Apollinaire Scherr on why Dance has no Pavarotti:

“…we don’t have a Pavarotti because DANCE DOESN’T RECORD WELL — i.e., it’s not mass-producible, like a Pavarotti CD or video or PBS special, and so there’s no dancer who’ll be viscerally KNOWN to millions of people as Pavarotti was through radio, TV and CDs, and the newspaper headlines generated by his stadium concerts with the 3 Tenors.”-Foot in Mouth

I’m not entirely sure I agree with this – Mikhail Baryshnikov comes to mind, and to some extent Bill T. Jones and Pilobolus. I don’t know of any Pavarotti calendars, for example, and neither has Kiri Te Kanawa starred in any Hollywood blockbusters that I know of. And films such as Moulin Rouge seem to beggar the idea that dance doesn’t record well (or Step Up or any of the bevy of mainstream dance films, some of which, yes, I think are lame (I was SO disappointed with the way the dance in Stomp the Yard was portrayed)).

Still, as Doug Rosenberg, my mentor, would argue, what we see on the screen is not actually the dance – it is a mediated version of the dance put into 2 dimensions and with the attention focused by first the director, then the camera operator, then the editor, and finally the venue in which you see it (whether iPhone or iMax). Then again, that applies to the Pavarottis of the world, too – I’ve never heard him sing, I’ve heard only recordings.

(sigh) it’s complicated. But I think that Mikhail has as much name recognition as Pavarotti to the general public. What do you think?

2 Responses to “Apollinaire Scherr on why Dance has no Pavarotti:”

  1.   Cherie
    September 22nd, 2007 | 1:01 pm

    It’s a complicated issue, but recorded dance, other than for historic value, just doesn’t cut the same experience as live.
    Barynishikov calendars show instants, or a pose, however beautiful, but don’t convey the passion, the artistry and emotion of the dance itself.
    Even filmed dance removes it from the watcher; it’s just not the same.
    And that’s just one reason why dance is so fabulous to appreciate live. It’s a moment, and then it’s gone. Be there or be square.

  2.   Gray
    September 23rd, 2007 | 1:07 pm

    I would argue that live music and recorded suffers the same problem. I hated jazz for the first two decades of my life, until I started seeing/hearing it live — then suddenly it seemed incredibly fascinating. I agree that filmed dance is removed from the reality – as is filmed ANYTHING. The argument is just that Mikhail has as much recognition as Pavarotti, and that dance celebrity is as possible with dance as with opera in popular culture.


About Us | Advertise with us | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Get This Theme


All content is Copyright © 2005-2010 b5media. All rights reserved.