QUOTE (Treefrog @ May 1 2007, 09:16 AM)

Caught is one of those pieces that I think works beautifully the first time you see it, and not so much after that. This was my second viewing, and I was really looking forward to it. I felt disappointed. I didn't think the timing worked as well this time as the first time I saw it (with Taryn Kaschock). At times the poses looked random, rather than the seamless stop-action they are meant to be.
Hmm. I didn't pick up any marked difference since my last viewing -- I actually had several deja vu-type flashbacks of Davis Robertson, who performed it several years ago. (Despite the fact that Robertson and Gluckman are different body-types, I think they have a similar approach to the solo). At any rate, the first time I saw "Caught" I could only think, "Wow! That's amazing how he can time his leaps to the strobe light like that!" I was wiser when I saw them perform it a couple of years later, having read that it's the DANCER who holds the switch for the strobe. It's still a remarkable feat, and while watching it Sunday I found myself conjecturing how Gluckman was moving in the darkness. Obviously, he was moving deftly and mightily. What a cardio-workout (does the audience have any idea?)!
By the way, I miss Taryn Kaschock to this day! That lady had real spunk!
QUOTE
I am particularly interested to hear how you were moved by Untitled.
It may have just been a personal reaction, but seeing how the themes of sexuality, childbirth, and motherhood were translated into the dance somehow struck me to the core. I saw these young ladies -- Victorian ladies at that -- dealing with bodies that were suddenly alien to them, while putting on airs of being in complete control. (And the fact that they were Victorian emphasized the naivete/innocence). There was awkwardness, uncertainty, even denial. How were they to adjust? When they "absorbed" those testosterone-laden suitors, they found their feet going in the opposite direction! Would life ever return to normal? Ultimately they managed to adapt and carry on, but with sacrifice, using their own inner strength (and possibly some old-fashioned female camaraderie).
QUOTE
My attention was drawn solely by the trickery and balance/counterbalance aspects. This is now raising an interesting question in my mind: when does gimmickry/gadgetry enhance choreography or enable a dance to transcend ordinary bounds; when does it thrill in its own right; and when is it simply distracting?
I think that gimmicks/gadgets can be more of a distraction. Fortunately for me, the fact that I attended a dress rehearsal helped me get past the distraction so I could focus on the choreography and dancing during the actual performance. So in terms of reacting as a first-time audience member, I'm not a fair judge.
And I would not be happy if all Joffrey programs were along this vein. I do feel cheated when I don't get a good dose of pure dance -- and ballet at that. (For instance, I was glad to see the "Green Table". The Joffrey dancers are tremendous actors and the piece was timely. But coming at the end of a program featuring the fabulous, dynamic and polished dancing in "Les Presages", I left the theater feeling let down. I wish "Les P" had ended the program!).
Anyway, "Light Rain" was a fun program, if a little on the short side, and I do appreciate the breadth of the Joffrey's repertoire. (Maybe there should be a discussion on how "Giselle" snuck in there. Has Joffrey ever done a full-length 19th century ballet, other than "Nutcracker"? Are they going for marketability?)