Flips and Splits and Kicks, Oh My!
Oh my. Oh my. It’s competition time again and I just received promotional information about how buying a certain “acro syllabus” will make my studio and dancers better and more competitive. I know over the course of the last ten years or so the direction of competitive dance has changed. But acro as a requirement for “good” dance? I am stupefied. No annoyed. No stiflingly, annoyed. No, I’m just lost for “clean” adjectives that I can use to express my utter disappointment in where I believe dance has veered off. Especially when it comes to competitive dance.
I believe the current trend of “populism” all over the world has creeped its way in dance. Listening to waves of applause and gasps at hyper-flexible stunts, flips, and contortions has encourage teachers and choreographers to incorporate “acro moves” into all their competition routines. But so often they are out of place, detract from the flow of a piece, and in some cases as attractive as the bug smashed in my radiator. I place most of the blame on “So, You Think You Can Dance”, (thankfully canceled) and “Dance Moms” (please STOP).
I realize that often as we get older we relish the way things used to be. We get resistant to change. We believe that the “old ways” are better. And new ways are heresy. And yes, I am one of those. You see, I fail to see how a “scorpion” or “round-off” could in anyway enhance the value of any dance piece I create. Unless I’m poking fun at cheer-leading.
Sometimes I feel like I’m in the minority when it come to my opinions about dance and how the artistic integrity should be maintained. But after a quick Google, I have discovered a few artists that have the same opinion as me. Yeah!! In an article by Karen Van Ulzen, “The Acro-Invasion” from the Dance Australia web site, she eludes to Dame Monica Mason opinion about acro in dance.
“But until now the two were kept firmly in their own boxes. Dance is an artform and gymnastics is a sport. In fact, the word “acrobatic” or “gymnastic” when applied to choreography is often used as a pejorative. Not so any longer on the amateur competition stages – particularly among young, preteen contestants in the so-called “lyrical” or “free” variations. There gymnastics and dance seem to be merging. To the dismay of many, “acro” – in the form of leg mounts, back flips, somersaults and cartwheels, handstands with oversplit legs – is taking the place of the usual pirouettes and arabesques, all to the roars of appreciation from the audience. At this year’s Genee, run by that bastion of classical ballet, the Royal Academy of Dance, Dame Monica Mason was moved to complain that there had been far too much floor work, too much gymnastics and acrobatics and too many split legs.”
On the other hand, some will say that dance in the various versions of Cirque du Soleil is artistic and esthetic. And I will agree. Some will say that the strength and flexibility stunts of dancers like the Nicolas Brothers is artistic. And I will agree. And some will say the unusual combinations that we saw from the League of Extraordinary Dancers and those that are inspired by them is very esthetic and art worthy. And I will also agree. Buuut. As I have complained about before, if acro moves are permitted in all the categories in dance competitions. Why is there an “acro dance” category? Then again why have any distinction between any forms of dance in a competitive setting, if anything is allowed in any category.
Dance in the competitive arena is so subjective. I realize that it is difficult for judges and adjudicators to separate personal bias as they sit in judgement over hundreds of dance routines. So, it is imperative that each style is clearly defined as to what is allowed and what is not allow in each category. That way a routine can be fairly judged on performance and technique not performance, technique and “#%£&$!” stunts.
Let me step out on a limb and propose something. Because, it is difficult, for an adjudicator, to penalize a dancer for the mistakes of a teacher or choreographer. Why not judge the dancer on what they are presenting, how well they perform, the technique used, etc. as is usually done? Then as a separate mark, not affecting the dancers score, mark the creator of the routine. Then an adjudicator could address issues like, age appropriate music and costuming, “political correctness”, stage usage, and whether the “freaking” round-off should have been part of that tap dance!! Perhaps if a dancer is scoring in the 90’s but the choreographer is scoring in low 80’s an attitude adjustment may come. And if the choreographer awards or recognitions were hinged on these marks—those that love to “WIN” might be more motivated to stick within the category boundaries. And, heaven forbid, that we must be creative to make our routines more noticeable.
Paul Malek, the artistic director of Transit Dance & Origins Dance Company in Melbourne has noticed another problem from focusing on acro stunts rather than basics of dance.
“I have auditioned a lot of dancers over the last seven years, and in these auditions, everyone is so capable of flipping, or kicking their face or jumping in second,” he says. “But the majority cannot draw their foot up their leg through retire with accurate articulation when you ask them to developpe to second. When they are learning choreography, they struggle to pick up any movement that is foreign to them and connect them with fluid and seamless transitions. This is extremely concerning when you think: where they will go on and dance as a professional if they are missing basic elements that are the base standard in the global professional dance industry?”
So, it looks like I will be putting my dancers at a disadvantage again. And I will have to live with the fact that their routines will not make the audience ooh and awe. But one of my routines got this comment “that was the most interesting and enjoyable routine all afternoon…Thank you”. And that I can live with. And, oh yeah, there was not a flip, “nose kick”, or walk over for 4 minutes. What?!?