Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Mats Ek retiring his works from performance


Recommended Posts

Mats Ek has decided to retire at age 70, and the French press is reporting that he will also withdraw all his works from active performance.

http://www.francemusique.fr/actu-musicale/une-derniere-danse-pour-le-choregraphe-mats-ek-118387

http://www.lefigaro.fr/musique/2016/01/05/03006-20160105ARTFIG00175-mats-ek-le-choc-des-adieux.php

http://www.parismatch.com/Culture/Spectacles/Chroregraphie-La-derniere-danse-de-Mats-Ek-890115

A farewell program will be performed in Paris starting tomorrow, including a final work created for his wife, Ana Laguna.

http://www.theatrechampselysees.fr/en/the-season/dance/from-black-to-blue-1

Link to comment

This seems to be a trend -- Kylian withdrew his works from NDT when he finally retired from the ensemble, though I think it was only supposed to be for a fixed period of time.

Post-modern choreographer Laura Dean has been taking work back for several years. And then there's the quandry that is Cunningham.

Link to comment

I think the Dean repertory is dead at this point.

In his year end 'Best Of,' Alastair Macaculay enthused about how much Cunningham he had seen in 2015. But I had the opposite reaction to his list. Given how long Cunningham was active and how he is still mentioned as one of the greatest of all choreographers, the retreat of his works from active performance has been remarkably swift since his death, which was only 6 years ago. I read about a lot of Cunningham activities connected to museums and exhibits but that only underlines my sense that Cunningham's works, at least in the United States, are museum pieces. The two great centers for actual performance now appear to be France and Los Angeles (with Benjamin Millepied's LA Dance Project.)

On a side note, the Ririe-Woodbury company will be performing the works of Alwin Nikolais at the Joyce from February 9-14.

Link to comment

Yes but, tell me if I’m wrong, I had understood Kylian withdrew his works to NDT for some special reasons but not to the other companies (and Lyon Ballet still performs them as well as Cunningham) while Mats Ek doen’t want his works to be performed anymore at all.

My memory from press reports at the time is that Kylian thought NDT had become too dependent on him as a choreographer and needed to nurture new talent. So he threw them into the deep end by withdrawing permission for a year for his own works.

Fortunately, most of the important Kylian works are available on DVD. I hope other choreographers withdrawing their works first make archival tapes for the sake of dance history. I can understand why they don't trust others to stage their works appropriately, but they "owe" history authoritative records of their work.

Link to comment

I think the Dean repertory is dead at this point.

... I read about a lot of Cunningham activities connected to museums and exhibits but that only underlines my sense that Cunningham's works, at least in the United States, are museum pieces. The two great centers for actual performance now appear to be France and Los Angeles (with Benjamin Millepied's LA Dance Project.)

On a side note, the Ririe-Woodbury company will be performing the works of Alwin Nikolais at the Joyce from February 9-14.

I know a couple people from the Dean company that are still trying to keep the aesthetic in the mix, hoping that LD will withdraw her embargo -- I hate to think of it as dead.

I agree about the shift in mode for the Cunningham rep -- it's a topic of study now, rather than a living part of the broader repertory.

I wish I could get to NYC for the Nikolais programming -- please go and report back to us!

Link to comment

Kylian pulled his works from Nederlands Dans Theater, and only them, for 3 or 4 years in order to encourage new choreography. I believe the moratorium will end in 2018. Of course we don't yet know what the ultimate fate of his works will be after his death. I hate this trend of withdrawing repertoire permanently, so I hope he doesn't join it. Balanchine was well aware that performances of his works would change after his death. Certainly he saw how performances of Petipa changed, for better or worse, during his lifetime, but he thought it was a risk worth taking. Why, why, why does the dance world, almost uniquely, treat repertoire as something disposable?

It's possible that once Ek's works enter the public domain someone may try to revive them, but wouldn't it be better to keep the "oral" tradition of passing them on alive and active rather than trying to re-create them in a vacuum? The last Ek piece I saw live was his Sleeping Beauty, and as it happens it's not my favorite in his output, so I'm certainly unhappy about the prospect of never seeing any of his works ever again.

Link to comment
I know a couple people from the Dean company that are still trying to keep the aesthetic in the mix, hoping that LD will withdraw her embargo -- I hate to think of it as dead.

In her 1975 review of Laura Dean's Drumming (set to Steve Reich's composition of the same name), Arlene Croce deduced that Dean was of a, "severe turn of mind." I think Croce was right and I think you're seeing it with Laura Dean pulling the plug on her own work. The lady's not for turning, I'm afraid.

I agree about the shift in mode for the Cunningham rep -- it's a topic of study now, rather than a living part of the broader repertory.

While Cunningham was alive, I thought that support for his works was a mile wide and an inch deep. Again, to quote Croce, "it all begins to sift down" eventually. She was talking about the Graham repertory but her words apply just as much to the Cunningham repertory since his death. At least in the United States, the last six years have revealed that there's not a huge appetite for his works among audiences or company directors. And since there is no longer a Cunningham company, the Cunningham repertory must depend on the kindnesses of certain acolytes and fans -- Robert Swinston in France and Benjamin Millepied in Los Angeles (and, perhaps, at the Opera next season.)

I wish I could get to NYC for the Nikolais programming -- please go and report back to us!

Hahaha -- I would love to but I broke the bank going to the Limon Festival at the Joyce in October!

I liked the Nikolais pieces I saw the Ririe-Woodbury company peform back in 2007 (!), especially Tensile Involvement. But a later -- and much longer -- piece from 1968, Tent, nearly sent me over the edge it was so overlong and boring.

I hate this trend of withdrawing repertoire permanently, so I hope he doesn't join it.

I have mixed feelings about this. I hate the vainglorious attitude of a Cunningham or a Dean that says "the works are nothing without me" so there won't be a successor company or even performances of repertory. But then I think of Martha Graham and her repertory and I truly do believe they are nothing without her. And then I switch gears again in my mind and I'm glad a Graham successor company still exists so I can formulate an opinion in my mind of what they might have looked like with Graham in them.

Link to comment
While Cunningham was alive, I thought that support for his works was a mile wide and an inch deep. Again, to quote Croce, "it all begins to sift down" eventually. She was talking about the Graham repertory but her words apply just as much to the Cunningham repertory since his death. At least in the United States, the last six years have revealed that there's not a huge appetite for his works among audiences or company directors. And since there is no longer a Cunningham company, the Cunningham repertory must depend on the kindnesses of certain acolytes and fans -- Robert Swinston in France and Benjamin Millepied in Los Angeles (and, perhaps, at the Opera next season.)

I'll keep my fingers crossed for Cunningham (and for Dean too) -- the work is too distinctive and significant to lose.

I liked the Nikolais pieces I saw the Ririe-Woodbury company peform back in 2007 (!), especially Tensile Involvement.

Oh, I love this work. I hate to think of his repertory being represented by just one piece, but if I had to choose, this would likely be it.

I have mixed feelings about this. (withdrawing repertory - sk added) I hate the vainglorious attitude of a Cunningham or a Dean that says "the works are nothing without me" so there won't be a successor company or even performances of repertory. But then I think of Martha Graham and her repertory and I truly do believe they are nothing without her. And then I switch gears again in my mind and I'm glad a Graham successor company still exists so I can formulate an opinion in my mind of what they might have looked like with Graham in them.

Yes. Do I love the way that Graham has sometimes been performed? (or Humphrey or Limon, for that matter) No. But take it out of the picture altogether, and we'll never get another chance to get it right.

Link to comment

I'm still not sure it follows that we would be better off without a Graham company and without performances of her works.

I suspect the problem goes beyond Graham's absence to a bigger breakdown of modern dance training. A few years ago I saw a performance by a west-coast modern dance company and was astonished that the fundamentals of modern dance technique seemed to elude the dancers. A little later I observed a workshop on the east coast aimed at reviving some classic choreography from a few generations past, and afterward the woman who had taught morning class, an old-school Graham teacher, privately expressed her dismay at the poor technical standards of the participating dancers. Luke Jennings has written about similar problems in the U.K., so the problem isn't limited to North America. http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2015/jul/12/contemporary-dance-debate-shechter-khan-newson-laban-students-training I don't think the situation is equally bad at every company and every school, but I have seen enough poor technique on display to make me doubt the feasibility of maintaining the modern dance canon.

Link to comment

Part of the trouble that Jennings is observing comes from the fact that when young dancers are training, they aren't looking to apprentice themselves with one choreographer or one style -- they're encouraged by their curriculum and their community to work broadly. This is a difficulty if you're hoping to see a traditional performance of something like Graham or Limon. Right now Taylor seems to have dancers of the caliber he wants, as do choreographers like Tharp and Pite, and companies like Ailey.

Link to comment

I would split the discussion into two parts: modern dance technical training and performance or theatrical aptitude.

In terms of technical training in the United States, there's always been a difference of opinion about the best way to train modern dancers. When Martha Hill became dean of the Juilliard Dance Division in 1951, she believed that the training should incorporate all of the extant modern techniques (i.e. Graham, Limon) as well as ballet. In her opinion, this would create dancers who were adept at a variety of techniques and, not unreasonably, would have better chances of finding employment. But there were those, like Erick Hawkins, who warned against this because they thought the intermingling of all these techniques would produce dancers that would not be able to create the very distinctive effects that only came from studying one technique. More recently, Bruce Marks has made the same points.

The modern/postmodern/contemporary dancers I see today (in the United States) are monsters of physical ability. But I also feel like many of the dancers I see have a sameness to them. Particularly, the bodies are so stretched from taking ballet classes that the modern aspect gets blanded out, which is fatal for something like Graham.

Another thing to consider is that it may take time for a dancer to fully internalize a modern technique. I've seen the Limon company a lot and one thing I've noticed is that the dancers who have been with the company for, say, ten years or more realize the fall/recovery/suspension aspects of Limon technique so much better than the newer members. It may be the case that it takes dancers a while to truly fall (bwahahaha) into the technique. I don't think that's a training problem or a company class problem. It's just that some things take time.

In terms of theatrical or performance aptitude, I think the rise of postmodernism in general and Merce Cunningham in particular really put a dent in the ability of today's dancers to perform the very dramatic works of yesteryear. I saw two performances of the Graham company in the 00s and I didn't get the sense that anyone had an understanding of what they were dancing let alone trying to attain the dramatic standards of the past. On the other hand, I saw the Limon company perform Carlota in October and that was dramatically sound. So, is there a training problem on the front end? Or does it come down to whoever is running the company??

As far as the Luke Jennings article goes, it does sound like the training at the three conservatories mentioned may have grown muddled:

"A teacher who has worked at all three conservatories tells me that the problems stem from the sidelining of demanding disciplines such as ballet, and the techniques evolved by Martha Graham, Jose Limon and Merce Cunningham, in favour of exercises such as somatic release, which is as much a healing therapy as a performance discipline."

But I don't live in the UK so I can't comment on the accuracy of that.

Link to comment

I would split the discussion into two parts: modern dance technical training and performance or theatrical aptitude.

This is indeed a big kettle of fish, and a topic of much contention in the dance education world.

In terms of technical training in the United States, there's always been a difference of opinion about the best way to train modern dancers. When Martha Hill became dean of the Juilliard Dance Division in 1951, she believed that the training should incorporate all of the extant modern techniques (i.e. Graham, Limon) as well as ballet. In her opinion, this would create dancers who were adept at a variety of techniques and, not unreasonably, would have better chances of finding employment. But there were those, like Erick Hawkins, who warned against this because they thought the intermingling of all these techniques would produce dancers that would not be able to create the very distinctive effects that only came from studying one technique. More recently, Bruce Marks has made the same points.

When Hill took the initiative to insist that Julliard make a place for dance training, I think she probably knew that it would be an alternative to the older, apprenticeship-based model, but I think she also could see the next generation of choreographers who would not necessarily have the resources or the desire to run a school along with a company. But it did, as you and Erik Hawkins (!) point out, begin a sea change in the relationship between a dancer and the dance world. If you're not an apprentice from the start, you're more mobile, but you're also less emotionally invested in a particular choreographer.

(currently reading Megan Pugh's book on American dance -- in her chapter on Paul Taylor she brings up Marcia Siegel's observation that the early moderns often operated in a highly dramatic leadership style, in part because they really couldn't pay anyone very much, so they needed people to bring devotion to the table. Acolytes are compensated in the opportunity to be near their leader, not in money)

I find Bruce Marks' comments a bit ironic, since he used to be referred to as the King of Crossover Dance.

The modern/postmodern/contemporary dancers I see today (in the United States) are monsters of physical ability. But I also feel like many of the dancers I see have a sameness to them. Particularly, the bodies are so stretched from taking ballet classes that the modern aspect gets blanded out, which is fatal for something like Graham.

I'm less disturbed by dancers who have extensive ballet training (though you're right in that it makes for a very different approach to gravity and the floor) than I am by people who train almost exclusively with physical therapy and fitness regimes. It's one thing to use those tools to strengthen and condition, but when they're a substitute for dancing I get worried. I see a great deal of this work in college-level programs, and wonder how people are going to learn to dance if they aren't doing it anywhere other than rehearsal.

Another thing to consider is that it may take time for a dancer to fully internalize a modern technique. I've seen the Limon company a lot and one thing I've noticed is that the dancers who have been with the company for, say, ten years or more realize the fall/recovery/suspension aspects of Limon technique so much better than the newer members. It may be the case that it takes dancers a while to truly fall (bwahahaha) into the technique. I don't think that's a training problem or a company class problem. It's just that some things take time.

And this, I think, is where we agree. Graham's famous dictum is that it takes 10 years to become a dancer. A dancing life is grueling, and shorter than most other professions, but there isn't really a short-cut to deep understanding. You may be on the stage long before the 10 year time clock goes off, but that doesn't mean that you're not still a work in process. We've all see exceptions to this rule, but they are exceptions. Time generally equals experience here, and experience is what makes someone interesting to watch.

In terms of theatrical or performance aptitude, I think the rise of postmodernism in general and Merce Cunningham in particular really put a dent in the ability of today's dancers to perform the very dramatic works of yesteryear. I saw two performances of the Graham company in the 00s and I didn't get the sense that anyone had an understanding of what they were dancing let alone trying to attain the dramatic standards of the past. On the other hand, I saw the Limon company perform Carlota in October and that was dramatically sound. So, is there a training problem on the front end? Or does it come down to whoever is running the company??

You're absolutely right -- aesthetically, Cunningham and his descendents are light-years different than the expressive dance styles of Graham, Humphrey, Limon, etc. There are dancers today who are interested in that material, and pursue those opportunities -- it's not the mainstream style at the moment, but Cunningham was considered a fringe style for a long time as well. I worry about work being lost, yes, but on the whole, we've got more access to more variety than we had even 10 years ago.

As far as the Luke Jennings article goes, it does sound like the training at the three conservatories mentioned may have grown muddled:

"A teacher who has worked at all three conservatories tells me that the problems stem from the sidelining of demanding disciplines such as ballet, and the techniques evolved by Martha Graham, Jose Limon and Merce Cunningham, in favour of exercises such as somatic release, which is as much a healing therapy as a performance discipline."

I spent some time talking with a UK colleague about this, and her observation was that the choreographers who are making the most complaints are the ones who have pretty specific demands for their work, and don't feel they should have to run an apprenticeship for dancers who come out of a college-level program. But that is what many US choreographers currently do -- they offer workshops and other kinds of extended training events to identify and groom young artists, in much the same way that ballet companies have second companies and apprenticeship programs, which we've been discussing elsewhere on this site.

Link to comment
Wasn't Carlota performed by Brenna Monroe-Cook?

Yes, she was the lead in Carlota. (And only the second "Carlota" after Carla Maxwell.)

She's had an interesting career with Limon. She was a company member in the early-to-mid 00s, then took a break to (I believe) pursue a Master's in Fine Arts. But she continued to teach Limon technique at company-sponsored workshops for dancers until she returned to the company as a full-time member in 2014 or 2015. She was extraordinary as Carlota.

Link to comment

She did her masters here in Seattle, at the University of Washington, where she had the chance to perform a number of heritage modern works (I'd have to dig up programs to get specific, but it's a specialty of the performing ensemble in the MFA program) -- she was a real pleasure to watch. I didn't know about the Stodelle connection!

Link to comment

Another story, also filed in the Links section, on the matter of preserving choreography. This one doesn't go into the details of Ek's two-year trial retirement--at which point he may come back, or he may not--but it touches on how other choreographers have dealt with the issue, including Graham, Balanchine, Cunningham, Forsythe and Taylor.

"pro"-preservation Hans van Manen: "It’s important to keep a tradition, a repertoire."

"anti"-preservation Mats Ek: "The memory is in the body. It can only be kept alive as long as people who were part of the original productions are still there, and maybe one generation after that.”

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/27898f0c-b46d-11e5-b147-e5e5bba42e51.html

Link to comment

Phooey about the paywall.

Van Manen when asked about Ek's plan: "Maybe you can tell him not to do it!”

The piece cites Ek's own experience as a rights-holder for the works of Birgit Cullberg. It notes that her works have practically disappeared from performance, but also that Ek "and his siblings have had to deny requests to re-stage some productions for lack of time." :wallbash:

Ek plans to bequeath his own works to his closest collaborators. They could theoretically revive them.

Link to comment

Thanks so much for the synopsis.

For many years, Anna Markard held the rights to her father's Green Table very closely -- like Ek, she did not want to allow reconstructions that she was not personally involved with. But unlike Ek, she was not trying to have a career as a choreographer, so there wasn't the same stress about time.

But it does have a long-term effect on the availability of the work -- if the artist representative doesn't create a chain of humans that can be trusted to stage a dance, they are signing a death warrant on the artwork.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...