Aller à : navigation, rechercher

$SHOT (Lacey/Lauro/Parkins/Cornell)

Version du 30 juillet 2014 à 12:29 par Everybody (discuter | contributions)

(diff) ← Version précédente | Voir la version courante (diff) | Version suivante → (diff)

Sidney Léoni All through the piece, the two female performers are arranging & re-arranging the postures of their body which would remind the work of the sculptor. On this degree of lecture, their activity thus close to modelling, would display an inventory of kama-sutra´positions. Then the performance seems to display the woman body as an object within a strong connotation of attractivity, sexuality, desire, even of submission of a sexual desire. Within that activity as I could see somehow as paradoxical (because it´s made and performed by women), an other level of lecture needs to be established by the viewer.

Alice Chauchat (this is a description of what I saw the dancers do as well as of what I experienced during the piece; it focuses on the dancer's activity and not on the set nor sound, although both much affect the perception) Two female performers wearing panties and sporty jackets evolve in a laid-back energy, arranging and re-arranging their bodies in relation to themselves, to each other and to various objects. These objects are socks & clogs (which as well as being comfortable practical shoes make them look like sexy manga figures) as well as blow-up U-shaped cushions of various sizes (which look like abstract shapes as well as wellness props). The way of doing these arrangements (and of staying in them for some time) is slow, matter-of-fact, yet it gives a sense of purpose and precision that makes me wonder why it might be so important that this should be placed in that way? There is a fetishism in this carefulness for details, as they seem to be given an erotic value, a meaning that I don't know for them. This value seems to lay in sensuality and/or in aesthetics, with variations in degree from the one to the other. Because of the dancers' spatial orientation, their buttocks are in the middle of my focus. Yet the pleasures that I sense are not in this exposure but in these seemingly fetishistic arrangements. Watching the performance I negotiate between my resistance to strategies of objectification (:exposing female bodies as objects of desire) which are reminded to me by the ass focus and some sparse movements such as jerky pelvic shakes, and the invitation that I perceive, in which artists display architectural, sensual, compositional and fetishistic pleasures as part of one general erotics of dance and choreography.

Johan Thelander Emancipating the subject from the object through the objectification of ones own body. In the performance of this the two performers gives a total focus to the perception of their own bodies not seeming to acknowledge me, the invited spectator. Throughout the show references to the act of sexual intercourse keeps on revisiting taking my attention away from the constant remoduling of shapes that take place in front of me.

Sebastian Lingserius Money Shot is a performance which is presented on a stage where there are thin white rectangular water mattresses covering the floor, and a stripe of fake wood who runs along the wall. The props are used interactively by the performers which are: pillows, shoes and wool hats. There are two women on stage through the entire performance, which wears underwear and sport jackets. For me money shot plays with the notion of sexuality. Through postures as symbols and props as icons I was looking for comments or irony.