Re: money = ability

Darren Kelly (
Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:04:00 +0100 (MET)

On 8 Jan 1998, Nick Rothwell wrote:

> > To exactly which "elevation" are you referring. It can't be money.
> No, it's not.
So do you mean "common" more in the sense of "not exposed to (familiar
with) more exotic or unusual" dance forms ?

> Nor am I generally accusing the practitioners of dance
> of being responsible. What I'm getting at is the following: if (as you
> say) the public at large are so willing to pay large amounts of money
> for trace and techno raves or Rolling Stones concerts, why don't they
> turn out in huge numbers for dance.

And _to_ dance (or move around at least and swill beer and pop pills) too,
not just watch.

> So why is this? It's not a problem with the form per se; if Riverdance
> can get such huge followings, then audiences are obviously happy to
> sit and watch dancers moving around on a stage

I've only seen Riverdance briefly on TV; The musical impact is quite
strong, and perhaps closer to the contemporary and folk music with which
people are familiar.

> Curiously, perhaps (as others have said) the application of technology
> to dance might help here, if we're interested in attracting audiences
> who are used to getting their kicks from broadcast and
> computer-generated media.

This is possibility, but perhaps not the way to go.

I don't have the impression that technological novelty is attractive in a
long term sense; it might get people in for one performance, but the
novelty wears off (as it did with most crappy holographic art, the medium
apparently not yet having brought anyone to tears). Strangely, I suspect
these things wear off more quickly with kids. Remember the story of the
emperor with no clothes ? The adults were too scared to admit he was not
wearing the most beautiful cloak in the world, a child simply said what
was. This remeinds me politicians touring scientific institutes; they are
scared to appear stupid and simply say they think something is a load of
crap. What's worse, they tend to feel "obliged" to fund projects with lots
of lights and machines that go "ping" instead of research achieving
_exactly_ the same thing but with more modest and less visually daunting
means. (The "how dare mortals question the majesty of the church" theme).
Critics, too, are often scared to admit they don't see what is so
fantastic about a new form others find exciting.

This is why I emphasise the importance of, for example, the music _alone_
being "audience worthy". You can trick some fools for a while, but not
for long (of course there are commercial counterexamples).


Darren Kelly | | |
| \ 0 / |
DESY -MPY- (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron) | * o |
Notkestr.85 | - D E S Y - |
22603 Hamburg | o * |
Germany | / O \ |
| | |
phone: +49-40-8998-4569 | |
fax: +49-40-8998-4305 <--Note change | |
e-mail: | |
Amandastr.40a, | HOME |
20357 Hamburg | zu Hause |
phone: +49-40-4322602 | The PLAYhouse |