The issue of ‘heritage’ for contemporary dance has become relevant as the repertoire grows – but what work should and shouldn’t be included in the canon?
Heritage only used to be a concern for the big ballet companies such as the Royal Ballet, which has long had to navigate a balance between maintaining their repertory of 19th and 20th-century classics and commissioning new works. But as contemporary dance acquires more and more of its own history, and as more of those works are filmed and notated for posterity, it’s become an issue for this sector too. An art form that was born out of an Oedipal opposition to the past, that was once all about making it new, now has to confront the issue of its own growing legacy.
Rambert, which started as a ballet company in 1926 before switching to contemporary dance, is in possession of an especially large and complex back catalogue. And recently it hosted a panel to discuss the issues that raises. Should Rambert opt to junk or preserve its past repertory of works? And if the latter, how does it ensure that choreography created for the bodies and sensibilities of a previous century remains relevant to audiences today?
The response to these issues turned out to be vehement and varied, when the panel met last month. One of the seven members was independent choreographer and dancer Ben Duke, who argued strongly that the past should – mostly – be left in the past. Duke started his stage career as an actor, and was attracted to dance precisely because it seemed to him an art form “of the present moment”, each work of choreography fundamentally defined by the dancers on which it was been made. A dance, in contrast to a book, a film or a painting, cannot ever be exactly reproduced or preserved, and it’s that slipperiness, that resistance “to being turned into a product”, that Duke cherishes. Even though he was prepared to admit that one of his own great experiences in the theatre was watching a revival of Pina Bausch’s Rite of Spring (choreographed in 1975), that was a rare exception. Normally, Duke does not seek out performances of past works, and he never thinks about whether his own will survive. The word “heritage” actually makes him think of crumbling castles... Keep reading on The Guardian
Heritage only used to be a concern for the big ballet companies such as the Royal Ballet, which has long had to navigate a balance between maintaining their repertory of 19th and 20th-century classics and commissioning new works. But as contemporary dance acquires more and more of its own history, and as more of those works are filmed and notated for posterity, it’s become an issue for this sector too. An art form that was born out of an Oedipal opposition to the past, that was once all about making it new, now has to confront the issue of its own growing legacy.
Rambert, which started as a ballet company in 1926 before switching to contemporary dance, is in possession of an especially large and complex back catalogue. And recently it hosted a panel to discuss the issues that raises. Should Rambert opt to junk or preserve its past repertory of works? And if the latter, how does it ensure that choreography created for the bodies and sensibilities of a previous century remains relevant to audiences today?
The response to these issues turned out to be vehement and varied, when the panel met last month. One of the seven members was independent choreographer and dancer Ben Duke, who argued strongly that the past should – mostly – be left in the past. Duke started his stage career as an actor, and was attracted to dance precisely because it seemed to him an art form “of the present moment”, each work of choreography fundamentally defined by the dancers on which it was been made. A dance, in contrast to a book, a film or a painting, cannot ever be exactly reproduced or preserved, and it’s that slipperiness, that resistance “to being turned into a product”, that Duke cherishes. Even though he was prepared to admit that one of his own great experiences in the theatre was watching a revival of Pina Bausch’s Rite of Spring (choreographed in 1975), that was a rare exception. Normally, Duke does not seek out performances of past works, and he never thinks about whether his own will survive. The word “heritage” actually makes him think of crumbling castles... Keep reading on The Guardian