On September 11th, SUNY Oneonta and Hartwick College sponsored the performance piece “Waters of Immortality” by Maureen Flemming. Flemming created a meditative atmosphere by utilizing a number of disciplines such as dance, light, music, and digital media. The subtle body movements of Flemming made her a living sculpture. The negative spaces between her limbs altered and shifted, forcing the human body- a shape we’re all familiar with- to become distorted, abstract, and alien. The lighting allowed her bare body to become a canvas where the shadows created by her muscles and limbs also contributed to the sculptures. The music, lighting, and props all aided in the exploration of vulnerability, purity, and spirituality.
In an exploration of something we all go through, Flemming seemed to be acting out and exploring the unspecified struggles that we all wrestle with- our own restrictions and need to experience utter freedom. This search and longing for release was represented in the use of fabric. In the beginning of the performance, Flemming is confined by a tight, taught piece of fabric in which she cannot escape despite her stretching. Then she is left bare, naked, and alone with her own body. Yet, by the end, she is in control of the fabric. She moves it around her and it seems that the fabric merely articulates the space and liberty around her.
Despite having an interest in performance art (especially since it’s the focus of my thesis!), I was quite disappointed in the Flemming piece. The images promoting the event showed stills of Flemming in these amazing positions with fabrics in mid-air, outstretched, and seemingly floating in space. As a result, I thought that the movements in the piece would have been much quicker, varied, and larger. Especially since it was sold as a “dance”, I thought there’d be a stronger correlation between the heavy beat music and the movements Flemming was creating. Though the slow, yoga-like movements were impressive and at times visually engaging, there was something lacking in the overall performance for me. There were endless opportunities for amazing photographs and stills to have been taken, especially with the ethereal lighting, but I kept thinking that this would be a stronger gallery piece as opposed to a stage piece. I was much more affected and moved by the photographs of Flemming in these positions in SUNY Oneonta’s gallery than by watching her slowly crawl into them. Similarly, I kept thinking that this performance may be more interesting if I had walked into a gallery and amongst the photographs was Flemming on a platform or in a mini-pool of water, or even behind glass where she contorted herself into a human sculpture. Of course, the digital and aural contributions of the performance could also translate into the gallery.
I was also disappointed by the use of the materials at hand. It seemed that the beautiful and somewhat eerie lighting was meant to create shadows on the screens behind Flemming. At times there were faint shadows; however, they seemed overpowered by the large, blank screen. There could have been some amazing correlations and relationships between Flemming’s movements, the projected shadows, and the digital art. The use of the screens was heavily underutilized. Also, the circle mirror in the middle of the stage with the water was also an underused opportunity. I feel like there were so many things she could have done with the use of the ripples of the water, reflections, and again- the shadows, lighting, and digital media.
I did, however, enjoy the film/digital components of the performance. Half-way through the performance was a short projected piece where a photograph of Flemming stretching morphed. This, similar to her actual movements, happened very slowly and at times you couldn’t be sure if anything was happening at all. Limbs slowly touched, moved, twisted, and turned. Soon the recognizable Flemming was an abstract shape. This larger than life image supported and enhanced the bodily shapes that Flemming was actually contorting herself in. It was a very interesting experiment in teasing the eye. Shadows became hair, blobs of color became limbs, and a face emerged from nothing. This was truly a beautiful exploration of the human body as a form.
I also truly enjoyed the final video where Flemming was dancing, pushing, and pulling the white cloth around her preceding her doing so on stage. I found that the video outshined her enacting it because the film had such harsh lighting, was much larger, and also used effects. On the film, Flemmings ribs, muscles, and body could be completely defined, yet on stage which put her an inevitable distance away from the audience, these couldn’t not be seen. By editing the video to speed up, slow down, or reverse also gave the video a much more surreal feel than the actual performance. The video seemed to embody the music better as well. There was so much tension in the whole performance; the video seemed to be the only component of the whole presentation that came close to having any climax or release.
Even though I didn’t particularly enjoy the performance, I think there were some heavy and interesting themes explored in the piece. The search for freedom and spirituality and sheer boldness of Flemming’s vulnerability were noteworthy. Perhaps I didn’t understand or wasn’t in the right state of mind for this highly meditative and intimate piece. I just felt there was a disconnect between some of the segments, some props were underutilized, and that it would have been a stronger gallery piece.
No comments:
Post a Comment