|
Bit 1
|
The much overused term, 'reconciliation', has spawned many cross-cultural
activities within Australia which attempt to reach the utopian ideal
suggested by this word. Luuli, a collaborative performance between the
Mornington Island dancers and Dance North, is the dance equivalent of this
cultural reconciliation. However, alarm bells began ringing when the
artistic director of Dance North, Jane Pirani, explicitly stated that the
dance companies did not wish to participate in an act of cultural
assimilation, a hazard presented at the interface of two cultures. Just how
these two dance companies dealt with mediating between divergent cultures
and dance styles within the discourses of assimilation and reconciliation
became the point of interest for this reviewer.
|
|---|
|
Bit 2
|
Luuli began with a presentation of both styles of dance as separate forms.
This display of unrelated elements was tenuously linked through musical
syncopation and some corresponding movement. The goals in presenting these
two dance forms were also vastly different. The Mornington Islanders
presented a celebration of Lardil dance which incorporated voice work and
body percussion. Conversely, Dance North parodied a Western style of dance,
classical ballet, commenting on the conservative nature of this dance form
and its perceived constriction of body expression. Whilst Dance North
cleverly used the string quartet Four Play's version of Metallica's "Enter
Sandman" (where a similar theme of resistance and the classical tradition
occurs), they produced a somewhat shallow interpretation of classical dance.
Their denigration of ballet suggested that restriction of movement is a
negative attribute of dance, not to be desired if true cultural expression
is to be attained. Their reading of classical ballet ignored the fact that
all forms of established dance, including Dance North's contemporary style,
are informed by older methods such as classical ballet, and the artistic
articulation of the director and company. However, more disturbingly, when
Dance North's criticism was juxtaposed with the Mornington Islander's dance
other, less desirable observations could be made concerning their dance
form. Is the established code of their dance, the rhythms and movement to be
interpreted as confining the range of their cultural expression? I'd suggest
that they would answer "Oh course not!" At the very least, the simultaneous
portrayal of a celebration of one culture's dance and the denigration of
another's was jarring to the integration of the first half of Luuli.
|
|---|
|
Bit 3
|
After the interval, there was a larger blending between the two dance
groups, which was interesting especially in the context of Pirani's remarks
regarding assimilation. Indeed there appears to be a fine line between the
assimilation of a culture and the participation in another culture whilst
retaining your own. The latter seemed to have been demonstrated in this half
of Luuli. Although there was some contemporary dance performed by both
groups, a larger element of Aboriginal dance was evident. The difference in
style between the Mornington Islander dancers and Dance North was marked,
highlighting the difficulty of Aboriginal dance. It seems that just as
second language learners have their learning process informed by their first
language, usually resulting in an accent, second dance learners are also
influenced by their first dance, consequently producing a dance form not
quite resembling the target style. The inability of Dance North to
completely attain a level of competency in Aboriginal dance actually
demonstrated the complex nature of this mode of dance and I believe that my
appreciation of Aboriginal dance was heightened watching Dance North failing
to cast off their Anglicised style in struggling to master the complex
rhythms of this dance form. This 'accented' dance appears to be one way that
a group can participate in another culture whilst retaining its own cultural
moulds, in which case this collaborative piece succeeded unintentionally in
avoiding the potential stricture of assimilation. Unfortunately though,
Dance North's poor performance reduced the artistic value of this piece.
|
|---|
|
Bit 4
|
In all, this collaboration of dance was successful in some respects but also
artistically disappointing. Socially, it took part in the act of
reconciliation to some degree by dealing with issues of cultural identity
and respect. Unfortunately though, in the first half the unequal treatment
and respect of both dance troupes reversed this aim. However the second half
dealt with the issue of maintaining cultural identity whilst engaging in
another culture's practices in an interesting albeit accidental manner which
was sadly detrimental to the artistic value of the production. In the end,
Luuli was not really a performance piece but a participative piece.
|
|---|
| |
Bit 5
|
Details
Luuli, by the Mornington Island Dancers and Dance North.
Various venues around Australia.
|
|---|
| |
Bit 6
|
Citation reference for this article
MLA style:
Felicity Meakins. "Reconciled to Differences: 'Luuli'." M/C Reviews 29 Sep. 1999.
[your date of access] <http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/reviews/events/luuli.html>.
Chicago style:
Felicity Meakins, "Reconciled to Differences: 'Luuli'," M/C Reviews 29 Sep. 1999,
<http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/reviews/events/luuli.html> ([your date of access]).
APA style:
Felicity Meakins. (1999) Reconciled to differences: 'Luuli'. M/C Reviews 29 Sep. 1999.
<http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/reviews/events/luuli.html> ([your date of access]).
|
|---|
|
|
