The natural turner and the fouette
A while back, in a post on the subject of turns in dance, I wrote:
Certain people are…that rare phenomenon known as “natural turners.” Some strange trick of brain and inner ear, some unusual sense of centered balance, allows them to turn easily almost from the moment the step is first introduced to them.
The following is an example of what I was talking about. It’s almost unbelievable how straight a plumb line this dancer’s body makes, how impervious to skew she is, how almost inhumanly rock-steady as she balances on the tiniest of pivots. She even changes her “spot” in the middle of the whole thing, making a complete revolution with that as well (a “spot” is the place a dancer focuses the eyes and head in order to keep from getting too dizzy):
The turn this dancer is demonstrating is known as the fouette—a word that means “whip.” I think you can see why it’s been applied to that particular movement. The trajectory of the leg as it quickly unfolds leads the body into the turn with a whipping force that isn’t easy to control, to say the least.
But you know what? I don’t care much for any of it. And this isn’t only because I was never all that good at fouettes, especially when on pointe.
Like most steps in ballet, the technique required of dancers performing the fouette has become more extreme. It used to be enough just to do them; the step itself elicited oohs and ahs. Now, multiple turns embedded within the fouettes (as you see in this video at the beginning and end) have become required in order to satisfy the jaded palates of the dance consumers, used to gymnastics rather than finesse, athleticism rather than art, tricks rather than sublimity.
I have searched You Tube for an example of fouettes that would partake of artistry. I couldn’t find any, even in older clips featuring dancers I admire greatly. It seems it doesn’t matter who does them, or how well or how poorly; they’re a trick that doesn’t interest me at all, although I admire the strength and balance required because I know how exceptionally difficult it is.
K… I got dizzy *looking* at that.
I think I’ll stick with Gilbert and Sullivan.
The trajectory of the leg as it quickly unfolds leads the body into the turn with a whipping force that isn’t easy to control, to say the least.
to any one that has done that kind of spin, and has spun a basketball on their fingers, the key is to being correct from the very start. that is, any amount outside of a small balance area from start will lead to the actions of the objec (dancer or ball), to amplify and make recovery almost impossible.
when you see this practiced (dancer), you will note that they either spin a few times, or they are off right from the start.
as with so many of the harder things tha man does like this, so much is invested in a very tiny zone, and that most of the work in practice is to train consistency out of a system that refuses to be that consistent!
we like varying things a little. we can do the same thing for years, and suddenly do it differently one day. so when your doing something exacting, juggling, pool, ballet, long distance target shooting, etc… your trying to achieve exact reproducibility
when its achieved, well as neo points out, it fills us with wonder.
this quality and other qualities are mixed in things we do and in different combinations they become entertainment that stretches our concept of what we can do when we focus and move in one direction.
There are gourmets and gourmands.
For the latter, if some is good, more is better.
I think neo is thinking audiences and critics are gourmands.
Phhhhht….
I can do that naked while on fire.
No, not really. Just goofing. It looks amazing, but I can understand the difference between mastery and monstery.
It’s extreme, but it becomes a different idiom…..
I’m sure there are some guys who can to that many revolutions on their head, but does that make it ballet?
That’ll be me when Obama leaves office.
And so like hitler, rahm manuel had to give up his dream of being an artist, a different kind of artist, but still and artist. and like other failed artist turned to despotism to quell the pain and teach all of them who laughed at him a lesson.
Well, I’ve never really been someone who likes most of what we call “artistry”. Or at least that is what I’ve always been told (and struggled through those course in college).
For me form follows function – that is a truly exacting function is a thing of beauty. I find that MUCH more artistic than what Neo probably does – I can clearly see the difference and I can even sometimes notice the higher ends of forms I do not care about (and to be fair she obviously sees the linked video as something to appreciate even if not like). Yet still I find those highly exacting forms to be truly breathtaking (I’m a software engineer – I find exceptionally done designs to be artistic in nature too, though I’ve had “artist” that I wouldn’t give a dime to see rant at me for saying that).
The really and truly great arts that make it for centuries satisfy both – the Sistine Chapel, some of the Greek statues, and a great deal of older architecture make both of us happy.
I rarely ever received high grades for critique of art for that reason – I *really* like much of the classical works out there. Yet my papers on why I found them attractive and worthy art were graded low (which drove me nuts – how dare someone tell me that I really do not like something for the reasons I specify as long as I was internally consistent and able to express myself).
*shrug* that’s why outside of the insular “art” world there are many types of art – many of us like different things. I can kinda see what Neo is discussing – indeed that is also a system and extreme examples of it also have a great deal of beauty to me. But I will personally take mediocre technical exactness over what she likes and there are also a few high degrees of “quality” in her world that I simply could care less about watching (though I can note that they do that style well).
Many times I have woken in the dead of night and stared up into the mute darkness to ask, “What, just what, is the pointe of the fouette?”
And now I am enlightened.
Just like Hollywood that will sacrifice story for special effects. Somehow it lessens the overall content.
you were graded low because the teacher was a communist and socialist realism is the only art that is allowed… that is, if it uplifts, makes you think, gives you morals, and hope.. it doesnt serve the parties needs, but your needs… so thats bad.
Although a different discipline than dance, I’ve seen martial arts go the same way in “forms” competition. When I was first learning, back in the early ’70s, forms–which are predetermined combinations of kicks, punches, and blocks–were utilitarian patterns that were learned and then performed to demonstrate mastery of these essential techniques. Later, probably in the mid-1980s, music started getting added to the routines, which became gaudier and gaudier, with plenty of jumps, splits, and tumbling runs that would be worse than useless in a real fight. Entertaining to watch? Sure. And if you’re good at it (I’m not including myself here), they can be fun, albeit bloody hard, to perform . But not especially relevant to the real world.
waltj.
I quit progressing in judo at green belt because the katas seemed like a waste of time even then. I continued to hang around and compete and improve but I also switched over to what we were pleased to call ju jitsu but was really scientific dirty fighting.
Both have been actively useful, and the benefits of having spent time in learning forms–with the inevitable result of less time to learn something else–would have been counterproductive.
Richard Aubrey,
You’re right, katas can be a pointless exercise if you just do them to learn the kata rather than to perfect the techniques behind them. Bruce Lee took this to its logical conclusion and did away with katas/forms completely in his non-system system, Jeet Kune Do. If done right, i.e., with more than just a passing thought to the techniques that underlie them, then katas can be valuable training tools. But if you just want to learn to defend yourself, take Brazilian ju-jitsu, Krav Maga, or Muay Thai.
I kinda favor “woman’s shooting class” to learn to defend myself…. ;^p
(Not that I didn’t listen very, very carefully when my uncles told me where to aim with my little pocket knife if someone grabs me, and not that I wouldn’t stab someone with a mechanical pencil if need be. For that matter, bat-to-the-kneecaps is nice….)
foxfier
Forty-plus years ago, in a college field project in a dicey area, the staff suggested I teach the female participants some self-defense.
We hauled out the mattresses and spent an hour and a half at it for a week, iirc.
At a reunion a couple of years ago, there were probably three of the women from my class.
Two referenced the self-defense even before saying “Hi,” or “Long time”, or “You sure got fat.”
Apparently important to them.
One said she’d never had to use it but that her self-confidence may have put off potential predators. Whatever the case, she felt better knowing what little we were able to transfer.
For forty bleeding years.
I guess it was important to them.
Richard Aubrey-
It’s amazing what knowing you don’t have to be a helpless victim can do for folks.
Neo, I have to admit – I love watching fouette. It has sort of mathematical precision that speaks to remnants of engineer’ training in me, I guess. Or maybe it’s vice-versa and I went to the engineering school in the first place because I saw beauty in economical, perfectly executed, precise movements.
Anyway, after 40+ years of loving ballet, I can’t say assuredly I like formality and technique over emotional content and “soul of the dance”, or the other way around. There is no preference. Or rather sometimes I like former, sometimes I crave latter.
She is amazing, breathtaking.
I bit of personal background: I was on a college sports’ gym team right up till sophomore year, when something happened to my balance mechanism. It came to that I couldn’t step on a high beam without getting dizzy – and 1/2 year before I was doing flips on it. Had to quit the team, sadly. I’m telling this to explain how my experience brought me an appreciation of a difficulty; OK, it’s a trick – but a trick I enjoy watching.
Pingback:Impossible Dream Revisited « Slow Stagger
I have not danced since taking it as a phys ed in college in ’65, and yet, for more than two years now the first thing I think of when I wake up EVERY morning is the fouette. I’m a guy and all I was ever good for was lifting girls, and not very good at that, and I certainly never turned, and now this obsession. I am wholly baffled. Any ideas as to wtf?
Yeesh, don’t be such a hater, m’kay? 😉
Maybe ballet shoudln’t be like the Olympics, but this is the way our greedy society is wired. The mob nowadays is constantly preoccupied, even obsessed with the notion that every moment, every thing, every gesture in our lives must be “the best EVERRR!”
But while performers are at least trying to give us THEIR best efforts, I don’t see reason any reason to snub. Maybe you’ve never seen a perfect fouette, but why do you even care to mention it if you’re so blasé? Because you couldn’t do them well? That’s what you said. I drew my own conclusions. Some folks don’t much care to see others succeed where they have failed, get defensive, and start to assign blame. Sour grapes.
Besides, what you are referring to are performances captured on video. You can’t even begin to compare a recorded performance with live dance. There’s an emotional connection with live performance that enhances the technical. It’s easy to watch performance on a small computer screen in low resolution and replay and study and dissect and pretty much become emotionally discnnected from what is going on. But if someone a mere 30 feet away from you is twirling like a top, kicking out 38 fouettes it’s pretty tough not to get caught up in the moment. You may be a terrific dancer, and you may be an authority in your field, but you can’t deny that just as important as the dance itself is to the performance, an equally important part is the audience’s emotional response while watching the “spectacle”.
After all, dance without an audience…well, it’s kinda like what they say about whether a tree falling in the woods makes any noise if nobody is around to hear it…
And what right has anyone to suggest the gifted should bury their talents? Shoot, if a dancer can do doubles or even triples — and dares to demonstrate — I’m going to cheer them on!
I agree with you that athleticism has blurred the artistry that was the achievement of balance and poise over gravity. I would rather watch the gentlemen of the Troc company dance than the anorexic pinheads that pass as women in serious ballet these days.
On the other hand, I wonder if it isn’t too harsh to criticize this particular dancer in the video. What she does may be a technical achievement, but it is so perfect, a few moments so filled with the potential for disaster that their successful passage redefines the human body. It requires more than a lucky inner ear to achieve such mastery — it still requires ballet.
While her fouettes may not add to our understanding of the character whose part she dances, they do add to the wonder of being in a theater watching magic performed.