|
JUSTIN PECK |
One of the courses I am taking this semester at Columbia is Dance Criticism. It is of particular interest to me, as it is provided an entirely new way of observing and analyzing dance. I am so used to viewing dance, and especially ballet, from a first hand perspective, so it is refreshing to look at it from a new angle. I am learning to pick up on specific subtleties of dance, evaluating the subjectives versus the objectives of art in general, and getting to know the writings of some of the greatest dance critics of the 20th century.
I have a particularly strong interest in the writings of Edwin Denby. He was a true poet, thus causing his analysis and criticism of dance to flow as brilliantly as the execution of Balanchine’s Serenade. Denby was a genuine devotee to the art of dance. He even danced himself for a number of years when he was younger. He was able to combine these keen elements in order to become one of the greatest critics of dance.
Much of the reading for this course is extensive, though very interesting. One aspect of it that especially excites me is that I work with a lot of the dancers that are analyzed and critiqued in my assigned writing (including Merrill Ashley, Kay Mazzo, Peter Martins, etc.). I think its kind of fun to be able to read about people that I know on a personal and professional level. Also, there are several works I have read already that really pick apart ballets that I have had the opportunity to dance. I think that [hopefully] this type of study will not only further educate me on the art of dance, but will also add depth and sophistication to my own dancing and interpretation of choreography in City Ballet’s repertoire.
Those are all the sporadic thoughts I have time for. Back to reading for now…. More to come though!
A semester’s reading in Dance Criticism
DENSE
I called this morning and the woman I spoke with thought the Barnard campus should not be affected at all by the Columbia campus’s closure due to the Iranian president’s talk there. Exciting! I agree with you somewhat about his criticism. I liked his early articles, and sometimes still like others, but there are points where he’s been rather sarcastic and ironic, and while I think a critic must and should be critical, I don’t know how well that particular tone fares for dance criticism. I’m reading Edwin Denby’s book now and he never took that tone. I also notice that Denby is often critical but then says good things as well, so the criticism has a softer edge. He also makes suggestions for improvement rather than just slamming someone. I think perhaps a lot of today’s reviewers are trying to be Pauline Kael (the great film critic) She often had that sarcastic witty ironic thing going and that was a lot of fun for film reviews, but dance is just somehow different… there are a lot of film reviewers all across the country who are going to be chatting about a movie, and movies are a more popular art form, etc. I dunno, there’s a lot to say about this — interesting subject! What is the purpose of criticism? Who’s mainly the audience who reads it? It’s all fun and fascinating to me 
