sarma

Canada chose Lalala-Human Steps as its official representatives, and the group chose “Two”, a work first presented in 1995 at the Théâtre de la Ville, as the country’s participation in the events, in Salonica, Cultural Capital of Europe in 1997. “Two” is a work which combines live performance and video. Filmed in black and white, it juxtaposes a young and an old (thanks to heavy make-up), Louise Lecavallier, simultaneously shown on the screen which appeared vertically divided in two. During each projection we watched both women’s reactions while eating, sleeping, dreaming, until the young one gets out of the bed, gets dressed and leaves her room.

For anybody who has seen Lalala-Human Steps performing, the words virtuosity, speed, ingenuity, witty presentation, seem recognizable elements and adequate characterizations. They mostly refer to the dancers, but also introduce those unfamiliar with the group’s works, to the way E. Lock sees the body and the performance; to what he requires from the dancers and the spectacle.

The piece started with a woman executing a series of minimal repetitive movements, changing directions in space, slightly altering her pattern. After a while, a man entered and they started dancing together. As “Two” developed, we saw duets, solos, quartets; moments with very little interaction between the dancers, and others during which they engaged, at breathtaking speed in various combinations with their partners, forming temporary relationships not to be pursued further throughout the piece.

The movements not only required virtuosity, but were also based on the element of trust between partners (as expected by their contact inspired sequences), which was never challenged. The manipulation of the female body in “Two” can hardly be seen as anything else than traditional, although via the athletic quality of their movements, their robust energy and the violent spasms of their bodies, the women at times seemed to acquire an image of power or rather, showed an agonizing effort for gaining independence. However, the “traditional” profile of the relationship of the male and female bodies did not drastically change throughout the piece as various combinations occurred in the space of the huge stage. Moreover, it was at times ironically reinforced, as for example in the scene (repeated during the performance), in which a woman takes-off a man’s suit using her mouth (instead of her hands), and lies down on it, evoking, images of a deserted, unhappy, tenderness seeking female “faune” able only to curl upon the male piece of clothing as if rejected or isolated on that empty “space” of manhood and power. It also seems that in the ‘90s, a subversive spectacle still strives to challenge the notion of “high art”, this time with technically accomplished dancers executing movements filtered through and mixed with the acrobatic elements of ‘plain”, “fashionable” street-dance. However, the acquisition of pop-patterns by obviously virtuoso dancers, cannot effectively challenge traditional preconceptions of high-theatrical-art in the mind of the audience, or at least it does not seem like an easy task to accomplish. Moreover, it seems that the narcissistic exposure of well-built female bodies in black tights which accentuate their long (or well-proportioned) limbs, together with the continuous exposure of all the dancers to danger through jumps, falls and turns, create a new discourse of the dancing body. The knowledge and experience of the previous years seem to be integrated in a new statement of the role of the dancer as an “entity” accepting elements from different sources, but ultimately using them in the direction of his/her successful accomplishment of a primary goal, namely that of becoming “a” body functioning perfectly within the “domain” of dance. La-la-la Human Steps is not a diverse community of dancers, but arguably, a specifically regulated community, which has used a new ideological perspective structure based upon respect for the prerequisites of the medium and new standards of professionalism.

In “Two”, casual behaviour on stage, abstraction and minimal patterns in endless combinations and repetitions, also created a sense of discontinuity, which stopped the viewer from establishing a linear narrative pattern. Consequently there was no signs of “progression” –in the traditional manner- within the limits of the given theatrical time; “Two” was rather an “expansion in time”, a study of one moment seen through multiple strands and different angles. A magnified approach of the synchronic dimension,. The effect was quite dramatic, and the outcome of what was acted-out on stage, taken as a possible commentary on human relationships (sic), led to a suffocating labyrinth with no way-out to any possible or satisfactory settlement for any of the parties involved; only an everlasting turmoil, which continued on end, once had had some rest and was again ready to take up the struggle (or give-up).

In “Two” there is no pinning down of one subject, a single meaning, or a “universal” truth to be reached or concluded. As for the eye-catching virtuosity and speed, they were only more confusing for the audience of Salonica, which –probably- expected something more “concrete” and lasting to be made out of so much hard work… On the contrary, what was primarily given, was a tightly interwoven “set of movements for feet and bodies in space”, a non-sense new “epic”, a witty game on time and meaning, which at times reminded of the strenuous running of Alice behind the Looking-Glass, only to realize after a while, that she was still on the same spot and breathless.