Decreation Indeed

I briefly reviewed "Decreation" in a "Fall Round Up" for Tonya Plank, and I couldn't agree more with Tobi. I am an enormous fan of Forsythe's early work. "Decreation," however, was a loud, cloying, pretentious mess; the only thing worse was the pretentious fools in the audience who applauded every groan, whine and shriek on stage. And how one actually relates what one says to the supposed four (am I remembering correctly?) women whose lives and/or work it referred to--including the Greek Lesbian poet Sappho--is hard to fathom.

The fact that there was barely any movement in a dance (i know -cum theater-cum performance art) didn't seem to bother the former. The only thing I have seen quite so bad of late is MEg Stuart's "Auf den Tisch." There is a French expression "Il ne faut quand meme pas nous prendre pour des imbeciles" Indeed.

Alas (or should it be a sigh of relief?), I did not get to see William Forsythe's "Decreation," which I assume was his collaboration with the poet Ann Carson. Or perhaps this was a different piece. In any case, it seems that more and more artists have to explain their work, which is not the way it used to be. Of course there are dance pieces that benefit from several viewings, but that is a luxury most critics with deadlines and even most audience members cannot afford. Time is a precious commodity nowadays. Unless Mr. Forsythe and other "inscrutables" who resist easy interpretation are willing to engage in "talk backs" at every performance, it sounds as if this particular piece was too just too obscure. Of course, I can't judge, as I didn't see it, but there has to be some kind of visceral or intellectual connection between the artist and the viewer--either immediately or upon reflection; otherwise, what's the point? Julieta Cervantes's photos are excellent and the second image recalls a long-ago production of Peter Brooks's "Carmen" at Lincoln Center, which was very effective in its minimalist staging. I have liked Forsythe's work in the past, so will have to await another opportunity.

Love your writing, Tobi. Please put me on your list for e-alerts. Risa Jaroslow, whom I dance for, recommended your blog.

Thank you for writing, Paul. We have some differences of opinion about responding to a dance and a critic's responsibilities.

I think a dance has to make its case without the help of the choreographer's explaining its relationship to material that is not immediately available to the average viewer. (In other words, I believe that a dance has to stand on its own feet.)

As for a critic's picking up clues from his/her colleagues' reviews, I try not to read them before I've posted my own take on the show.

tt

While I agree that the piece is rather inaccessible (I saw it twice last week), it becomes much more cogent when considered in very direct dialogue with the text (by Anne Carson, bearing the same title--here: http://commonknowledge.dukejournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/8/1/188) that inspired it. During his talk after Thursday night's performance, Forsythe was quite articulate in explaining the relationship--which made my Saturday viewing a much different experience.

Case in point: the final table seen refers to Marguerite Porete's immolation. (Porete was a 14th-century French mystic, from whose writing the "love" variations are taken.)

BAM had credited Carson in its promotional material in the spring but dropped any reference to her essay in subsequent materials. Given how closely linked the two are, such omission seems irresponsible. This information has been cited in other reviews of the piece, so such omission on the part of a critic (in your position) seems equally--perhaps even more--irresponsible.

If Forsythe's work is indeed "empty" and "inexplicable," I would say that it's not art. Though you might not go so far as to conclude that, in remarking that "Decreation" "is not so much a dance as a dance cum postmodern drama cum installation cum performance art cum . . ." (your ellipsis), you at least seem to be saying that it can't be categorized and is certainly not dance. In any case, your remarks are refreshingly candid and most welcome.

Louis Torres, Co-Editor, Aristos (An Online Review of the Arts)

Hm, different strokes for different folks, I guess. I came back to New York almost a year ago from a spell in Europe, where it seemed I could see great works by the likes of Romeo Castellucci and Christophe Marthaler and Mathilde Monnier and Jerome Bel at will, and have struggled to find just two performances in New York that rocked my world like they did. Decreation was one of them. Seen the distraught woman climbing the table before? Well, if this is indeed a conscious reference, then as T.S. Eliot said, immature poets imitate, mature poets steal. And I have no doubt that the import of the woman climbing the table in Forsythe is utterly, utterly different than whatever Bejart came up with.

Forsythe called 'Decreation' his opera. So, for anyone reading who is trying to decide whether to go, my suggestion is that you check your expectations of conventional dance or conventional narrative or conventional anything at the door, be up for an uncategorizable challenge, and make up your own mind on whether you've seen it all before. This is important work.