The dance community will come together tonight for the seemingly controversial 4th annual Sage Awards. I have had the pleasure of being a part of the Sages in many permutations. The first year, I wasn’t really paying attention. I was under a rock. The second year, I attended the festivities at the bidding of my colleague, Kristin Van Loon, who invited me to pre-Sage cocktails (Who in their right mind would pass up a drink and eat spread anyway?) The third year, I was on the Sage Award panel, I performed in the show and I actually was awarded, which really meant something to me, but that’s another story. This year, in exchange for a ticket, I am blogging about the Sages. I really wanted to volunteer in some way, as I did last year. (For the 07 party at the Ritz, I picked up and delivered nearly 100 loaves of bread and 10 butter cream frosted cakes donated by Wuollet’s Bakery located in some crazy dale-like suburb. It must have cost me 30 dollars in gas just to find the place.)
Before I articulate my own feelings about the Sage awards and ponder its public perception, I feel it necessary to address Camille LeFevre’s critique of the Sages, its nominees, panel and administrators in her piece “DANCE: 2008 Sage Awards (More Insidery Than Ever)” posted on MN Artists.org two days ago. The panel this year, I surmise, took this task seriously. As on any panel, there are compromises and little heartbreaks. I can imagine that some panelists didn’t really connect with any of the work presented this season, and on the other hand, I’m sure for some, the earth shook. And I’m sure there was at least one dead beat, (the person who couldn’t really participate because they didn’t make it to very many shows). One thing that is certain is that a majority of the people on the panel took the time and energy to discuss and share their feelings. And of course, those feelings are based on a subjective notion of what they consider special, earth-moving, intelligent, experimental, and/or plain old, pretty. Words like post-modern don’t enter their heads, I imagine. They are connecting to the work they see and advocate or critique it from their hearts or brains. They site details to back up their position. They don’t use “ post-modern,” or “ modern” as terms to define the work.
Post-modern dance is not a viable category anymore, and is as cliché and undefined and lazy as the moniker modern dance. By using this term, you incite debate about dance history, undermine the earnest efforts of the artists, and in this case, critique the panelists of the Sage Awards in a vague way. I would even venture to say that dance writing in this town, could use a little more straight up academic, scholarly, empirical thinking and research, especially if you are going to use historically heavy terms like Post-Modern. My other piece of advice is… talk to Sage herself about the implications of Post-Modern. She has been in the thick of it with her own work and her work with Bill T Jones/Arnie Zane Company. Did you happen to see Jerome Bel last season? His critique of performance and dance is foregrounded in his work. What is wrong with wanting to reject what is known about our field, and then see what is left in the imprint? Huh? There is a boatload of magic that can come from this earnest pursuit, just as there is magic in the pursuit of crafted, highly formal, choreographed works like my favorite dance of all time, “Rain” by Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker. (Now you can admonish me for using the word “formal” without elaborate definition.) All of these artists I’ve mentioned are alive and still making a wide variety of dances. I guess all of their work (and the work of the Sage nominees for that matter) would fall under the category of Contemporary dance.
On another note, I think it is a disservice to the nominated artists (and the work of the panel) to lump them together in such a reckless way. Yes, Anna Shogren performed in Justin Jones’ work, and was also nominated for a Sage Award. (This is a small town. The dancer/choreographer overlap has been happening everywhere, for years. Look at the illustrious work of Galen Truer. He works for himself, Mad King Thomas, Mathew J’s Arena, Live Action Set, Wil Swanson and probably more. Is this a form of nepotism? or does the boy just like to move? What about Eric Boone or Kristin Van Loon? Both have been self-proclaimed dance sluts.)
Anna’s performing is extraordinary and her artistry is critical, challenging and understated and dare I say, sometimes sarcastic. Her work, “La Brea”, her third major dance production that I know of, is very different than Justin’s “Pinhead.” Jones’s work was chock full of energetic choreography drawn from his personal foray into brotherhood, childhood and coming of age, as well as his personal experience with dancing. The movement may not have been drawn from a modern (I’m thinking Graham or even Cunningham) or ballet (I’m thinking Balanchine) tradition, but it came from a desire to explore something extremely physical and to express it with his body. Why is that so unworthy? Why does that not provoke thought or feeling? Is it because it does not posses the linear verticality, the extensions, or pointed toes of ballet? And lastly, why, as an artist, would you want to be derivative, to do something that has been done so well before, like Cunningham’s abstract, form- based choreography delivered in the structure of chance operations?
I think it’s best for everyone-dancers, choreographers, panelists and critics alike-if we admit that we have preferences and make unexamined assumptions based on those preferences. I remember Camille’s article “Beauty is Back” in the Star Tribune, that applauded the arrival of TU Dance to the stages of Minneapolis. I too am glad they are here. However, with her article, the writing was on the wall. Some people are uncomfortable being challenged. Some people want to sit back and enjoy the ride. Some people want to see beautiful movement. ( I confess that I don’t know what this means.)
As a viewer and critic of dance myself, I want to ask the right questions. I am not in the self-righteous position to ask, “Is this really dance?” That is granted, even if the work is loaded with theatrical devices or behavioral expressions. The artist decides. (It’s kind of like sexuality. If I say I’m gay, then I’m gay. You’re not going to debate it even if I look like a corporate, purse-swinging, pump wearing, black Chanel suite-wearing executive. Sure, I might be able to pass, but believe me I’m still gay.) I also take for granted that the artist has worked hard on their show. If I really want to get something out of the experience, then I ask myself “what is being explored? what can I learn about this dance? what can I learn about the body? how do I feel? and what is their point of view? and what kinds of expressions are they using to get their point across?” Of course, my own personal subjective preference will shape this experience. I will try harder for some artists than for others to sort this out, depending purely on my mood. (The thing I hate most is when I expect a certain kind of work from an artist before I even see their work. If you’re an artist, know that when I come to your show, I work hard to leave this at the door.)
As far as the Sages are concerned, we, the greater community, won’t agree, thankfully. It is evident that some will want “Wreck” to receive a nomination, and maybe others will want “Pamela,” by Emily Johnson, Jessica Cressey and Hannah Kramer to receive an award. What is important, I think, is to acknowledge that all of the people on the panel have had their own ideal candidates and ultimately had to compromise to find a common ground. This process has it’s own flaws, and I believe is continually being shaped and fine-tuned by the panelists themselves. The Sages, like other things in life, are in process. What’s fun about this is that we, the spectators still get to participate–be part of the conversation. We get to make our own lists and see if we align or run astray of the panel’s findings. We can have our own private debates about what we have found to be extraordinary in the field this past year. We can come together and drink and celebrate each other. I think the panelists and administrators have to do the hard work and perhaps bear the brunt of a disgruntled artist/critic or two.
The Sage Awards is not a Minnesota-nice kind of affair. Everyone cannot win. In fact, yes, sometimes, people are nominated twice, (Laura Selle and Olive and Otto of Body Cartography fame). In fact, Anna Shogren was nominated for best Dancer/performer last year. I still say she was robbed. But is it possible, that these artists rose to the top on their own? Why is that out of the question? Why is it a case of nepotism? Laura Selle is one of the best dancers in town. She works with at least 5 companies that I can think of. The girl definitely loves to move and does it well.
I think it is fine to be biased. I think it’s necessary to own it, is all. That’s what makes this town what it is. And that is what propels artists into making work. Let’s be glad that we get to cultivate our own imaginations. Let’s be glad that we have one. It’s funny, when people ask me about Minneapolis as a dance community, I usually say it’s a pretty traditional, straight ahead kind of community, with an underbelly to die for.
I have much more to say about the Sages awards. But I am going to post this now, and leave further ruminations for part II, after this special and deliciously controversial event. Now, it’s time to get dressed. I hope to see you there, in your Chanel suit.
Dearest blog reader,
And if in fact, to sit back and enjoy the ride and watch some great dancing is all you’re looking for; these folks sure are good dancers.
http://www.theway.org/Current/Mar07/Mar07Flash4.htm
MR/MS Durko Lynch
Comment by Mr/Ms Durko Lynch — September 24, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
Oh I am so looking forward to a good discussion on this after tonight…
Comment by Charles Campbell — September 24, 2008 @ 3:57 pm
thanks Morgan for your intelligent writing….i won’t take space to repeat what you have said but underline your writing about the term post modernism and ask the critics to be more accurate and less patronizing. If you’re not interested in looking at and writing about contemporary performance why are you working in the field? Space is valuable.It is important for our all of us in the field of contemporary performance making to understand what is happening not only locally, but nationally and internationally, especially the people who write about these ephemeral forms. We are not here for the money. Critical debate is welcome.
“the change our country needs”
Comment by Olive Bieringa — September 25, 2008 @ 3:35 am
Thank you Morgan for your thoughtful writing. Camille’s article looks very pale in the morning light and I am fully reassured that there are good things that can come from the SAGE Awards and their process. I am proud of the program and fully agree with you that it is in process and changing each year, with the opinions and care of each panel.
As coordinator I experience many rewarding moments and most of the come from the dialogue during panel meetings. This year’s panel had especially different view points and although there may have been some bristling during the first conversations, later on I witnessed some “ aha!” moments and believe that they learned a new appreciation of others perspectives as both artists and audience members. Not everyone attends dance performances hoping to find the same things and that it so important to remember. It helps us make better work and address our audiences in a more thoughtful way.
I feel blessed to sit and listen to such passionate dance community members discuss the work they’ve seen. Learning to express your views clearly is a tool that many find difficult at first, and yet there is clearly a power felt when one has done it well.
I also have rewarding moment on the award presentation nights - -
I had several SAGE nominees approach me that night and talk about how much the community nod meant to them personally - in some cases the first public acknowledgment of their lifetime of work. I watched community members revel in themselves, in each other, and celebrate their gifts and successes. I watched new community members marvel at the swirling room and witness this dance community in its glory.
Until next year, Dana K. Kassel
Comment by dana kassel — September 26, 2008 @ 8:09 am
11 SAGE awards presented
http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_10549431
Comment by Michle Steinwald — September 26, 2008 @ 8:46 am
My greatest respect and admiration go to Ms Kassel and Mr Pimsler for creating this event. And those who serve to ensure its continued rigor and dedication deserve nothing less than our souls.
This is not merely an awards show. The Sage Awards are a prominent aspect of what makes this “local dance community” a bright and vibrant spot in this troubled point in time and place.
Things seem to be falling apart all over. And if you were witness to the stomach-churning commercialism of the recent Ivey Awards, you might think that the art of performance in the Twin Cities has disappeared under the layered self-satisfied plastic of theater-bling. But the very human depth and variety demonstrated at the Sage awards, the obvious fact that the art/work is the motivation and justification and reward, the self-supportive and forward-looking investigations in both pedagogy and in practice, the perfect blend of self-respect, humility, humor, with a healthy disregard for the conventions established by the powers that be, give me hope for something worthwhile surviving the plunge to the lowest common denominator of the bottom line that is all the rage.
It is my hope, both for my own selfish needs and for the good of the whole arts community, that the model and example that the Sage awards recognizes and embodies can help save those aspects of this arts community that are in danger of drowning in their own B.S.
Comment by Charles Campbell — September 26, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
Check out In Defense of the SAGE Dance Awards, by Caroline Palmer
http://blogs.citypages.com/ctg/2008/09/in_defense_of_t.php
Comment by Olive Bieringa — September 28, 2008 @ 4:34 am
I briefly served on the SAGE panel for this year’s awards, however, stepped down in November of last year as I realized that I would be unable carry out my responsibilities due to scheduling conflicts etc. I will add to what the others have said on this thread while trying to avoid repetition.
I’ve known Stuart Pimsler from the community, met him a few times, but only got to have any significant contact with him after he invited me to be on the Panel. So, if it was his intent to have those affiliated with him win awards, as it has been suggested, I would/should not have been invited by him to sit on the panel. In regards to the panelists, I knew some of them before I joined the panel, some I met for the first time. From the few meetings I attended last fall I never got the impression that anyone had any biases toward any particular individuals and all seemed quite professional and were passionate and dedicated towards what was expected of them. I do also want to mention here that the award categories were based on what role an individual is identified by/involved in and not based on any movement vocabularies, theoretical ideologies or aesthetic leanings.
I do want to commend Morgan, Olive, Dana and Caroline for their candor and lucid thoughts in regards to this issue, it is quite refreshing to read such honest opinions especially when so many artists are concerned about getting positive affirmations from critics/peers and would never attempt to say or do anything negative to jeopardize that goal.
I do want to add to what Morgan refers to as the “underbelly” of dance in the twin cities, and say that the underbelly is the “Avant Garde” in dance in the twin cities and these artists from the “underbelly” have already done work internationally and at the bastions of contemporary thought in movement, such as Movement Research and DTW in New York and locally at Bryant Lake Bowl, Patrick’s Cabaret, The Red Eye, The Momentum Series and at other smaller venues and sometimes even at people’s homes and garages. Heck, a past significant revolutionary movement in contemporary dance began in the basement of a church!
I am not a dancer/dance artist/mover nor am I a journalist, however, I have been affiliated with the contemporary dance world long enough to know that Post Modern dance has had its day. It was a catalyst in the evolution, but has ceased to be the contemporary thought in western movement vocabulary. Rejections of forms, for what ever reasons, has long permeated this current thought. So, this misinformed view in regards to “Pomo” dance by Camille LeFevre as contemporary thought in movement is surprising, given the fact that journalists are expected to do “investigative” reporting supported by facts and rigorous research etc etc. However, not surprising in another sense given other similar misinformed views related to dance, such as the local “New Music” community and the American Composers Forum’s outdated take on the relationship between contemporary dance and music/sound. These misinformed views related to dance, I have come to accept as Midwestern provincialism, general myopia and maybe a lack of, we, the dance community not serving as a form of “checks and balances”. These willy nilly, I’ll say what I want to and expect people to believe my actions would not fly in the east or west coast!
In regards to the SAGE awards. If anything, I challenge future panelists to present the award to the best candidate for each specific category, irrespective of how often they have won the award in the past. If Laura Selle wins the same award every year, so be it, because she is damned good at what she does, If Mary Ellen Childs wins the design award every year, so be it, because she is an excellent Composer. Of course this view by me may not be in accordance to the principals of “Minnesota nice” or the practice of “round robin niceness”, but then again I am not Minnesotan.
I have also approached Stuart Pimsler about SAGE Awards setting up a separate award for Dance Music, where the criteria will not only include the situational aspect of composing for a dance performance, [which has been on the rise in the past few years since "Interdisciplinary art" is now getting into the mainstream], but also the intellectual, theoretical and non public aspects of this complex relationship between sound and movement. Then maybe Drew Gordon will win this award, posthumously, for his contributions to dance for the past twenty five years.
In regards to this “six degrees of separation” business, the Kevin Bacon/Stuart Pimsler factor that Caroline touched on, for me, personally, in the past ten years that I have been in the twin cities, I quite often get the “Oh you must work with Ananya [Chatterjea] etc?” well, it must be the color of my skin and my ethnic persuasion, however, to be exact, I don’t do any work in South Asian Art forms and the first time I heard about Ananya was from a friend and former colleague of mine at the Dept. of Dance at SUNY Brockport NY, James Payton, a former Jose Limon Dance Co. soloist and an original cast member of “Missa Brevis”, whose wife Ann Vachon [Currently Director of Limon Institute] was on the faculty at Temple University where Ananya got her Phd. So, it may not always be what one assumes.
Stuart and Dana have done a great service for the local dance community and it should be appreciated and not subjected to juvenile sandbox politics by individuals for whatever reasons. Yes, the system is not perfect, it will get better and we have to be thankful that we have such an awards system where one can get recognized by their peers and colleagues. Will I serve on the panel again? If asked, time permitting, yes and I will act in accordance to upholding the credibility of the local dance community and not act in any way to undermine it.
Hhmmmm…I wonder how many cups of tea I would have had during this final seven hour mtg if I had remained on the SAGE Awards panel …
Manjunan Gnanaratnam.
http://www.manjunan.com
Comment by Manjunan Gnanaratnam — October 3, 2008 @ 8:03 pm