mariajsanchez-blog1

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Get Krump For Christ?

This is it...the final blog. I mean you guys are probably tired of hearing my historic rants. Here it goes...

This week we focused on krumping, house dancing and we got to have a discussion with Raph.

In the first reading I love how they brought up the concept of the dance circle. In this circle chaos turns to order and there is an opportunity for discussion and interaction with new people. The circle could be an opportunity to fight or dance. It also brings a sense of fullness to a person’s life when in reality their life may not be whole. The dancers get to “build a world within a world”. What I found interesting about the circle within the hip hop culture is it can be a home for two different elements. It can either be a place of combat, artistry or competition. Orrrrrr it can be a religious place to spiritually release oneself. I never noticed how violence and religion go hand in hand. I mean all throughout history, religion does end up to violence because of beliefs. The circle is just not an area to dance, but an area to become human again.

Krumping derived from the hip hop style of Clowning. It became harder and more aggressive. It was still comical in some aspects but most of the time it was aggressive. As a krumper you would confront through more difficult emotions of pain and anger. Play became serious, almost tribal like in the circle. Many times people defended their actins by saying they were “krumping for christ”. In the end the circle also became a “street” sanctuary. Then becoming more of a religious ritual. 

krumping became very commercialized soon after people started to notice it, yet got noticed for its sexual aspects. Sooooo do you think krumping (and other forms) have been over sexualized to be recognized more commercially than by their roots? Why not stick to their history and get discovered for that? Could it be because it is seen as more violent and people may not want to see violence in the media? So many thoughts...

When getting to talk to Raph, it was interesting to hear how he wasn’t interested in hip hop originally. Yet, eventually he found breaking to resinate within him and kept the style and technique even when it went out of trend. He then found his way to Dance Theatre where he got to work with Reni on new projects and productions, where they brought street to the stage. It was crazy to hear about his intense being in a community like that is. yet, it brought a different perspective on the professional side of dance. Raph was right! You have to give it your all no matter what and have your skills on call and executed correctly. Having him talk about humility in the professional world was really eye opening for me because I did not realize the negative consequences in being too humble. You do have to adjust depending on where you are and what are the events around you. Doesn’t mean we always have to be an ass, but sometimes it does call for it. 

I loved how he described hip hop as elegant. The fact that as one matures, so does the stylistic approach. It cannot always be about fighting and being rebellious. You can show new skills in an intense technique while still having some form of maturity behind it. His stylistic is also very much similar to mine, in the sense that he choreographs for himself and if the audience relates to it, brings a whole new level of energy to it. 

I love being able to hear his thoughts on the hip hop industry, especially since I am not very infused with it. Having other thoughts and concepts brought in at the same time I am learning new material allows me to have multiple perspectives. That is a great way to get even more included in a community, is by understanding and acknowledging more than perspective. 

Overall, learning about the history of hip hop has been an experience. I don’t think I will be able to reach that advanced level of movement, but I can admire and respect the history behind everything that has created the umbrella of Hip Hop. 

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Little Bit of Spice and Some Things Nice

Ahahaha I am losing it...actually losing it. It’s fine, everything is fine, WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE JUST FINE!

Anyway: This week went in deeper into the world of hip hop and more specifically in terms of communication, sexuality and a choreographic stand point.

In the Global Communication reading I had to go into, it brought to light just how far hip hop culture has spread. It has spread not only nationally but internationally. Even though it has spread to new areas, the history and integrity behind it has not been lost. I find fascinating that as one of the dance forms that has multiple parts and movements to it, it has been able to keep it all in one form with no manipulation of its true form. Actually, because it is such a solid form it is a true form of communication. People from different ethnicities did not have to communicate verbally with each other to go through the process of hip hop. They could just communicate through their body language and structure. What was also interesting was how Break Dancing was done in an “improvisational circle”. The fact that they did not change the idea or concept of improvisational to fit the aesthetic of hip hop, demonstrates more than one form lives within it. 

Things actually brings me to the last reading that was brought up about Rennie Harris. He was able to incorporate that improvisational, in the moment form of hip and bring it into a choreographic setting. He did not use violence to portray the social issues he introduced in his projects. He used the body, text, sound and visuals to deconstruct those issues and have the audience have a true connection/experience with it. Having those other elements incorporated into that hip hop realm gave it more of a postmodernism vibe with the aesthetic of hip hop. He was able to put these to forms together and make them inseparable. 

Two things that were brought up in the discussion that got my thinking was about the choreographic form. From the reading, Urban Dance is an experience and a social form, not formal. It denounces what tends to control. SO if we take that social improvisational form and put it into a choreographic setting is it still considered social? Is it now social and somehow formal with an experience included? This really all depends on the choreographer and what their stand point in when creating. 

Going off with that concept of violence in hip hop, it has always been something associated with it. Yet, a great point that Ella brought up was, if violence is needed to complete the hip hop form? Can we move past and evolve from violence being depicted in this form of dance? Personally this again can depend on what the choreographer wants to show or announce. The violence can either be demonstrated to show a resolution or show a past, but it does necessarily have to be the objective of the piece. It also does NOT have to be depicted in a vulgar and harsh way. One can show violence without going too far with it. This was a great aspect to bring up in the discussion because it could be something that as artist we can shift people’s perspective of violence in a choreographic standpoint and perhaps in terms of reality.  

Offff that was a lot. My brain has officially become disconnected. Man I wish having these discussions in person with you all!  

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Break Them Bones

Lil Mexican Bean in the houseeeeeeeeee!! (Lol jk, I am an uncooked, flavorless bean right now)

We have officially entered into the Hip Hop arena and mannnnn I feel so unprepared. Let’s just say Hip Hop is not in this dancers vocabulary, but will be there eventually. 

This week we started off with a few readings that brought to my understanding, the various forms and styles of hip hop. We got the Top Rocking, Jerking, Up Rocking, Locking, Popping, Boogaloo and the list goes on!. What is so fascinating, is the fact that each of these styles and movements have different movement qualities and effects, yet all live under that umbrella of the term “Hip Hop”. Even though the movement qualities may be different, the idea and reason behind them are all similar. Hip Hop is an improvisational form of self expression. There is a relationship between the music, dancer and spectators that allows each dancer to demonstrate their own identity and their form of expression. Each dancer’s form of expression is often represented through intense physical movement and a sense of power and strength. They want to make an impact to everyone on who they are and what they can offer. Yet, when it comes to these types of dancing, it is not often done in a traditional sort of way. 

In the Hip Hop world, battling it out is what can separate the amateurs from the professionals. When is a battle, one must show control, restraint and have some knowledge on the OG’s...the B-Boys. A dancer must also embody the 5 earth elements. Fire- The intensity; Earth- Body rolls and footwork; Air- Swipes, flips; water- the flow and consistent motion and Ether- what holds everything together/Rhythm. All of those components assist when going into BATTLE and getting stuff done!

In the last reading we specifically went into detail on Breaking. (Breaking is a style of competitive, acrobatic and pantomimic dancing). What I found interesting about this reading was how is was getting compared to Ballet. Both Breaking and Ballet was a form of technique and vocabulary that can be redefined and expanded. So the fact that both forms have this strong foundation of technique that makes up each form yet, only ONE is viewed as “acceptable”. Both are true forms of expression. For ballet, it is about expressing ones identity through character and immersing/narrating in a story. Breaking is a way to use the body to inscribe their identity on the surface of the city. We should not have to view both forms as separate or one superior to the other. They both break bones!...right?

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

The Show Must Go On...

In our transitioning readings and discussions from Ballet into Hip Hop, we looked into the art of Notations and how they are a crucial part of the dance and music realm. Notations are indicators and accents that are placed on a musical sheet of a dance, that indicate small details and placements that get lost in translation and give a better idea of what the choreographer wanted. The downside of notations are they are different for each choreographer. This means that notations can be interpreted differently by each person who reads them and things could get lost or changed. Even though notations are considered an “’old fashioned” way of capturing and writing down choreography, they are able to communicate movements through a written language. It is a timeless form to capture an art that technology can not always do.

In the last reading we discussed about the Gaga Technique and whether or not “improvisation” is considered a technique. In my opinion, as an artist I feel as if we have sort of lost what that true definition of “technique” is. We have this concept that technique has to be codified and a structured way to do or go about something. When in reality the definition is “to be able to do a certain skill”. We improvise in our daily lives. By either taking one path over another or choosing chocolate over caramel, it is all IMPROVE!! The fact that as dancers we can take that form and incorporate it into our bodies to move in unique ways through space and create new movements is a technique!! So yes...I would 100% say that Improvisation is a technique!

On another note:

I am going to miss seeing all of your beautiful faces in class and having wonderful in person discussions with you! I will miss you all immensely and cannot wait to see you all! Love you all! Thank you Jenn for everything and catch me crying over the computer! 

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

My Brain is Fried Like Well Done Hash Browns

I see the light...We are almost through the long (and what I thought) never-ending tunnel that is the history of ballet. DAMNNNN BOIIIIII that took a while! 

Anyway to “almost��� conclude this section of topic, this week we continued on with Ballet pioneers and more specifically those who brought the rise of “American Ballet”. Balanchine was a big deal. Not just cause his name is cool or whatever, but because of how much he changed and innovated the ballet world. Since, many people did not associate ballet as “American enough” because of its European background, modern dance became a large portion of what ballet is today. Now what is considered “American Ballet”? There really is not a direct answer for that because it can range from person to person or time to time. Yet, for the sake of discussion, it was noted in the reading that “American” ballet was more energetic, and had more forms of athleticism within it. Balanchine was able to incorporate the high energy and athleticism into his works, giving it a phrase of “Classical Ballet with an American Accent”. He decided to challenge the traditional forms of classical ballet, by removing these complicated story plots, reflecting his personal response and evoking moods or personal relationships. These sort of elements, especially the concept of personal response, were unknown is the world of classical ballet. Obviously times have been evolving and so has our cultures, yet why do we still hold ballet as the foundation to all other techniques? Not every dancer is driven or has a passion for ballet, so why must they be looked down upon and have their talent and passion overlooked for their lack of ballet training? (Been questioning that my whole life)

Now the evolution of Ballet not only modified its definition and movements of it, but it started to open doors for people of color. Arthur Mitchell was one of the first’s African American dancers that truly opened up new opportunities for colored dancers. He not only was the first principle male African American dancer for NYC Ballet, but he also created Dance Theatre of Harlem. He created DTH to create a space where African American dancers could train in a better environment. This push lead to Misty Copeland getting the chance to become the first African American principle dancer at American Ballet Theatre. Misty Copeland not only continues to motivate young colored dancers to pursue their passions, but she also uses her platform to promote and shed light on issues still occurring in the dance realm. In the final discussion we brought up the controversial topic Misty Copeland brought up about the Bolshoi Theatre putting on Blackface in there ballet. Now the post about the dancers was quite old and when Misty brought it up, it was almost ignored. Why? This is a huge issue to address especially when being done in a performance setting, yet no one wanted to say anything about. The truth? Race is difficult to talk about PERIOD. Doesn’t matter whether it is in the arts or in general, people do not want to bring it up. In situations like this though, it is important to bring attention to them so that we can start to address these issues properly. 

I wish I could totally just record and paste our live discussions from class because they areeeeee soooooo much better than this trashy blog of mine. I’ll try to cheat the system...

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Chinchilla.

This week we continued our discussion on the history of ballet. 

In the first part of the discussion we dove into one of the most important figure heads of ballet, Diaghilev. Diaghilev made ballet what it is, into a modern art. He also started the careers of other well known pioneers of ballet such as, Michael Fokine, Nijinsky, Nijinska and Pavlova. Fokine’s style of ballet made everything more compact to where it become a one-act ballet, and choreographed plotless/abstract ballets to demonstrate that movement can exist in free narrative structure. Nijinsky on the other hand, emphasized the straight lines, angles and narratives. Many of Nijinsky’s ballets are considered controversial due to the elements in the piece. For example, in Rite of Spring the music by Stravinsky caused the audience to riot and the movement was made up of rituals from prehistoric tribes. Many of his pieces also had sexualized concepts which was something very unheard of or seen in a ballet style. All of these choreographers paved and created their own way of including their own elements into the rigid ballet style. Though it may not seem as much, it formed parts of what ballet is seen as today.

Now..for the interesting part of the week. This Girl Is a FFFFIIIIIRRRREEEEEE BIRD. Not a human nor a bird soooo a Firebird...makes sense. Anyway the topic that was very interesting to me this week was about the three different types of controversial ballets that highly inspired much of what we see in the dance realm today. First off FIREBIRD. Choreographed by Fokine and music by Stravinsky, this ballet is...special per say. It was different than any other ballet because of the change in elements and what was incorporated into it. The movements were very grounded and deep, yet still had that sense of ease and ethereal. To start off, back when this ballet was being created much of Russia believed that a good chunk of their population was Asian so, because of that, Fokine wanted to emphasize the different or split personality of Russia. The Firebird is a powerful female figure that represents the split personality of Russia. Tsarevna, the actual love interest of the story, is seen as pure/true Russian. What was controversial about the ballet was not just the meaning but the elements and layout of it. The Pas de deux is something that usually happens at the climax of the ballet and that happens between two lovers. Yet, in this ballet it occurs right at the beginning between two non-lovers. There was no passion behind the pas de deux, only the struggle for domination. (totally normal) The other interesting thins about the pas, is the fact that Firebird is this powerful entity, yet is struggling to get away from a mortal? The reason for that is actually because she wants the human prince, Ivan, to feel as if he is the dominant figure, when in reality he is just the support. She is able to seduce him into having everything fall the way SHE wants it to. (WHAT A WOMAN!!...sorry not a woman, hybrid creature...) In the end Ivan marries the other woman, Tsarevna, who is the representation of true Russian. This allows for the connection to be made that Ivan, choses his traditional roots over something ethnic and exotic. That balance between earth and Russia has been established once more through man and woman, prince and hybrid creature. 

In the last ballet we discussed, Les Noces, which was slightly different in comparison to the others. Choreographed by Nijinsky and music by...ya guessed it, Stravinsky, this ballet was the most abstract yet, had a clear meaning behind it, discipling sorrow and submission. The movement was very staccato and repetitive and very drama driven. It felt very dark and almost uncomfortable due to the music and use of vocals in the piece. This ballet, though lost throughout the years, is crucial to the ballet world because it demonstrates a concept that not many people are and were comfortable discussing. The liberation and struggle for women before and after wedding. This ballet brought to the surface on how a wedding day could mean a funeral for the bride to be depending on who she marries. It also distinctly brings up the concept of sexual violence from the perspective of the woman and how they are treated by their spouse. We questioned in class, if it was from a males perspective, would it have been a normal happy wedding day? 

After watching Firebird and Les Noces I can definitely see why people had such a negative outlook and feel towards them. At times I could feel and understand what they meant by the “sexual aspects and sensations behind it”. Even the movement choices seem to resemble more of a dark sensual modern feel to it than a balletic presence. The idea of having women as these powerful and focal entities also changed the ball park. Instead of these fairy tale stories where man meets girl and girl marries man, it shows the dark side that women go through and this “other woman” that women CAN BE. They don’t always have to be the damsel, they can be the one manipulating the whole story without anyone knowing. These concepts and elements were very foreign at the time, which in turn changed the style and movement choices in that “classical” ballet style. This highly contributed to the risk and styles that ballet does today. 

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane...No...It’s just a Ballerina

Soooooooooo this week we went into great detail on the Romantic Ballets. (like sheesh I feel about 20 years older. Just kidding...love class Jenn:) ). Yet, for my sanity and yours, I won’t be going into that much detail. 

What we discussed in class were about the components/goals of the Romanticism Ballet. The goal was to challenge the way of thinking/techniques of the traditional sense. Emotion took over logic, so everything was a personal response so political things happening at the time. Romantic Ballets achieved that by having those mystical worlds, complex movements, POINTE, soft movements, white outfits that are looser fitting, and the ETHEREAL stage!!! 

All of this helped with women taking over the ballet world. They technically took on the role of the man. There was no more side-by-side dancing, it was all just about the man standing behind the woman and holding her while she danced.  The men were necessary for the performance but were not allowed their own solos. Now this can be seen as a win for women, yet there is another perspective we have yet to notice. Soooooooo, if the man is there to hold, lift and make the women look “pretty” and “angelic” the man IS necessary. In a way yes, but these women do not NEED a man to dance or pose, so when she is being carried around the room, just posing or doing other things, she seems more like an ornament than a powerful entity, no? (Interesting...)

Now...TO THE TIME MACHINE! (woooowwwww wouldn’t that be nice...the things I would change...) The 50′s were all about abstract expressionism in different forms of art. This in turn allowed new modern ballet choreographers to go off the books and actually avoid story plots. The two best “non story” tellers were George Balanchine Marius Petipa. (What a pair of guys!! Imagine what they would have to say if they were here now?!) They contributed so much to the evolution of Ballet from Romanticism to slight Classical and even a mix. They DID IT ALLLLLL.

Anywayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy after the small snippet I gave of our weekly class discussions (There were many other things discussed but I want to stay sane...) I will end this blog with a question. Are men in ballet just for show? Are they a critical part of the ballet? Hmmmm?

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Romantic? I beg to differ...

Well this is awkward…in today’s blog I will be talking a lot about my ex….Ballet. I really don’t want to go into detail on what happened between us, soooooooooo I will be discussing more about the history and evolution of Ballet.

We all have some sort of idea or concept of what Ballet is or symbolizes. Whether it is through movements, music or design it all makes up the aesthetic of ballet. Yet, with that in mind is there a clear/precise definition of what Ballet is? I tried coming up with my own definition and honestly it was just a jumble of words put together that are associated with Ballet…and I still don’t have a clear definition. Which is crazy because I was in love with Ballet for 12+ years of my life!! (I guess we never had a true idea of each other in the relationship…)

Annnyyywayyyyy let’s start with the baby phase, the court room dances. Court Room dances began around the 16th Century and were the starting foundation for ballet. The dancers were usually accompanied by spoken or sung texts. The reason for this was because dance was inspired by Greek culture and mythology who incorporated poems, music and dance into one form of expression and narration. These court dances were also viewed from above meaning the dancers had to create geographical patterns that would be the center focus throughout the performance. Court room danced slowly evolved into the early stages of the technical aspect of Ballet. The largest advocator for Ballet was the one, the only LOUIS XIV! What a man! He truly advocated for Ballet even when being in royalty. He allowed it to grow and prosper and become a way of living for himself and the people. Over time Ballet began to evolve from the early stages and started to gain more technical and codified aspects/elements. The five positions of the feet were started, the merging of mime and dance, the growth of the stage/theatre and the creation of the pointe shoe!

By the time the 19th Century rolled around, the Romanticism era started to come about. This brought in the…YOU guessed it!…the Romantic Ballet. Romantic Ballets brought the supernatural to the stage by brining magical stories and characters to life. It also created the iconic “ballerina” She was ethereal on pointe and the new techniques allowed for more movement possibilities to happen on the stage. Yet, something we discussed in class was, did the Romantic Ballets really stay true to the ideals of the Romanticism movement? Did it challenge the academic traditions of past techniques or concepts? In my opinion it did bring about a new range of movement and technique but I would not necessarily agree that is challenged/rebelled against traditional ideas. Science and other forms of art had a distinguished new technique and style that demonstrated that rebellious side to traditional forms. Romantic Ballets brought darker meanings and stories to life but nothing about the art itself was new or innovative. (I guess white tutus were not enough.) Sooooooooooooo a question to ponder on if you will——> Do you believe the ballet techniques and styles we have today would have been a better fit for the Romanticism era or not? To what extent?

After discussing and diving deeper into the history and evolution of Ballet, I was able to see my issues with it a bit more clearly. Yet, after all we have been through and the break in our relationship, I will always have a special place for Ballet in my heart and will still love it. (Not LOVE it, LOVE it, but enough.)

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Minuet Into This Blog #2!

This week we started to discuss about the early stages of dance, more specifically Greek folk dances, and how these forms of dance contributed to the early evolution of what we know as Ballet. *DUNDUN DUNNN*

Now obviously Greek culture is not the only culture that has dance as part of its tradition. Even though cultures vary in a multitude of ways, they still make up three universal categories when it comes to dance; Social, Ceremonial/Spiritual, and Theatrical dancing. When looking into the components of Greek folk dancing, they incorporated not only movement but music and literature. This allowed it to have a deeper meaning imbedded into their dancing than just movement. To dive deeper into this I took a closer look into a specific type of Greek dance such as the Tsamiko/Kleftikos. This is a traditional folk dance that is the most popular in Greece and mainly danced by men. The dance is used to emphasize grace and style when being performed at ceremonial events.

Nowww this transitions into the question that has been sprinkled in throughout these few weeks…Is Ballet considered ethnic? I am sort of two ways when it comes to this and here’s why. Ballet was created for the people by the people and brought in a sense of inclusivity and connectivity, which is the same way other cultures created their forms of dance and made it as a form of communication between each other. It does have a deeper context than we perceive it to have and more specifically with the geometric patterns and shapes the performers create for the audience to view. Ballet was also a part of France’s way of life and made up most of their culture we know today. Over time as Ballet has evolved, it has derived from that concept but the roots are still heavily embedded in that. Where I disagree in Ballet being considered ethnic is the aesthetic and energy behind it. In the early court dances everything was very forced, boring and wayyyyyyy to proper. Yet, that is what was popular then and was considered “social”. Other cultural dances had that sense of fun, inclusivity, and high energy. The nobles doing the court dances didn’t necessarily do it for the communication aspect, but rather for the experience of a higher class life. They wanted to be a part of the nobilities way of life even if it was for a night.

What I noticed toward the end of the discussions and readings was the shift of the social aspect of Ballet. It started out for the nobles by the nobles, then shifted to lower classes performing for the nobles. For me though, I almost feel as if it has shifted yet again to performers being higher class and audiences being in the same class. Now this could totallyyy be just me but I will end this rant with a question that is a bit off topic but still relevant. Do you still believe that today, ballet would still be considered for the nobles/higher class? And to what extent?

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Blog #1: Lani Come Back

This week we read articles based on world cultural dances that included folk, ritual, ceremonial or for concert viewing. We focused on the Western African Yoruba Tribe and Japanese forms of Noh, Kabuki and Butoh. These readings went into detail on the history, meaning and context behind each of these forms of art. Each of these forms also had a deeper meaning not only in the context but for the community in which it derived from. For example, the Yoruba Tribe were known for their use of drums, singing/chanting and dancing. For them it was a form of communication between the people and a way to keep family names/traditions alive. In the Japanese forms, they were used as ways of spiritual release and to narrate historical stories or real world situations in a theatre/entertainment aspect. The structure for all of these dance forms, stayed true to their original structure in which they started from. The only thing that they have added, was finding a way in which to “codify” the structure of each form and allowing it to be seen in a performance setting.

Since I did not have extensive background on Japanese forms of cultural dance/art forms, I was very intrigued with all of the very small intricate, yet crucial parts that make up each form. From the details in movement, makeup, stance to hand gestures, it brought the whole form together in its own unique way. I was also fascinated with the way the Kabuki and Butoh originated…as rebellious forms of entertainment and communication for those of the middle and lower class. The deep commitment from the actors, dancers and musicians, to these intricate and beautiful arrangements of art, gave me a new look and appreciation for older/traditional art styles.

While discussing these readings in class we brought up how as growing artists, it would have been more beneficial to have taken Butoh and West African dance later in our academic careers, because we would have had a greater appreciation for the cultural aspects behind it rather than just looking at it from a technical stand point. Having an understanding of improvisation before taking these forms would have also allowed us to have a deeper connection spiritually in the way they are meant to be done. We also discussed the idea and opinions of having these dances projected in a performance setting. There were opinions against it because of the idea of taking away from its traditional form and its deeper context. Yet, the more we discussed we came to the realization that they wouldn’t have put them on the stage and in that format if they didn’t want it to be seen in that aspect. They did it not only for the audience but for themselves as artists and to bring a larger known appreciation for their traditions/keep the traditions alive. They should not have to meet up to anyone’s standards or expectations. They should be done in the way they choose to, because in the end it will be beautiful in their own way.

[mariajsanchez-blog1]

Welcome to DH2!

Bring it on...