Housewife Dances Madonna: Bernard at Seabury 47
Bailey Triggs
Issue date: 4/22/03 Section: Arts
- < prev Page 2 of 2
Bernard had commissioned two pieces of music for her performance: one by Los Angeles-based composer Kate O'Neal and the other by Montreal-based composer Annabelle Chvostek. Both pieces of music were based on the work of the cultural icon Madonna. The piece itself focused heavily on the work of Madonna: exploring what it means to be rich and famous like Madonna and contrasting that to the life of a housewife.
Many of Bernard's movements are 'pedestrian' in nature (to reintroduce the word and use it in its proper context). For those who think 'pedestrian' movement is something that could get you hit by a car if you're not careful (which it quite possibly could), just imagine catching your mom dancing along to the Madonna CD you left in the bathroom boom box.
Bernard not only danced like that, in the Q&A session after the piece, she actually told the audience that exact mom-dancing-in-the-bathroom experience was what inspired her to use Madonna in her piece (her being the mom in question). 'That's all well and good,' you might say, 'but I can catch my mom dancing to Madonna any old time. What makes this any different?' This is when it pays to be a trained dancer. Being a non-dancer, I needed a little dancerly guidance (thanks Emily and Jamie!) to pick up on the subtle differences between a housewife dancing around to the top forty of the 80s and performance art. Although her movements were 'pedestrian' on the whole, Bernard made allusions to classical dance styles (jazz hands etc.) that gave away her extensive background in dance. While she repeated the dance segment twice to two different pieces of music, she changed the gesture and articulation of her moments to evoke a very different emotion (at first I didn't even realize she was repeating the same dance). While it might have looked easy to the untrained eye, what Bernard was able to accomplish subtly was something only a well-trained dancer could pull off effectively.
When the performance was over, Bernard held a Q&A session: an awkward thing for a professional artist who is used to performing outside of academia. The relatively small Trinity audience was a far cry from the masses that come to see her perform in New York and the atmosphere felt an odd mix of receptive and resistant to her work. The questions and comments ranged from confusion: 'What should we take away from this piece?' to praise: for stripping away the stereotypes of dancer to prove that anyone can do it (though I feel compelled to add that I don't think anyone could do what Bernard did without the thorough training she's had). I think Bernard sensed the resistance of the audience and deflected it by keeping up the persona she introduced in the beginning of the piece.
When asked what we could take away from this piece, she responded by saying it wasn't up to her to decide what we'd come away with, it was up to us. Though not an easily accessible statement, true nonetheless. The answer to the question 'is it art?' is up to you. And in my book, if any artist can get you thinking about the question at all, they've done their job.
Many of Bernard's movements are 'pedestrian' in nature (to reintroduce the word and use it in its proper context). For those who think 'pedestrian' movement is something that could get you hit by a car if you're not careful (which it quite possibly could), just imagine catching your mom dancing along to the Madonna CD you left in the bathroom boom box.
Bernard not only danced like that, in the Q&A session after the piece, she actually told the audience that exact mom-dancing-in-the-bathroom experience was what inspired her to use Madonna in her piece (her being the mom in question). 'That's all well and good,' you might say, 'but I can catch my mom dancing to Madonna any old time. What makes this any different?' This is when it pays to be a trained dancer. Being a non-dancer, I needed a little dancerly guidance (thanks Emily and Jamie!) to pick up on the subtle differences between a housewife dancing around to the top forty of the 80s and performance art. Although her movements were 'pedestrian' on the whole, Bernard made allusions to classical dance styles (jazz hands etc.) that gave away her extensive background in dance. While she repeated the dance segment twice to two different pieces of music, she changed the gesture and articulation of her moments to evoke a very different emotion (at first I didn't even realize she was repeating the same dance). While it might have looked easy to the untrained eye, what Bernard was able to accomplish subtly was something only a well-trained dancer could pull off effectively.
When the performance was over, Bernard held a Q&A session: an awkward thing for a professional artist who is used to performing outside of academia. The relatively small Trinity audience was a far cry from the masses that come to see her perform in New York and the atmosphere felt an odd mix of receptive and resistant to her work. The questions and comments ranged from confusion: 'What should we take away from this piece?' to praise: for stripping away the stereotypes of dancer to prove that anyone can do it (though I feel compelled to add that I don't think anyone could do what Bernard did without the thorough training she's had). I think Bernard sensed the resistance of the audience and deflected it by keeping up the persona she introduced in the beginning of the piece.
When asked what we could take away from this piece, she responded by saying it wasn't up to her to decide what we'd come away with, it was up to us. Though not an easily accessible statement, true nonetheless. The answer to the question 'is it art?' is up to you. And in my book, if any artist can get you thinking about the question at all, they've done their job.
Be the first to comment on this story