Vivian Hughbanks (“James Sewell is no ballet master,” Nov. 5) challenged the James Sewell Ballet for calling itself “ballet” without adhering to the structures of classical ballet.
If Sewell’s company claimed to be a troupe of classical ballet dancers, this would be a problem. But they don’t. In his description of the company on Sewell’s website, he states his goal to blend the “elegance of classical ballet, the freedom of modern dance, and the can-do spirit of vaudeville.” Sewell and those who formed the company with him seek to push the notions of ballet, to stretch it to its technical limit.
In the Oct. 30 concert, Sewell succeeded.
To someone untrained in dance, of course, these are difficult distinctions to see. To make things more difficult, there are only a few short clips to be found of rehearsals for three of the concert pieces, making a review of the pieces that parses out the technique in the dance difficult.
To the uneducated viewer, James Sewell would not have met their expectations of ballet. To anyone walking in expecting to see something akin to veteran dancers performing “Swan Lake,” the company did not satisfy. The responsible viewer, with or without any knowledge of the dance art form, would then cast aside their expectations, and allow the company to speak for themselves. From the first piece, classical though it may have been, it was clear these were young dancers whose bios confirmed their novice status. Sewell, an experienced choreographer, used those weaknesses as strength in more contemporary pieces.
I only know a little about ballet, in any form, and yet I know that much. Hughbanks only needed to speak to any Tower Dancer to understand what so confused her. If that proved too difficult, a simple Google search would have revealed a wealth of information and helpful videos, if not the Wikipedia page for “Contemporary Ballet.”
A short foray into the history of dance reveals that, in the last century, the lines between styles have blurred. Jazz is split into hundreds of variations, each with varying echoes of ballet, modern, and vernacular dance. Ballet is now divided not just between the Russian, French, and American schools, but also between classical, neoclassical, and contemporary. Modern dance is generally separated into schools named for choreographers and developers, such as Graham, Cunningham, and Paul Taylor.
So perhaps Sewell choreographs more from the tradition of George Balanchine than Marius Petipa, though Balanchine certainly never choreographed a phone conversation. Who are we, students at a college that does not offer a major in dance, to say what genre of dance a company “deserves” to call itself?
James Sewell did not consider our response when he set “New Moves.” He did not think about whether his audience would like “Tryst.” He did not confine our interpretations, our “take away.” He set no limits on us.
We should at least do him the same courtesy.
