Fall 2024 In Dance

consumption, reducing their creative depth. I mean…. how dare Archibald defy her ‘primitive,’ ‘exotic,’ ‘unre- fined’ destiny?! Towards Inclusion and Respect Harmful reviews do not exist in a vacuum; they are part of a larger sys- tem of exclusion in the arts. When critics fail to recognize or appreciate the sweat and value of Black artistry, they reinforce the systemic inequities that have historically marginalized Black artists’ voices. This propagates a cycle where only certain narra- tives and dance genres are deemed “worthy,” further entrenching racial and cultural biases within the indus- try and our larger culture. Injurious reviews also potentiate fewer oppor- tunities, reduced audience interest, and a tarnished professional image that can be difficult to rebuild.

We must recognize and challenge how dance works are experienced, talked about, and written about by acknowledging the cultural signifi- cance of Black dance forms and citing Black choreographers, Black dancers, and Black culture appropriately. The High Cost of Biased and Harmful Critiques In a 2023 review of Jennifer Archibald’s Exalt for BalletX, Jeff Slayton wrote, “It is a dance that brought the Irvine Barclay Theatre audience to their feet with shouts of bravo, but again, it is the danc- ers who earned the applause and olés. Archibald’s choreography has a similar business to Alonzo King’s work for LINES Ballet Company and Dwight Rhoden’s for Complexions; two prominent and acclaimed cho- reographers of this era in contempo- rary dance. What I see too much of in these works is the complexity of the choreography. It is showmanship vs. art. This company is, however, more than worthwhile going to see, and I look forward to doing so soon. I do wish for more meat on those cre- ative bones.” This is an example of compara- tive diminishment, the undermining of Archibald’s contribution, a lack of constructive feedback, and overem- phasis on “complexity.” While com- parisons are common in reviews, Slayton compared Archibald’s chore- ography to that of prominent chore- ographers Alonzo King and Dwight Rhoden, grouping her exclusively with other Black choreographers. This is limiting and racially biased, implying that Black choreographers are only relevant in comparison to one another rather than within the broader con- text of contemporary dance, thereby reinforcing racial demarcations. When Slayton credits the dancers and not Archibald’s choreography for the positive audience reaction —”it is the dancers who earned the applause and olés”—he dilutes her creative vision and skill, inferring that

her choreography is secondary to the performers’ execution. This is particularly harmful as it devalues the recognition of Archibald’s artis- tic contribution, a common issue faced by Black artists in predomi- nantly white spaces. Mentioning that her work leans towards “showmanship vs. art” is unconstructive and biased as this criticism perpetuates a stereotype that Black creativity is less serious or less artistically valuable. Such a dis- tinction undermines the legitimacy and depth of her work, reducing culturally rich expressions to mere entertainment akin to how ‘street dances’ such as breaking, krump, etc., are framed as lacking skill, training, and validity. The phrase “I do wish for more meat on those creative bones” is not only vague but unhelpful and

THE DOMINANCE OF WHITE NARRATIVES IN DANCE WRITING MEANS THAT BLACK ARTISTS ARE NOT ONLY UNDERREPRESENTED BUT ALSO MISREPRESENTED WHEN THEIR WORKS ARE FILTERED THROUGH A LENS THAT DOES NOT UNDERSTAND, VALUE THEIR CULTURAL ORIGINS, OR SEE THE IMPORTANCE OF CAREFULLY CURATING CONTEXT AROUND BLACK CULTURAL SOPHISTICATIONS.

A Complex Examination of “A Strange Loop”: Conformity and Commercialism in Black Art I recently saw a production of Michael R. Jackson’s A Strange Loop at the Ahmanson Theatre in Los Angeles, California. Winner of the 2022 Tony Award for Best Musical, A Strange Loop attempts to subvert stereotypes, but in my experience of viewing, reinforces the ‘struggling art- ist’ and the overbearing, unsupportive Black family tropes, hyper-sexualizes the Black gay male, suggests Black folks are inherently burdened with trauma, and displays the portrayal of Black pain for the consumption of predominantly white audiences. I left the theatre thinking about bell hooks’ Black Looks: Race and Rep- resentations , in which she addresses the commodification of Black culture. In the text, hooks explores how Black culture is consumed and how Black creators often feel pressured to pres- ent themselves in ways that are pal- atable to white audiences. She offers that Black creators sometimes adopt derogatory language or perform ste- reotypes to fit into white-dominated cultural spaces or markets. This act of “self-othering,” she asserts, can be seen as a survival strategy in a society where mainstream acceptance often requires conformity to stereotypes. It dawned on me that the lingering feeling I experienced upon leaving A Strange Loop was a questioning of how conformity impacts commer- cialism. Do Black creatives think they can only achieve success based on the

not worthy of serious artistic con- sideration but are instead suited for lower, less cultured audiences. Knowingly or not, these nomencla- tures reinforce a racist hierarchy that places Black artistic expressions at the bottom, denying their artistic merit. This language, in an effort to uphold Eurocentric standards, den- igrates the cultural articulation and sophistication of Black communi- ties while ignoring the rich histories and social significances behind Black dance movements. Yet, some dance writers and critics continue to use offensive verbiage in their descrip- tions, evaluations, and analyses of dance works created by Black cho- reographers and performed by Black dancers. Writers’ unwillingness to be non-binary and nuanced in their approach to dance criticism is indeed lazy and exclusive. This exclusion is not just a matter of oversight or self-proclaimed ignorance; it is a continuation of systemic oppression. The dominance of white narratives in dance writing means that Black artists are not only underrepresented but also misrepresented when their works are filtered through a lens that does not understand, value their cul- tural origins, or see the importance of carefully curating context around Black cultural sophistications. These misrepresentations not only perpetu- ate harmful stereotypes and reinforce biased standards in dance, but they are flat-out racist and harmful. We must impede!

expectations of white theatregoers? Do they believe their validation is dependent on the stereotypical lens through which art critics define and analyze their works? If the answer to any or both is in the affirmative, then undoubtedly, Black creatives may feel compelled to cooperate with a system that rewards such portrayals. This reflection also led me to con- sider how choreographers’ works are discussed within the realm of dance criticism. Writers, whether Black or white, may feel pressured to pen pieces that reinforce stereo- typic, confining, and reductive por- trayals without fully considering the harmful impact of such depictions. The Language of Exclusion: How Terminology Marginalizes Black Dance Black choreographers and danc- ers face a double bind: they are often tokenized within the industry and asked to “perform their Black- ness” in ways that conform to white expectations, yet their artistic con- tributions are rarely given the same critical consideration or respect as their white counterparts. The works of Black choreographers and the abilities of Black dancers are often written about devoid of cultural context and reduced to lazy and insulting terminologies like “primi- tive,” “exotic,” or “unrefined.” In addition to marginalizing Black dance forms, these jargons sug- gest that Black dance forms are

HARMFUL REVIEWS DO NOT EXIST IN A VACUUM; THEY ARE PART OF A LARGER SYSTEM OF EXCLUSION IN THE ARTS.

To all dance writers and critics, I implore you… cultivate cultural humility and deepen your understand- ing of the diverse cultural contexts from which dance works emerge. GREGORY KING received his MFA in chore- ographic practice and theory from Southern Methodist University. He has performed with The Washington Ballet, Erick Hawkins Dance Compa- ny, The Metropolitan Opera Ballet, and Disney’s The Lion King on Broadway. His writings have ap- peared in Stage of Reckoning (Routledge, 2022), Africa, Caribbean, and Black People’s RESIL- IENCE During Covid-19 (Demeter Press, 2023), Dance Magazine , and ThINKingDANCE . In 2021, he launched the Decolonizing Dance Writing: International Exchange Project, bringing togeth- er artists from Peru, Columbia, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, and Ghana to explore non-Western dance practices. Currently, King is the inaugural Assistant Provost for Faculty Development at California Institute of the Arts and is completing his doctoral studies in Interprofessional Leader- ship at Kent State University.

patronizing. It does not provide any feedback on how Archibald could improve her work or clearly artic- ulate what Slayton found lacking. Instead, it dismisses her choreogra- phy without offering constructive insights, making the comment dis- paraging rather than productive. Criticizing the complexity of Archibald’s choreography—”What I see too much of in these works is the complexity of the choreog- raphy”—implies that her work is overly complicated in a way that detracts from its artistic value. This proposes an unfairness against the intellectual and technical rigor in her work, which might not be similarly critiqued if the choreographer were white. It reinforces a narrative that Black artists’ work should be more accessible or simplified for white

36

in dance FALL 2024 36

FALL 2024 in dance 37

In Dance | May 2014 | dancersgroup.org

unify strengthen amplify unify strengthen amplify

44 Gough Street, Suite 201 San Francisco, CA 94103 www.dancersgroup.org

Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker