There were some very creative choices in this video and I thought they meshed together well. I was struck by the black and white filtered image throughout coinciding with the mundane sort of text about movement and the body. The combination seems very mysterious but completely appropriate and deliberate somehow - I was immediately engaged. I couldn't help but think of the text as belonging to the dancer, as though this whole video dance was a documentary of a famous dancer with her words about her life and dance imposed on some footage of her studio work. I appreciated that the text was definitely about movement and the body, but it didn't take me to a place where I would get confused or want to ask more questions. It felt comfortablely abstract.
I had no issue with the dancer closing the mirror and walking out of the dance studio in the original video, but I think with this new text, this walking out scene makes little sense - especially since I felt I was seeing documentary footage of a famous dancer dancing away in the studio. I ask myself why. I feel like a different ending is needed, although I'm not sure what...perhaps it could just end when the dancer closes the mirror the last time?
It was interesting that you chose to use this woman's voice to embed it within shakerra's performance. I felt that Tonder's speech opened up the beginning of the piece well--it set this powerful feminine tone within the revolving atmosphere. It was as if Shakerra was Tonder, speaking through her rhythmic taps. However, I longed for the musical and visual layers to build together--shakerra was building, the camera was building, yet the speech was at this constant horizontal level that failed to support the movement. I wanted Tonder's adjectives, phrases, and potent words to match up with Shakerra. There were certain words that I believe you could have played with, allowed them to seep into Shakerra's arms and out of her taps--perhaps you could have played with the timing of the speech and edited it to mesh better with the choreography.
Also, it might have been interesting to add another sound layer using the actual tapping sound--or maybe another non-tapping sound with the same rhythm and patterning that the metal taps create.
Using a speech about rhythm was a clever way to add sound to change the tone and purpose of the piece. It made the movements seem more instructional and demonstrative but also emphasized the journey that movement takes you on. Although I liked the speech I thought that you could have played with it more so that it connected more closely with the movements. The section where the speaker lists adjectives could have been sped up, repeated, and gotten louder while Shakerra's movements became faster and wilder. There was also a moment where Shakerra repeated the movement and a couple seconds later the speaker mentioned the word double. This could have been layered on top of the repeated sequence to show the connection between the speech and the movement. It seemed like the speech was very monotone while Shakerra's movements were more varied and diverse. I longed for the speech to become more varied with different tonal qualities to reflect the different tonal qualities of tap in this piece. I also wanted the piece to end when Shakerra closed the curtain and the speaker said the word identity. Showing Shakerra walking out of the studio broke the connection between dance and speech.
I am struck by how well the speech supports her dance movements. When I view this piece I read two interpretations: First, I see the speech as the voice of the mover progressing her intellect and her philosophy as she progresses through movement. Secondly, I see Kiki's image of a wise mentor sharing her insights with the next generation. I see Shakerra as remembering this mentor's speech and letting her knowledge guide her movements. Through both interpretations I see these words redefining Shakerra's movements and giving them this almost greater context. I see power from both being intellectual and physical through voice and movement and how each are pushing each other to discover and define something. I think the choice to use the speech was smart and well done. The only part that didn't work for me was the ending. I saw someone defeated after almost winning a battle and I wanted to leave her as she climaxing the build of power in her movements. I wanted to peak in the window and then walk away and I feel that by Shakerra closing the mirrors and exiting it takes away from the strength I saw building in her performance.
With the soundscore I am so tickled by muted taps. I wonder why did you not use the noise of taps anywhere in this piece. I wonder if I would still appreciate the words as much if there was tapping in the background. Would the tap noises even fit when you don't see her feet and you can only view her upper body? By negating the tap noises while Shakerra performs tap movements makes me ponder the meaning of tap in relation to non percussive dance forms and I appreciate how Driven made me consider many dance concepts in relation to film.
In class, we discussed how the dancer wrote this speech. As I don't know this girl so I did not know that, I got a different feel from this video. The speech was beautifully written so I assume it was a famous dancer passing on their wisdom to others dancers instead of the dancer in the video sharing her words while also dancers. Just gives it a different feel. You could have played with the words matching images more but it was an interesting idea and I enjoyed the piece.
I didn't even think of using a speech as a soundtrack before I watched your video. It did work out well at the first half. At the second half the speech seemed to lose track of the dance's pace, the "er" and the reduce in speed did not cohere with the intensity of the dance. I'd expect some original sound as of the tapping feet, thrusting arms, and pulling curtain at the last minute of this video.
Comments
I had no issue with the dancer closing the mirror and walking out of the dance studio in the original video, but I think with this new text, this walking out scene makes little sense - especially since I felt I was seeing documentary footage of a famous dancer dancing away in the studio. I ask myself why. I feel like a different ending is needed, although I'm not sure what...perhaps it could just end when the dancer closes the mirror the last time?
Also, it might have been interesting to add another sound layer using the actual tapping sound--or maybe another non-tapping sound with the same rhythm and patterning that the metal taps create.
With the soundscore I am so tickled by muted taps. I wonder why did you not use the noise of taps anywhere in this piece. I wonder if I would still appreciate the words as much if there was tapping in the background. Would the tap noises even fit when you don't see her feet and you can only view her upper body? By negating the tap noises while Shakerra performs tap movements makes me ponder the meaning of tap in relation to non percussive dance forms and I appreciate how Driven made me consider many dance concepts in relation to film.