There began a small investigation here in Kassel about the origin of an idea. Johannes Wieland, Director and Choreographer of the Tanztheater in Kassel built his version of “Le Sacre du Printemps” around seven human-sized tanks, each filled with at least 500 Liters of lukewarm water. The idea stemmed from a piece he created and premiered in New York City (2001) called “Tomorrow;” which has become one of Johannes’ signature works. In our rendition of “Sacre,” water ends up converting the entire opera house stage into a slippery sea comprised of splashed water, buckets full of water and quite literally, hair loads of tossed water.
After our premiere, a writer for the “Süd Deutscher” Newspaper wrote a positive review of the work but inferred that Johannes “copied” a piece by Sasha Waltz, a famous European choreographer whose company is based in Berlin. The reviewer attributed the originality of the tank idea to Ms. Waltz and her work “Dido and Aeneas,” which premiered in 2005. Chronologically, the tanks of water appeared first in Johannes’ “Tomorrow” nearly eight years ago. The writer of the review failed to research Johannes’ repertory and made a false claim based on her performance-going experience.
So, where did the idea of tanks of water on a stage originate? And does it matter? Can ideas really be claimed? It seems to me (and several of my colleagues with whom I’ve spoken much with about this issue) that both choreographers found reason to use the same not-so-commonly-used prop as tools to achieve separate visions. And perhaps tanks of water have been used on stage in several other occasions, perhaps prior to both of the aforementioned pieces.
Which brings me to another issue: the writing of a review. What is going on? I was taught to write as objectively as possible when reviewing performance art, and though I did not go to Journalism school, isn’t the point of it all to educate the public? How can we expect the public to gain an interest in dance if we make assumptions without researching the facts we claim or telling the public what “I” like and “I” think about the work. Thank goodness for blogs…
brian
i love the post! Very interesting. You are on to something. There is no such thing as an “orginal” idea. We all get inspired by whatever stimulous. What matters is how you use the inspiration so that you can apply it with intelligence. A tendu will always be the same but what matters is the context and transitions before and after.
Dec 07, 2007 @ 00:55
lillian
thanks kristen for bringing a dancer’s voice to the debate.
the concept of owning an idea seems linked to consumerism. the need to posess things.
but what do we really own? especially when what we do as dancers is, by its very nature, disappearing?
Dec 07, 2007 @ 14:35
PAT
I think there are two points of interest raised in this blog. One, what is the role of reviewer - inform, opine, enlighten, encourage, report, persuade, compare….? Maybe all these. But when the reviewer seeks to inform/report - there is a journalistic requirement to get the facts right. Who, what, where, when, how much, why (if known) etc. My dad, a journalist of 40 + years taught me that.
When the reviewer is in the “interpretive” realm, trying to encourage, interpret or otherwise opine, he/she is free to use whatever style, example, analogy, “standard” seems appropriate to express whatever he/she got out of the dance - just as the choreographer and dancer(s) try to express whatever they put in / get out of the dance. The beauty of the versatility of the dance form is everyone can get something a little or a lot different from the same experience - dancer, choreographer, audience, reviewer. My daugter, a dancer of 20+ years taught me that.
Dec 15, 2007 @ 13:56
thewinger.com » Belated Update
[...] Johannes Wieland’s Le Sacre Du Printemps [...]
Apr 17, 2008 @ 23:23