Archive for the ‘dance’ Category

Inside the Design Idea – Everyone Intimate Alone Visibly

Monday, December 28th, 2009

When Ben Levy, Artistic Director and choreographer for LEVYdance, contacted me about lighting his most recent full evening piece I was excited. We have worked together before and not only do I enjoy his choreography but I enjoy him as well. We have a good working relationship and appreciate each other’s aesthetic approaches. When we sat down to discuss the piece and he told me the general concept my initial reaction was that this was unlightable.

To many “unlightable” would be a place to stop, turn around, and go home. For me I saw it as an opportunity to look for new ways of approaching dance lighting. Why was the piece unlightable? Let’s look at the layout a bit. The work takes place inside a 30′x30′ square space bounded by 10′ tall screens which hang 4′ above the ground. On these screens are projections. The audience sits on all four sides in two rows thus creating a 20′x20′ dance space. On the floor of this dance space is more projection.

Because there are four walls traditional low angled side lighting was out. Because of the projections there could be no light on the floor or walls (light washes out the projection). Because the audience was so close and we could not have light in their eyes there was no high side/front/back light available. The only thing left were downlight pools but that would not have worked aesthetically for the piece. What to do?

As we talked more about the piece it became obvious that A) the projections were not on all the surfaces at all times, B) there were times when the projections could be, at least partially, washed out by the lighting, and C) we could light into the audience’s eyes on occasion when used judiciously. In addition to all that the walls do not make true corners but have 4′ openings where the “corner” would be. Lastly, because of the immediate proximity of the audience very little light could go a long way towards illuminating the performers.

One of the ideas with the piece (reflected in the video) is that the dancers are, at least initially, controlled by the space or there is a direct dialog between performer and venue. It opens as a kind of video installation with audience mingling about looking at images on the four screens. At some point the video fades out while our dancers get in place. Once in place a new reactive video begins which illuminates any movement in the dance space. Since this is not your typical dance show I knew that attempting to force “dance lighting” into this space would fail. I had to approach the space on its own terms.

This freed things up a bit and led me to look formally at the space as an object in which action occurs. I saw the open corners as alleys through which light could move. I saw the screens as walls off of which I could bounce light to illuminate our performers. Taking that idea one step further I chose to add bounce cards in the air which I would light to give a soft glow to the space. That idea of bounce light caused me to think of juxtaposing hard and soft sources in addition to varying the lighting by direct and indirect sources.

The light plot is a formally organized system of lights that creates an ordered geometry in the space. By giving myself control over each of the lights I could turn on all of a given system to create that formal geometry or only part of a system to throw the formality off balance as dictated by the needs of the choreography.

The video images are low-res black and white with one notable exception. As such I chose to follow the lead of the projections and keep the lighting in that same color world of gray tones. The video, music, and choreography run the gamut of soft and tender to harsh and severe. I wanted the quality of light to follow that same range and looked for a variety of options through which to achieve that.

The systems I used were as follows:

  • Daylight Fluorescents in CLR
  • Head Highs in L202
  • Overhead bounce in L201
  • Screen bounce in L201
  • Downlight pools in L202
  • Downlight Specials in L201
  • High Cross in L281

The Fluorescents make “corners” at the corners of the dance space. Booms are placed in each corner outside the screens with two lights each; a head high (for an alley shot across the space) and a low unit (for the overhead bounce cards). Three Source-4s and a Fresnel hang just above each screen; the Fresnels are for the screen bounce while the Source-4’s make up the high cross system (individually controlled and sharp edged to make boxes that the dancers can move in and out of). The downlights are a 3×3 grid of Fresnels. The downlight specials are for a special moment at the end and are hard edged Source-4s.

Here is a look at the light plot:

This show has a very controlled color palette ranging from 4300° K – 5700° K. Despite such a tight range of color the quality of light varies radically from sharp edged focusable lights to diffuse flood lights to indirect bounce light. Most lighting for live performance uses color and angle as the main story telling devices. In this case I was largely limited to variations on top light and had to look to the quality of light for variation. It is a sensibility common in television and film but rarely encountered in live performance.

The show tours to DC and New York before playing in San Francisco. On the road this design will be modified slightly at each venue as the equipment will vary. While some venues will not allow for the precision of hard eged vs. soft edged I should be able to maintain the direct and indirect sources with full integrity.

What did you think of this post? Let me know in comments.

Recessionary Aesthetics; Money, Minimalism, and Art – Or, it’s the performer stupid

Monday, December 14th, 2009

I am currently working on two shows that, for budgetary reasons, have pulled back on the design elements and are working within a minimalist framework. It has long surprised me that smaller theater and opera companies will often spend a significant percentage of their budget on scenery (or costumes) and skimp on a lot of the other elements of the show. Dance learned years ago that when working with limited means the first thing to go should be the elaborate scenery, followed by fancy costumes. The whole purpose of live performance is to experience the performers.

Modern dance developed within a rather poor environment even for the arts. Scenery and, to a lesser extent, costumes were largely eliminated in favor of spending money on performers and, by extension, lighting. You can do any show without scenery and without costumes, but you can’t do it in the dark. As the saying goes, “If you can’t see them you can’t hear them.” One quickly begins questioning what exactly that means. Seeing the performer does not necessarily mean a spotlight on their face. If you are working on a noir piece revealing the actor in shadow and half light may be the most effective means of hearing what they are saying in a given moment. Yet the underlying logic is true. If the audience can not see the performance they will fast lose interest.

It is interesting that theater and opera companies will often sacrifice the actual performances in order to have scenery and costumes when, in the end, the audience comes for the performers. Both of the shows I am currently doing in a minimal style have made sacrifices in order to directly improve the performances and thus the audience’s experience of the piece. In one case a rather pricey scenic element was cut to hire a dialect coach. In the other case singers salaries were increased with, what would have been, the scenic budget. In both instances a choice was made in favor of the performance over the packaging. In both these cases the lighting budget is tiny (as it should be) but I will make it work overtime.

Don’t get me wrong. I am incredibly vocal about the utility of good design. I firmly believe in the value that visual storytelling brings to a work. I have seen shows whose success was largely through the design ideas alone. But no slick piece of stagecraft will make up for a poor performance. One of the great things about lighting is that it has the capacity to work scenically as well as a means of illumination. Through the use of standard American theatrical lighting instruments whole worlds can be created with variations of color, texture, shape, and angle. Interiors and exteriors can be created not to mention the more obvious qualities like time of day.

I see a lot of companies cutting back their programming or doing smaller shows in order to make up the funding gaps they are experiencing under the current economy. Sadly this is precisely the wrong direction to go. Audiences come to the theater to see shows. By reducing the programming you are reducing your audience base and risk pushing them away more permanently. Instead the most logical thing to do is revision the way in which performance is seen. Exploring minimalist approaches to design is certainly one way to do this. Cut the scenic, costume, and lighting budgets and do the five actor play you really want. Cut all the fancy drops and hire that amazing singer.

It is common in New York, and with many European companies, to forgo design altogether. No set, rehearsal clothes, and worklights. While this is often too bold a choice for most directors it is a way of producing work that focuses first on the performance.

Before these ideas get tossed to the side as the ravings of a post-modernist, keep in mind that Shakespeare operated in much the same fashion. The scenery for his plays was minimal to non-existent, the lighting was daylight (and perhaps a few effects), while the costumes were a hodge podge of items the company would carry around with it. Roman characters might be wearing Elizabethan clothes and brandishing Greek weaponry and all this in simple daylight on a more or less bare stage. The focus, once again, was on the performance.

Far from cutting back on performance, when times are tough, it is exactly the performance that needs to be focused on. Additional rehearsal times, dialect coaching, higher performer salaries (to both allow them to relax and focus on the work as well as garnering a higher quality performer) are what the money should be spent on. An audience should leave the theater thinking fondly on the performance. If they leave remembering the scenery or lighting, with no resonance to the story, we have done something wrong.

At the rate of economic “recovery” we are experiencing these are issues companies will be dealing with for the foreseeable future. If live performance is not to be totally overwhelmed by mass consumer culture something must be done to keep performance alive and growing.

How will you respond?

Jardin aux Lilas Excerpt by Antony Tudor

Monday, September 7th, 2009

A few years ago I lit a production of Lilac Garden for New York Theater Ballet reconstructed by the late Sallie Wilson. I was given the following to help guide my lighting of the piece. It is written by Antony Tudor, choreographer for the ballet.

Wilson was rather exacting with her reconstructions and this was given to me as a means of most accurately addressing the lighting for this piece. In deference to the rigor with which we reconstructed the ballet, I am including Tudor’s words, unedited, with the inclusion of grammatical and spelling errors, as per the original.

I hope you enjoy.

“Jardin aux Lilas” is more often requested by companies for inclusion in their repertory than any of my other ballets, and is often asked for by groups with little experience and small resources in matters of technique, personal, or training. It must be supposed that, to a director, it must seem very practical in every way, but this is a misconception and a delusion. And the delusions seem to include that of regarding this piece as “romantic”, because there is a romanticism about the scenery with its overwhelming masses of lilacs, and of the predominantly blue lighting, for the dim light filtering through from the right off-stage area where we suppose the house to be is the only other color used.

Although the short story based on the idea of the “Droit du Seigneur” was abandoned, the situation remains a dramatic one, without the former melodrama, and the “dramatis personae” of the four principals are thrown into relief by the background of the young friends of Caroline with their easy sort of romanticism of the adolescents and teenagers.

The ballet is steeped in the conventions of the beginning of the twentieth century, when young girls of good families were trained in the good manners of young ladies of refinement, with the right social graces and an understanding that a girl remains a virgin until she is Married. Caroline’s young friend who makes his appearance unexpectedly, having unexpectedly, having played “french leave” from his Academy, has grown up with her as children together and they probably always assumed in their innocence that they would eventually be married with each other.

Unfortunately the diminishing fortunes of her parents, having no longer the wealth that was formerly theirs have arranged a betrothal, with her consent, to Caroline with a very rich young man of considerable financial means. He has great ambition, is very successful and is accustomed to knowing what he wants and always getting it, and his marriage to Caroline will open doors to many of the old families who still wielded enormous influence. The fourth of the group of principals is the fashionable about-town woman with whom he has conducted a love relationship of long standing, and she also appears unexpectedly upon the scene through the side entrance. It is understandable that characters of this complexity cannot expect to be performed by young talented technicians whose sole education seems to have been acquired in the limited conversations of the ballet studios and dressing rooms. And they can be very limiting.

In this ballet I had the inestimable advantage of working is out with dancers with whom I had worked very much before, and we were able to understand each other and to be truly “simpatico” but all of whom were bringing adult minds with them.

They understood my approach and worried with it, but Rambert herself did not and after a few incidences when she tried to get my dancers to put more motion into it, to “feel with the emotions” or in other words to ham it up and turned it toward the melodrama that I was so studiously avoiding, then it became necessary to forbid her to attend any further rehearsals of this piece, and if she as much as poked her nose in the door than all action came to an immediate halt.

This ballet concerns itself with the hiding of emotions from public display, but still conveying through the performance the emotions that were being concealed. As is the case with the majority of my ballets the performers must recognize the existence of the audience’s presence and the fourth side of the stage in “Jardin aux Lilas” is as much overgrown with lilacs in the old part of a manor house garden as are painted scenery on stage, and the proscenium arch is not there in essence. And the audience are witnessing the action clandestinely.

The ballet continues a regular course of narrative choreography until the moment of Caroline’s swooning into her betrothed’s arms. The succeeding sleepwalking episode, which should be handled as though water divination was happening, and the succeeding sequence for the four principals should be looked upon as if the ballet until this moment were being regarded nostalgically from a period still forty years ahead. This is ended by the White girl beckoning that the carriage has arrived to take Caroline and her future husband into their new life far away, and the ballet ends with her young friend left alone and solitary in the deserted garden, and regretting that he will likely never see Caroline again and that this last time together was made impossible of any joys of being together by the constant interruptions by other people in the ballet. Now all of this of the past and the future is now present.

Musically it is necessary that Chanson’s guiding remarks shall be followed and also that the main theme whenever it returns shall also return to the “l’istesso tempo”, especially with the entrance of the orchestra after the original exposition by the solo violin.

The lighting should be as though moonlight was filtering through overhead branches and should be of various shades from blue spotlights to cover the whole dancing area of the stage.

Ladies and Gentlemen, The new Chairman of the NEA

Saturday, August 8th, 2009

Rocco Landisman

He was particularly angered, he said, by parts of the debate over whether to include $50 million for the agency in the federal stimulus bill, citing the comment by Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” in February, that arts money did not belong in the bill. That kind of thinking suggests that “artists don’t have kids to send to college,” Mr. Landesman said, “or food to put on the table, or medical bills to pay.”

In American politics generally, he added: “The arts are a little bit of a target. The subtext is that it is elitist, left wing, maybe even a little gay.”

And while he praised the way recent endowment chairmen have carefully rebuilt the agency’s political standing, Mr. Landesman — who is known more as an independent entrepreneur than as a diplomatic company man — said he was not planning to follow too closely in their footsteps. While Dana Gioia, his immediate predecessor, made a point of spreading endowment funds to every Congressional district, for example, Mr. Landesman said he expected to focus on financing the best art, regardless of location.

“I don’t know if there’s a theater in Peoria, but I would bet that it’s not as good as Steppenwolf or the Goodman,” he said, referring to two of Chicago’s most prominent theater companies. “There is going to be some push-back from me about democratizing arts grants to the point where you really have to answer some questions about artistic merit.”

“And frankly,” he added, “there are some institutions on the precipice that should go over it. We might be overbuilt in some cases.”

Yes it’s true, we in the arts work for a living. And work hard.

The new chairman said he already has a new slogan for his agency: “Art Works.” It’s “something muscular that says, ‘We matter.’ ” The words are meant to highlight both art’s role as an economic driver and the fact that people who work in the arts are themselves a critical part of the economy.

The latest on the arts, coverage of live events, critical reviews, multimedia extravaganzas and much more. Join the discussion.

“Someone who works in the arts is every bit as gainfully employed as someone who works in an auto plant or a steel mill,” Mr. Landesman said. “We’re going to make the point till people are tired of hearing it.”

As for the former agency slogan, “A Great Nation Deserves Great Art,” he said, “We might as well just apologize right off the bat.”

I am excited to see what this man is capable of. Perhaps we can get some measure of real arts funding back. Spreading the money out everywhere is nice in theory but ultimately leaves everyone with not enough to do anything. Art is about the best, not about the most.

Let’s get to work!

A Look at Past Dances

Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009

Here is a sampling of some dances and ballets I have lit over the last few years. It provides a nice overview of the range of lighting design I have done.

Click on any image to see more. Photo credits and collaborator info available on click-through.


Dracul: Prince of Fire


Romeo and Juliet


Mazurkas


Color Codes: A Point of Hue


Le Combat


Mother GOOSE!


Prayer

Dance Lighting – Introduction

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

I wrote an article for the British design blog On Stage Lighting about dance lighting. Check out the article here.

Lighting the Dance – At home and away

Monday, June 8th, 2009

Plays share a lot in common with novels. They are character driven long-form storytelling. Designing for dance differs greatly from theatrical works. If theatre is like a novel, then dance is like a poem. In fact, the poetry of dance has led some people to speak of it as the the very quintessence of performance. Lighting dance is very much like composing a poem. One must be incredibly attuned to each and every choice as the slightest misstep will throw the whole thing off.

The first real modern theory of dance lighting was developed by Jean Rosenthal and then further advanced by Tom Skelton in his The Handbook for Dance Stagecraft. Numerous designers since have provided their own changes, elaborations or theories of their own to the world of dance lighting.

One of the central issues surrounding lighting dance is the tension between the home season and the tour. Most to all major dance companies make their money through national and international touring. They will have a “home season” in whatever city they are based in and then go on tour for several weeks to several months with a repertory of old and new pieces. The home season is often the time where new pieces are premiered before they go on the road.

One of the major challenges of dance lighting is dealing with the tour. One must construct a design that is simple and flexible enough that it can be recreated in any venue the company might encounter. At the same time, the design must be true to the uniqueness and individuality of the specific piece at hand.

Theatre and dance are both about storytelling. Both deal with the vicissitudes of human emotion. Both are art forms that take place live over time. Dance differs greatly from a play in one major, and I would hope obvious regard. While lighting a play is about dialogue, lighting dance is about movement. In a play an actor might stand down stage left and deliver a soliloquy only to be joined by another performer wherein the two meet midstage center to discuss various matters.

Dance on the other hand engages much more directly with space as a volumous object. The duet begins way upstage in stillness, they slowly begin to make their way downstage only to break off into wide sweeping movement around the very edges of the stage. Here, each movement phrase is like its own dialogue, its own soliloquy. Perhaps the stillness demands one kind of lighting while the sweeping runs demand another.

Lighting Antony Tudor’s Lilac Garden demands a very different visual sensibility than lighting Victor Kabaniaev’s choreography in Dracul. Yet they both demand a poetic heart to render the lighting in a manner appropriate to the piece.

In no other performative medium is the tie between performer and designer so strong as in in dance. The clothes of an actor come close but do not exhibit so fully and completely a whole relationship as that of the dancer and their light. For the light of dance is not merely illumination, it is setting too. But far from it being divorced from the performer it is setting as psychological space, the internal world made manifest. As such the lighting in dance is as much costume as anything else. The relationship between dancer and light is perhaps equalled only by that of dancer and music. A desperately intimate relationship that calls the audience to watch in voyeuristic silence.

Dance is a direct expression of the human soul. As such, the lighting must be treated with the care and respect that such intimacy and vulnerability deserve. Remembering Jean Rosenthal’s words might get us close to this idea: “Dancers live in light, like fish live in water.”

Dracul Preview

Thursday, February 19th, 2009

Designed and Directed by: Michael Sturtz
Choreography by: Viktor Kabaniaev
Stage Direction by: Mark Streshinsky
Scenery by: Benjamin Carpenter
Costumes by: Anna Prisekin

Dracul_04

Dracul_08

Photography by Stephen Loewinsohn

Like a Blind Date

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

I had my first design meeting this morning for The Floating Lightbulb that I will be designing in San Francisco this spring. The director and entire design team are all new to me. I find this to be a curious experience as the vast majority of shows I have designed over the last several years have come to me through personal connection. Either some or all of the team are people I have worked with before, or I meet a director or producer at some social function. Sometimes a designer I have worked with previously recommends my work to a director or producer, but even then there is the personal connection. In this case, it was none of those situations. Rather I sent an email to the producer and they liked my work enough to ask me in for a meeting and then hired me for the job.

These situations always feel a little odd to me. Most of the time is spent getting a sense of where your collaborators are coming from. This is not necessarily even artistic in nature, Rather, you are simply trying to get a hold on the personalities of the folk you are working with. Some art does get discussed, of course, but it is almost incidental at these first meetings to developing a shorthand with your collaborators.

The shorthand is not something you can force. Rather it derives from working together and learning what “moody” or “bright” or “shadowy” or “blue” means to different people. Even common cultural referents must be learned and understood. “Noir” to one director may be all about lighting, while to another costuming and another acting style. The more you work with a similar group of collaborators the more you learn what each person means with their language and the work delves deeper into the play earlier in the process.

In New York, I worked with similar groups of people all the time. Because of this, there was a common short hand and ease of expression with regards to design ideas. I now find myself working on my fourth show in the Bay Area and with my fourth wholly new creative team. While I know that it is only a matter of time before I begin working in overlapping circles of directors and designers, for the moment it appears to be something like dating. You get out of a relationship and suddenly find yourself meeting and interacting with all these new people, trying to understand them, who they are, where they came from and where they are going, to see if you are a good fit.

Unlike this first meeting for Lightbulb, Dracul was like the kind of working situation I am used to. I had done a show with The Crucible a few years ago and was familiar with the basic aesthetic they were coming from. The director and I both knew each other from our time at San Francisco Opera and had a very similar working vocabulary from which to begin. Despite having never actually worked together on a show we were able to quickly devise a shorthand that allowed us to communicate ideas quickly and efficiently. Ultimately this made the process very smooth and a total joy to be a part of.

Next week I fly down to Virginia to begin work on Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat. I have worked on a half-dozen shows down there to date, two of them by the director of Joseph. The shorthand is already there. We each have a basic understanding of the aesthetic place the other is coming from. Thus far our phone and internet conversations have been relatively smooth.

Obviously there can be and often are misunderstandings and disagreements. But more often than not they tend to be around the details rather than the fundamental aesthetics of the piece. Developing a shorthand also helps bypass a lot of those misunderstandings as well as shortening the length of the disagreement.

Collaboration, as found in the theatre, only works when it is a win/win situation. If any person or aesthetic viewpoint “loses,” the piece suffers. Finding a means of integrating varying and disparate aesthetic perspectives is what creates the synergistic magic that is theatre and opera and dance.

Dracul: Prince of Fire

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

Dracul: Prince of Fire opens tonight.

Tickets available here and they appear to be selling out fast.


Twitter links powered by Tweet This v1.6.1, a WordPress plugin for Twitter.

Creative Commons License

All text and images on this site unless otherwise noted are licensed under a Creative Commons License.