the philosophy of movement
A friend, V, sent me a link to this video. Don’t know much about it other than it is #@$@!! cool. Can’t imagine how much work it took. How many hours and gallons of white paint. What pigments did they use? Interesting obsession with heads opening up. How much was set beforehand and how much did the idea evolve as the film was made?
[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/993998 w=400&h=300]
MUTO a wall-painted animation by BLU from blu on Vimeo.
Thought of a way to classify dance companies into classical, modern, post-modern:
Classical – named after a place -> Ballet Russes, American Ballet Theater
modern – named after a person -> Martha Graham Dance Company, Paul Taylor Dance Company
post modern – named after anything else -> Lower Left, Body Cartography
Is this true for every case? No, but I think there is some truth to it. Takes us back to the question of what defines classical, modern or po mo. Is it the tool, the aesthetic or the logic? See picture below for relationship. Much work done now is still modern in terms of logic but the tools are different than the tools of traditional modern. Maybe that is what contempory work is – modern/classical logic with post modern tools.
The other day, K and I were near Counterpulse in SF. Parked in a side street off Mission between 9th and 10th, one that functions a bedroom and bathroom for some of the denizens of SOMA. On the sidewalk next to where we parked, lay a pink pair of underwear and black sweats. From the arrangement of the clothes, it looked as if they had been worn and taken off in haste. There was no bare bottomed individual in sight, so either she ( I am assuming she because the underwear is pink, but in SF you can never tell) ran away bare bottomed or put on another pair or pants. Not being in the market for used pink underwear and sweats I let sleeping dogs lie, or sitting pants lay or…
The next day we parked on that street again. The sweats were gone, but the panties still there.
Here are some photos and a videoclip of a performance installation K and I did on Monday the 21st of April, 2008. It took us over 14 hrs of set up time. Blowing up balloons took a lot longer than I had imagined. Especially when you only have one hand pump. I bought a second one to use in the last few hours before the piece ran. The location of the performance was the San Francisco Arts Commission Gallery @ 155 Grove Street. I was asked by the group Kunsole to do something there. One of the members of Kunsole, Roddy, created a sound piece he played during our performance. He places mikes in contact with the tape wall to pick up the sounds of the balloons, which were integrated into his score. The music was then piped out to the sidewalk.
Initially I purchased 2500 balloons online, but they arrived a day late, so I had to find enough balloons in town to do the piece. Turns out I had more than enough. The limiting factor was time. And because time was limited, we had to limit the space that we could fill with balloons. Further evidence of how time and space are inextricably linked. Next time, and I hope to do this or a version of it again, we will use an electric air pump.
Popping balloons is a very satisfying sensation!
The clip above is from the noir film “The Damned Don’t Cry” starring Joan Crawford. It’s an okay flick, kept waiting for the titular line, but it never came. The clip above is from the end of the movie when the shit hits the fan. The bad guy kills the other bad guy. There’s a great roll and flip over a staircase.
Who says parkour started in France?
read it here
Yahoo! really has it wrong this time. Well maybe not for the first nine movies, but to call 2001 one of the most historically wrong films ever is just plain wrong. It was not made as historic fiction. It was filmed in 1968, a film about the future. To then evaluate this film on the basis of whether or not it was good historical fiction is not only unfair but silly. Who is the nincompoop who compiled that list? Yes, the future did not happen as Clarke, rest his soul, envisioned it. But he had nothing but his imagination to create his idea of the future. All those other films about the PAST were made after the events happened. The directors etc. could have done a little more research.
This is just further evidence of how stupid Yahoo! can be.
First thing I have welded in a while. Overall I am happy with the design. Some of the welds are kind of manky as I haven’t welded in a while and not used to the welder. Not many settings on it. For some reason I like figuring out something to make with spare parts, more than making something with parts I have specifically chosen for that project. Maybe that is the improviser in me.
I find what this guy to be doing pretty amazing, though I do not like the song.
This is something I wrote to Rita Feliciano, a dance critic in the Bay Area, about my upcoming show, Sentimental Pussyfooting – a study in plagiarism. She was wondering how the show fits into the concept of dance.
“This work fits right into dance. In this show, I am
using works by Yoko Ono, Trisha Brown, John Cage, Jess
Curtis and Paul Taylor as points of departure.
The idea behind the show is to use structures that
have been created by and are attached to specific
artists and re-use/reclaim/re-examine them. The way I
see it dance, or most dance, has the same structure.
Lights go on, music and movement start. It’s
essentially the same skeleton every time. Whether
it’s ODC or Scott Wells, the skeleton is the same.
Just the meat around the bones has changed. The
costumes are different, the music is different etc.
But still essentially the same piece. Or is it?
The piece by Yoko Ono that I will be examining is her
“Cut Piece”. First done in ’64, she sits on stage and
audience members come on stage and cut her clothing.
In my show I will do this piece again. I will sit on
stage, audience members will come on stage and cut off
my clothes. Some people will say that I am doing
Ono’s piece again. But am I? The scissors are
different, the clothes, the audience, the location,
the pathways cut into the clothing will be different.
If ODC and Scott Wells are different pieces then Ono’s
piece and mine are different. In both cases, the
costumes are different. The people executing the
movements are different. The pathways of the bodies
and scissors are different. The lighting is
different. The soundscore is different. Yet the
skeleton remains the same.
People are more likely to say that I am repeating
Ono’s piece because it is a different enough of a
skeleton from the basic dance skeleton. No one says
to ODC or Paul Taylor – “Oh lights, movement, and
music…that is So and So’s piece” Why not? Because
that skeleton is from time immemorial. And most dance
I see is just repeating the same skeleton over and
over again. And dance is so rich because we keep
investigating the same skeleton over and over again.
Where would dance be if people stopped making dances
to music because that had already been done?
By keeping certain structures identified with certain
artists, the collective artistic investigation is
limited. By saying – Oh we can’t do that because that
is So and So’s piece – we cut ourselves off from so
many possibilties. Every piece in this show that I am
relating to, I consider a door that was created when
the pieces were originally made, a door for us to walk
through. Those artists pointed us in new directions.
It is up to us to continue in those directions and
continue their investigations.”