Dance Review (Derek)

IU Dance Theatre 85^th anniversary celebration gala was held November 4 and featured four pieces: Esplanade, Rite of Summer, Straight Duet, and Nascimento Novo.

Choreographed by Paul Taylor in 1975 and performed to violin concertos by Bach, Esplanade consisted of four distinct parts, each with a different feel. The first part was dominated by bright colors and a light atmosphere generated by the playfulness of the dancers’ geometric movements. Particularly notable was Miss Lalah Hazelwood’s smiling exuberance, which set the tone for the piece. The dancers engaged in domino tag, touch-falling and rising, leaping into the air, and I could not help smiling in pleasure at the joy they exhibited. One of my favorite moments was when they moved in circles and spirals, expanding and contracting, occasionally exploding outward like a starburst. The second part of Esplanade was more serious, reflected in the more somber music, lighting changes, and movements of the dancers. Four dancers stood off center, two taller (a man and a woman) and two shorter (two women), which made me think of a family. Miss Hazelwood was again a key dancer in the piece, seeming to float around the other three members of the family unit, hands pressed to one thigh as though signaling some injury, yet ignored by them as evidenced by their non-response to her movements and her hand waving. The end of this part was the most poignant, with the mother figure extending her arms with hands clasped, pleading and crying, before sinking to the floor as the lighting faded and the ensemble dancers crawled ever closer, circling around and enveloping her as the lights went out. The sadness of this part was cast off in part three, which began with bright lights, quick cheerful music, and more exuberant running and smiling dancers criss-crossing the stage. There was again the sense of playfulness exhibited in what might have been a game of tag. I was struck by the image of one of the male dancers running across the stage, taking long strides with his chest thrust out, smiling broadly; watching him, I felt the joy of unencumbered movement, of running freely through the warm grass in an open park.  As the final pair of dancers met in a leap caught deftly on the left of the stage, another pair of dancers entered from the right, mirroring the pair exiting to the left. This transition marked the beginning of the final part of Esplanade. This was marked by a great deal of physicality between dancers. I particularly enjoyed the twin rolling, which reminded me of wrestling.

The second piece of the evening was Rite of Summer, choreographed by William Evans in 2005 for the Bellingham Dance Gallery. The dancers in this piece were all female. One wore a green slip while the other six or seven wore white dresses. On the far left front of the stage was a white pedestal with a basket of rose petals on top. I felt like the girls in white were spirits or represented the inner emotions of the girl in green. As they danced they often kept their eyes on the girl in green. Overall this piece was very emotional, with the dancers convulsing and twitching with pained expressions, arms outstretched grasping, yet restrained or pulled back by some invisible force. I was really impressed by the controlled body movements and poses that they struck, many of which were quite difficult; for example, they did many lunges and deep squats, which I’ve done in karate, wrestling, and yoga, so I could sympathize with them as they struggled with trembling limbs to maintain their poses. Toward the end of the piece, the girl in green lay on the ground in a near fetal position, and the lighting turned red. The movements of the girls in white became jerky, their arms pushing out in pain and longing, perhaps fighting their desire for the basket, but eventually giving into that desire. They lifted the girl in green and gave the basket to her. She sprinkled flower petals on the girls one-by-one, and then dumped the remainder on the final girl. Each girl upon whom the petals fell sunk to the floor twitching.

The third piece was titled Straight Duet, and it was choreographed by Larry Keigwin and Nicole Wolcott in 2003. Miss Lalah Hazelwood returned to perform in this number opposite Joe Musiel. Both dancers wore plain white sports underwear, and the only prop was a queen size mattress. At the start of the piece, Miss Hazelwood tipped the mattress flat and flopped onto it in invitation, but Mr. Musiel’s character declined to join her, which prompted laughs from the audience. The entire piece seemed to chart the evolution of a relationship, progressing from happy flirtation to angry argument, with several ups and downs in between. I had a lot of admiration for their athleticism, for several of the movements required a great deal of strength to perform, including leaps, catches, and “tension” holds (where one person supports another at an odd angle). The movements of the dancers mimicked changes in relationships, with moments of tenderness, support, tension, and opposition. At the end of the piece, after Mr. Musiel’s character held the wrists of Miss Hazelwood’s character and shook her arms, they went round in circles pushing to spin the mattress before finally Miss Hazelwood had enough, up-ending the mattress into Mr. Musiel’s face, metaphorically slamming the door, which she then turned her back on and stalked resolutely chin-up off the stage.

The fourth and final piece of the evening was titled Nascimento Novo, and was choreographed by David Parsons in 2006 and set to the music of Milton Nascimento. The ten dancers in this number were dressed in white tops and brown bottoms. They performed a hopping dance step with their arms raised and lowered. This reminded me of a dance step that I use sometimes when dancing to techno. At one point they were in a half circle, and took turns leaping into the middle to dance solo. The final song had some English lyrics, “gathering together”, and featured rhythmic clapping by the dancers, which made me want to clap along with them. My companion felt this fourth piece was her favorite, but clearly tastes will vary. I liked it but enjoyed the others more, perhaps because this piece reminded me of going to a dance club. As I exited the building, a man of possibly South Asian origin commented to his family that the music seemed like a fusion of Eastern and Western styles. I also felt that way because of the instrument sounds I heard. Perhaps some of the arm, wrist and hand movements were meant to be evocative of non-Western dance styles, too; however, I am not sure if that’s actually the case.

Richard III Casebook [Sara]: I saw good strawberries in your garden there I do beseech you send for some of them...

I began my inquiry into Richard III with Hasting's Strawberries in Act III, Scene IV.

GLOUCESTER

My noble lords and cousins all, good morrow.

I have been long a sleeper; but, I hope,

My absence doth neglect no great designs,

Which by my presence might have been concluded.

BUCKINGHAM

Had not you come upon your cue, my lord

William Lord Hastings had pronounced your part,--

I mean, your voice,--for crowning of the king.

GLOUCESTER

Than my Lord Hastings no man might be bolder;

His lordship knows me well, and loves me well.

HASTINGS

I thank your grace.

GLOUCESTER

My lord of Ely!

BISHOP OF ELY

My lord?

GLOUCESTER

When I was last in Holborn,

I saw good strawberries in your garden there

I do beseech you send for some of them.

BISHOP OF ELY

Marry, and will, my lord, with all my heart.

 Exit

GLOUCESTER

Cousin of Buckingham, a word with you.

Drawing him aside

Catesby hath sounded Hastings in our business,

And finds the testy gentleman so hot,

As he will lose his head ere give consent

His master's son, as worshipful as he terms it,

Shall lose the royalty of England's throne.

BUCKINGHAM

Withdraw you hence, my lord, I'll follow you.

Exit GLOUCESTER, BUCKINGHAM following

DERBY

We have not yet set down this day of triumph.

To-morrow, in mine opinion, is too sudden;

For I myself am not so well provided

As else I would be, were the day prolong'd.

Re-enter BISHOP OF ELY

BISHOP OF ELY

Where is my lord protector? I have sent for these

strawberries.

HASTINGS

His grace looks cheerfully and smooth to-day;

There's some conceit or other likes him well,

When he doth bid good morrow with such a spirit.

I think there's never a man in Christendom

That can less hide his love or hate than he;

For by his face straight shall you know his heart.

DERBY

What of his heart perceive you in his face

By any likelihood he show'd to-day?

HASTINGS

Marry, that with no man here he is offended;

For, were he, he had shown it in his looks.

DERBY

I pray God he be not, I say.

Re-enter GLOUCESTER and BUCKINGHAM

GLOUCESTER

I pray you all, tell me what they deserve

That do conspire my death with devilish plots

Of damned witchcraft, and that have prevail'd

Upon my body with their hellish charms?

HASTINGS

The tender love I bear your grace, my lord,

Makes me most forward in this noble presence

To doom the offenders, whatsoever they be

I say, my lord, they have deserved death.

GLOUCESTER

Then be your eyes the witness of this ill:

See how I am bewitch'd; behold mine arm

Is, like a blasted sapling, wither'd up:

And this is Edward's wife, that monstrous witch,

Consorted with that harlot strumpet Shore,

That by their witchcraft thus have marked me. (3.4)

I have puzzled over this seeming non-sequitor since first re-reading Richard this year, and my interest was again piqued when I noted that the moment was cut from IU Theatre's production. It seems such a funny thing to request--a bowl of strawberries--a medieval symbol of peace and prosperity--after just announcing in a previous scene that Hastings is essentially a dead man walking if he should refuse to disenfranchise the young princes:

BUCKINGHAM

Now, my lord, what shall we do, if we perceive

Lord Hastings will not yield to our complots?

GLOUCESTER

Chop off his head, man; somewhat we will do:

And, look, when I am king, claim thou of me

The earldom of Hereford, and the moveables

Whereof the king my brother stood possess’d. (3.1)  

And then moments later, his fate is sealed when Buckingham's fears are confirmed:

CATESBY

It is a reeling world, indeed, my lord;

And I believe twill never stand upright

Til Richard wear the garland of the realm.

HASTINGS

How! wear the garland! dost thou mean the crown?

CATESBY

Ay, my good lord.

HASTINGS

I'll have this crown of mine cut from my shoulders

Ere I will see the crown so foul misplaced.

But canst thou guess that he doth aim at it? (3.2)

Scraps from a Shakespeare character card from Richard III., c. 1890; "Scraps became extremely popular in Victorian England to be cut out by adults or children and stuck into albums, on to screens, or used for decorating greetings cards. This scrap is one of a series depicting Shakespearean characters played by popular actors. Edmund Kean first starred in Richard III at London's Drury Lane Theatre, 12 February 1814."

Looking for clues to riddle out this moment, I stumbled upon a letter to the editor written by Dr. J. Swift Joly in the in the British Medical Journal from 2 Jun1956 that puzzled over the same moment:

Presenting an "Unfinish'd" Richard III (Whitney)

This image has been on my mind since I was first introduced to it during a recent Renaissance Department lecture on early anatomy books. In doing initial research for our assigned dramaturgical work on Richard III, I kept returning to Richard’s deformity and the way the deformity has been staged and could be staged. Kelly’s post moves through each of the words and phrases Richard’s uses to articulate his deformity during his opening soliloquy, helpfully tracking the various opening references and proving a great springboard for my concepts.  Some of this opening language, specifically the lines “deform’d, unfinish’d, sent before my time/ into this breathing world, scarce half made up,” compelled me to return to this image (1.1.20-1). After initially trying to ignore the insistence of this image in my mind – simply because, like probably many of you, I find it chilling and difficult to analyze – I found myself starting to shape a concept of Richard built around the this image and the idea of a child and a man “unfinish’d.”

Richard III is most often portrayed as evil incarnate. Similar to Iago’s “motiveless malignity,” Richard is often staged as unnecessarily cruel and inherently evil, a tyrant who commits acts of terror and cruelty for, it seems, no reason at all. But, after watching the end of Henry VI, Part 3 (which, I’m ashamed to say I haven’t read) and hearing Richard’s lines after he kills Henry VI, I started wondering about his motives. Richard III is, in fact, not at all without motives (as Ellen pointed out in our recent class discussion). He has witnessed immense trauma in the deaths of his family members and has consistently been categorized as inferior because of his physical deformity. If every person’s gaze directed at Richard has been laden with disgust, pity, or horror, isn’t there room here for a certain amount of self-loathing and its potential results? Self-loathing and shame, as we see in other Shakespeare plays (Othello, for instance), can turn into rage directed outward. I would like to offer this reading as a possibility for a portrayal of Richard III that is not purely evil.

As a way into this reading, I offer this image. This image manages to be repulsive and beautiful. It displays a fetus at almost full term, but also suggests the possibility for further development. In other words, this child could be “unfinish’d” or “scarce half made up.” The possibility is what interests me. The tension between an “unfinish’d” body and it’s alternative – presumably “finish’d” or in some way more completely whole. I would like to suggest the possibility that this same tension can exist within Richard’s character. The tension between repulsion and beauty, between incompleteness and wholeness, between de-formation and formation. There is, obviously, much evidence in the play Richard III to support the common staging of Richard as evil incarnate. But even a play that depicts a character in such a way is limited by the constraints of itself. In other words, there is always the possibility that Richard was not always evil incarnate, and a Richard III that took into consideration a different set of motives for Richard – motives that are, perhaps, outside the constraints of this single play – could potentially stage a much more complicated and compelling figure.

*Image taken from The Anatomy of the Human Gravid Uterus, William Hunter, 1774.

Richard III Casebook (Justin): Head Gear

Prior to Richard’s dream in Act V, Scene 3 in which he is visited by the ghosts of his various victims, Richard prepares himself for the approaching battle of the next day, ensuring that his armor and weaponry have been laid out for the impending conflict. The protective gear and arms referred to by Richard are a rather curious missed opportunity on the part of IU’s production. The biker motif chosen for this Richard III yields few concrete opportunities for pairing Shakespeare’s text with contemporary items deemed ‘bikeresque,’ yet Richard’s pre-dream statements concerning his personal protective gear clearly present such a moment.
   


Image 1 - Knight's Helmet

At lines 53-54 (Folger edition), Richard asks, “What, is my beaver easier than it was, / and all my armor laid into my tent?” The term ‘beaver’ in this instance refers to the visor on a helmet (see image 1). Richard is soon assured that his head protection and “all things” [his other pieces of armor] “are in readiness” (line 55). At this moment, why not make use of the modern protective equivalent for a biker – a motorcycle helmet? Add some metal adornments, such as a spike or two, and suddenly it will become a ‘war motorcycle helmet’ (see image 2).

Image 2 - Motorcycle Helmet (sans spikes)

This simple prop achieves several duties at once: (1) it makes the term ‘beaver’ somewhat intelligible to a modern audience [making the audience ‘feel smart’ is always a bonus – they tend to judge productions more favorably when their egos are stroked]; (2) the conceptual selection for a ‘biker’ world becomes more relevant as choices that serve the story are implemented – beyond providing a reasonable way of ‘labeling’ the characters with their names and affiliations, the biker concept now helps to tell the story of the approaching battle and Richard’s involvement in it; (3) the protective gear serves as a sign for what Richard is prepared for [hand-to-hand combat], but also highlights what he is incapable of protecting himself from [the ghostly visitors he encounters in his dream].  One simple prop has made Shakespeare’s text more comprehensible to a modern audience, further grounded the production in its chosen world, and helped advance the story.  

RIII casebook: RIII as Corporate Psychopath (Derek)

RIII casebook: RIII as Corporate Psychopath

Derek DiMatteo, 2012.10.22

“Corporations are people, my friend.” – Mitt Romney

“Since the late 18th century American legal decision that the business corporation organizational model is legally a person, it has become a dominant economic, political and social force around the globe. This film takes an in-depth psychological examination of the organization model through various case studies. What the study illustrates is that in its behaviour, this type of ‘person’ typically acts like a dangerously destructive psychopath without conscience. Furthermore, we see the profound threat this psychopath has for our world and our future, but also how the people with courage, intelligence and determination can do to stop it.” –  Kenneth Chisholm, synopsis of The Corporation film; source: imdb.com

Over the past several years the US has experienced the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Bad behavior in the halls of corporate financial institutions (Enron, AIG, Lehman Bros), and in corporations generally (GM failure, BP oil spill), have created a climate in which the public might welcome a play that addresses these issues in a critical way and which works to affirm the need for ethics and social justice within the corporate world. RIII is a play that decries the lust for power and argues for the ethical wielding of that power for the greater good. Framing RIII in such a broad way would allow for us to set the play in the modern world of corporate misbehavior, intrigue, and psychopathology. Doing so could enable a radical critique of corporations, and hopefully raise awareness about corporate citizenship.

We start by reconceiving the action of the play as occurring within a corporate structure. Instead of The War of the Roses, we get an internal power-play between the rival factions of a company or between two subsidiaries of a large conglomerate, where the York subsidiary is getting dominated by Lancaster subsidiary, but plots its ascendancy. The main characters of the play become executives and managers within the conglomerate. For example, Richard would be an executive in the York subsidiary who wants to become CEO of the conglomerate. To do so, he has to eliminate rival executives who are in favor ahead of him in the eyes of the Board of Directors, or who otherwise stand in his way. He does through various means, including framing one of them for industrial espionage (i.e. treason) or becoming allies with them (the character of Anne, an executive who reluctantly allies herself with Richard for self-preservation). Finally, the board elects him CEO. He is autocratic and a bit of a psychopath. He embodies the corporation and its ethos.

The final battle would be in a board room or in a shareholder’s meeting where the two sides would verbally spar and a vote would be taken. If this is not dramatic enough to sell tickets, then we could do the scene with some of the physical violence that Shakespeare used. For example, CEO Richard draws a knife and runs at his rival Richmond, who defends himself by redirecting the CEO out the 30^th story window using Aikido, symbolizing that it is Richard’s own self/momentum that proves his undoing.

But let’s back up.

The night before the final battle, CEO Richard has a dream. In it he is accosted by all the other executives and employees he exploited and killed. The dream should also contain a rebuke from families or people in a community whose lives were ruined as a result of his actions or his deceit (e.g., their water was poisoned, they got cancer from toxic waste, they were displaced, he fired all of them from a factory for unionizing). The final group of people should turn into a mob in his nightmare and start to move in on him, encircling him with hands outstretched, moaning, trying to grab his clothes, as he sinks (the imagery evokes both zombie films and drowning in an ocean). He awakes in a cold sweat, terrified. He is mentally unhinged, and has his nearly schizophrenic soliloquy, which illustrates the corporation’s refusal to acknowledge its own soulless conscienceless nature, even when confronted by it (as in the dream). The profit principle / imperative of shareholder value provide the mechanism for repressing any sense of soul or conscience.

CEO Richard’s embodiment of the corporate ethic would be psychopathic, while his arch-rival Richmond’s embodiment would be eco-friendly, ethical, and social-justice aware. Richmond comes from the Mexican unit of the Lancaster subsidiary. He is a handsome and charismatic leader who understands his workers, approves of workers’ unions, and does good work within the community because he believes that a corporation needs to be socially aware and a good local (and global) citizen. However, CEO Richard disparages Richmond and the Mexican employees of that branch of the company in his oration to his army (i.e. the executive support team which is going to the board meeting with him) on the morning of the final battle. His rhetoric in this brief speech is a continuation of his larger pattern of classism, racism, and exploitative behavior.

The hope is that the audience would see Richard’s psychpathology and understand that if corporations are people, they need to be held to the same standards as actual real people. They need a soul and a conscience.