LET’S THINK ABOUT OUR FUTURE.
About a week ago my boyfriend and I were listening to a podcast about a female restaurant owner in East Village, NYC. She talked a lot about her financial struggles both before and after the pandemic outbreak, but she also vocalized another thought: the deterioration of her reasoning for existence. Like many other restaurateurs of NYC, she had seen the city change and sculpt itself differently over the course of 20 years in business. Although she had much success to the outside eye (several James Beard awards, etc.) business was OK, which led her to wonder, “Did NYC actually need her restaurant to exist anymore?” Between the change in food culture, a new breed of clientele, the rise of BRUNCH...she felt like she didn’t connect with this new evolving industry world. .
That night, I had a thought.
“Dance culture” is in the very similar predicament. Maybe we should take this time to really think about the future of our craft…
If dance is truly a “generous art form” that gives to its audiences, then why aren’t more people flocking to go see it?
Dance entertainment can be inspiring and uplifting…even semi-magical to the viewer. It has the power to change perspective and touch people in intimate ways. Sure, but you and I both know, dance doesn’t always do that. Dance doesn’t always “give.” Even I have fallen into the trap of addressing ego before addressing the actual audience. (More on “ego” and this conversation below)
Is the potential dance audience weakened by a general lack of exposure to the arts?
People often say they “don’t know what to expect” out of a dance performance, yet we can’t “tell them” what they will get out of an individualized experience. It would be bold to do so. Everyone forms different relationships and reactions to unique works; which only makes the act of enticing people to experience dance, more difficult.
Sure, live art isn’t accessible in every community, but we have the internet. Dance, especially, is ALL over the internet: in movies, music videos, instagram accounts, streaming platform, the list goes on! Perhaps it’s just general disinterest in seeing it live? If people can get a free dance performance on their couch, then why should they venture out to a theater? Which leads me to the next question…
Maybe tickets are too high and people can’t afford it?
I can’t condone this argument. People will shell out hundreds of dollars for concerts. I’ve witnessed plenty of friends, who are scraping by financially, buy expensive tickets to concerts. What makes the idea of attending a concert, infectious? Welp. Concerts have an energy, a vibe, a community, a social aspect. It’s an exclusive experience that touches people with sound and atmosphere. It’s an escape.
Is dance regarded too frequently as an elevated art or a weird art?
I think, yes.
Ever have a friend say they just didn’t “get it” after watching a piece?
We know as artists that there is actually nothing to “get” and that the act of simply watching is enough, but this idea can quite misleading to the average person. Your friend didn’t find anything to grab hold on-to. They were not able to develop a connection to the performance, so instead they waked away with a sense of alienation. How much longer can we alienate our paying audiences? Watching, as a dancer, I love work that I know is made for someone like me. I think there is a sacred place for art, specifically made for other artists. I think it elevates the field, but it is often intimidating to someone outside the field.
(Previously I was commenting more-so on the work that claims to “do all the things” in performance: “engages the audience, connects with the community, entertains and inspires”….but instead only makes a small dent in its endeavors.)
Can we sustainably exist on the same large scale we do now and in forward into the future? Probably, not.
The professional dance pool is only growing and getting larger with every single year. The field has blown up, commercially and in concert performance. More people are going to school than EVER before.
We can say it’s working and we are thriving, but project based stipends can’t even cover rent for the month and the majority of large shows wouldn’t exist without grants. What are we doing wrong? Is the cost of production simply too high? Is our dance audience spread too thin among our own community?
This system we have cultivated for ourselves already had holes in it, and the gaps are only getting bigger. We need to adapt for survival.
What is our angle, what is our reason that people MUST attend?
Think of your recent or current endeavors.
Can you answer that in some shape or form other than “I think” or “I believe” or “We’ve all been working hard on this” ?
If the answer is no...does the work really NEED to exist?
Surprisingly, we aren’t asked as artists to evaluate this notion. We are told to make because we can, and show when we are given the opportunity. We may be coached along the way to make the work more cohesive, digestible, etc...however, I was NEVER told in school to evaluate whether or not the work needs to exist. (And I think that is because it is a learning process, right?) Performance is a useful platform for makers to present and re-evaluate, because the act of making choreography is a learned skill. I am all for both of these things, but I still think perhaps even BEFORE the process begins, we should evaluate the importance.
I am asking that you look into your own life and wonder if all the performance opportunities you have been part were ego forward or community driven?
I certainly fall into this trap. I like to make and I like to show the things that I have made for feedback and for my own personal growth. And see, both of those reasons only go back to me. A lot of makers are the same. Dance is often a selfish art in training and process: of course the catch is that in performance you must be selfless to translate well to an audience. Yet even if the integrity is selfless, oftentimes the actual choreography is rooted in ego and therefore less is received.
I don’t mean ego as a BAD thing either. Ego driven art is concerned more about the performance of the thing for one’s own journey than the audience. Maybe the audience attaches onto it...maybe they don’t.
Which brings up another problem, how can we tell who was affected by a performance and who wasn’t? In other words, who is to say that ego driven art doesn’t touch others. It’s often based around some aspect of the human experience. Plus, the experience of witnessing beautiful, athletic movement on its own, is enough to produce a profound effect on people. Yes, sometimes we can rely on this because we HAVE relied on this. Yet the dance world has evolved, the neighborhood is now different, and the clientele have also changed. Does the world want, need, crave, the same recycled performance experiences we are giving them? More importantly, will the world want the same recycled performance experience after this pandemic?
I believe that reinstating community as
the core focus of dance performance
will save us.
I’m not advocating for people to stop making art, maybe just to adopt more empathetic mindsets.
This may seem harsh, but it may actually save the dance world. Why are we giving people ego-driven dance when they aren’t asking for it? I think the quick answer is that dance is quite rooted in its’ own traditions. We like to maintain prestige, we like to show off, we like to do all these things. Is that giving people anything right now, though?
I do believe that everyone who wants to share dance should be able to, as a means of expression and freedom of artistic speech. SHARE is the key word here and maybe that’s what I have a problem with. I don’t always believe people share for the most honest reasons…or more-so when they do, it’s just not effective.