HomeMagazineListingsUpdateLinksContexts





Merce Cunningham Dance Company

‘Fluid Canvas’, ‘Interscape’

September 2002
London, Barbican

by Bruce Marriott


'Fluid Canvas' reviews

'Interscape' reviews

recent Cunningham reviews

more Bruce Marriott reviews




What to say about Merce Cunningham and his 60 years of creating dance? A legend who has a technique and style of class named after him, somebody who broke moulds and is renowned world wide in the dance establishment. And more immediately a charming disarmingly smiley old man of 82 who, supported by a stick, walks out with his latest company of dancers to take a bow at the end of the show. Goodness knows how many he must have seen come and go since he created his first piece in 1942.

At the end of the evening many stood for the legend - still out there living his dream his way and apparently pleasing a theatre full of people. One can do nothing but respect his achievements but for myself I struggled with the now and what we saw at the Barbican. You'll have to bear with me - I can't put the works in the context of years of seeing Cunningham - only judge it as a night out for somebody who loves dance and ballet.

There were two pieces, in both of which the movement seemed unexceptional, lacklustre and flat. There was no breathtaking beauty nor unusual positions of individual or groups. Mainly fit people moving their limbs in not too exceptional ways. There were occasional moments of great stillness that cheered or at least registered but overall nothing went anywhere or looked harmonious or deliberately inharmonious. Rather bland I suppose.

Given it's a dance company you'd expect the movement to lead but much of the time I found myself following the backdrops which in Fluid Canvas (a world premiere) was computer-generated and, by some margin, provided the best viewing of the evening. It takes a while to sort out what is happening before you see fingers 'dancing' in space defined only by a few spots of light. Bodies emerge and there is much morphing and developing of images. It's pleasant - enthralling at times even - but as the electronic score drums away in the background and the dancers caper below you realise nothing is together or supports anything else. A weird case of the sum of the parts being less then the individual contributions. Is it intended? Does it even matter?

In Interscape the John Cage music could either be performed by an orchestra of 108 or by a solo cello. Doubtless a coin was flipped and sadly 107 musicians sighed as their little earner on tour went out the window! The cello was a fractured affair with long rests while the dancer sailed on unconnected. In fact I'm sure you could have done a mix and match of any of the designs with any of the music and any of the movement and the resultant pieces would have the same impact.

Cunningham comes over as the dance equivalent of modern jazz - if you get it it's just the greatest thing. You're part of an in-crowd who understand and see while all around are the blind and un-bothering who should look further to see the light. But most folks don't enjoy modern jazz and see it as an irrelevance and blind alley. Everybody should see the Cunningham legend and a man who helped free up dance from earlier strictures, but it doesn't follow that what he does (now) will necessarily impress the wider community or even the wider community of dance lovers. But long may he do it for those he does it for.


{top} Home Magazine Listings Update Links Contexts
...nov02/bm_rev_cunningham_0902.htm revised: 12 September 2002
Bruce Marriott email, © all rights reserved, all wrongs denied. credits
written by Bruce Marriott © email design by RED56