Re: pantha

Jeff Miller (
Tue, 25 Aug 1998 08:09:12 -0500

>My two pfennigs' worth on this interesting discussion. I think there
>is a simple test:
>(1) Block your ears and watch the performance.
>(2) Close your eyes and listen to the performance.
>If the performance is not just technological blah blah both
>of these should please. The dance/stage performance and the
>music should each convince in their own right. Just an
>extension of the old trick of turning the sound down on the
>TV or closing your eyes and listening to a music video (usually
>very disappointing).

I don't know that I agree with this. I'm interested in the gestalt, and my
work reflects it--the music, visuals, and movement are interdependent, not
intended for exclusive viewing. If they are intended to be pleasing in
their own right, then why not be a musician or a mime? These are
legitimate art forms that focus the attention. I'm not interested in
separating elements; I want to combine different things and see if the
whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. This reminds me of a
reviewer who commented that the projected images in my piece were
"distracting". Distracting from what? Themselves? They were meant to
draw the eye, not to serve as a set behind the dancers. If he just wanted
to look at the dancers, then he'd be missing most of the piece...


"Our entire culture has been sucked into the black hole of computation,
an utterly frenetic process of virtual planned obsolescence. But you
know---that process needn't be unexamined or frenetic. We can examine
that process whenever we like, and the frantic pace is entirely our own
fault. What's our big hurry anyway?"

- writer Bruce Sterling