows her work to be performed?



#23 sandik

sandik

    Diamonds Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,088 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 09:34 AM

Interesting article in The New Yorker about modern dance preservation and succession:
 
http://www.newyorker...taylor?mbid=rss


This is an excellent synopsis of the current situation and the difficulties surrounding these heritage repertories.

I'm very curious to see how the Taylor company navigates this transition. I'm glad that they're doing this while Taylor is still making work on a regular basis -- I think that will give them some extra traction.

#24 miliosr

miliosr

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,680 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:51 PM

Also, does anyone know why Laura Dean no longer allows her work to be performed?

 

I don't know . . . but that won't keep me from speculating!

 

Arlene Croce wrote a wonderful piece about Laura Dean (and post-modern dance more generally) in 1975 titled "Going in Circles".  (It's probably my favorite Croce piece.)  In any event, Croce noticed an austere quality in Dean's work and, suggestively, in Dean herself.  Perhaps Dean's eradication of her own repertory is the final manifestation of this austere personality.

 

Alternately, Dean may have concluded that the post-modern dance was never meant to become entrenched as repertory or technique in the way that the "classical" modern dance of Alvin Ailey, Martha Graham and Jose Limon has become.  Maybe she felt that the post-modern dance was meant to be ephemeral and transient.

 

Or maybe she just said, "The Hell with it!"




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):