

home
| art & architecture | books & cds | dance
| destinations | film | opera | television | theater | archives
.
.
Dancemaker (1998)![]() |
|
|
| Suggested reading: The Vision of Modern Dance: In the Words of Its Creators (1998), Jean Morrison Brown (Editor) Private Domain: An Autobiography (1999), Paul Taylor Choreographing Difference: The Body and Identity in Contemporary Dance (1997), Ann Cooper
|
..
.Dancemaker is destined to be required watching for anyone with an
interest in modern dance. Its chronicle of the Paul Taylor Dance Company is, despite a few
bothersome aspects, a well made, eminently watchable and enjoyable documentary, using
standard techniques - new and archival footage, talking heads. That it is so well done
makes its principal failure, though not a fatal one, annoying. While the film does allow
some of the warts and a bit of controversy onto the screen, it is, nonetheless, so totally
worshipful of Taylor that it takes on the tone of propaganda.
At least a couple of
times we are treated to the claim that Taylor is the greatest choreographer of
modern dance. Why is such an absolute assertion necessary? It immediately raises questions
in the viewers mind. What about Taylor's teacher, Martha Graham? And is Mark Morris
chopped liver? Isn't it good enough to be one of the greatest, without laying claim
(and opening a meaningless argument) to being number one? Once the claim is made,
too, it puts the filmmaker on the spot to prove it in his film, an impossible task.
Now that that is off
our chest... The portrait presented is of a great creative artist, in a collaborative art,
who has built a company around himself to serve that art. Particularly interesting are
scenes where Taylor works individually with one or another of the dancers, creating the
dance through interaction with the dancer, changing and developing the movements. One of
the dancers says that Taylor "creates a dance on you": the dancer for
Taylor is like a musical instrument for a composer, with the key difference, of course,
that the dancer is a living person, not just, say, wood and catgut.
If, on the one hand,
the company exists as the expression of the art of its choreographer, it is also a
community of people and attention is paid in the film to the bonds amongst the dancers,
Taylor, and all the others involved. At the same time it is an autocratic community, with
Taylor having total authority; the term "father" comes up more than once. When
Taylor brusquely fires dancers who no longer are serving his purpose, the dysfunctional
aspects of such a family are revealed and, indeed, the entire "family" metaphor
comes into question. Families, after all, are about staying together, not ejecting the
less-than-perfect.
The film is full of
wonderful dancing. The opening shots from the wings of Esplanade convey some of the
astounding energy of this dance - leaping, twirling, rolling dancers with
their heavy breathing fully audible on the sound track. The Herculean physical demands
made of the dancers' bodies is a running theme in the film, including some cataloguing of
how their bodies are truly abused in the process. Ah, what we do for art!
There is a
remarkable piece of film of the dance Aureole, a segment for solo male dancer.
Archival clips of Taylor himself dancing the part are intercut with clips of current
dancer Patrick Corbin doing the same dance. Not only is it fascinating to compare the
performances, but the viewer can literally see the historical continuity, the steps
of the dance being passed from generation to generation. This brilliant bit of editing
alone would justify the entire film. Unfortunately, it is tarnished when, at its ending,
cutting short that lovely moment of conclusion, the soundtrack blares out a ringing
telephone and there is a quick cut to the next scene. Aesthetically poor choice here.
There is another
wonderful scene of the company dancing at a gala performance in India when the sound
system goes down. While the camera shows the technicians dealing with the crisis
backstage, we can see from the wings that the dancers continue dancing and don't miss a
beat.
The shots of Last
Look are annoying. The idea was to show the dance from the dancers' point of view.
While the success of that communication is questionable, the screen picture is cutting off
heads and feet and jerking all over the place. A lot of self conscious camera work and
editing, but no way to watch a dance.
The film notes, as a
complete portrait would need do, losses to AIDS, and Taylor's Musical Offering, a
requiem piece. Taylor speaks of his overriding theme - a "sense of romance, of
possible love, in face of the realities of people and experience." And later he says,
"The law of nature - we move on, we separate."
- Arthur Lazere
.