I know the linking may be a little simplistic, or a little silly, but how we memorialize our dancers has been on my mind with the passing of Pina Bausch and Michael Jackson. Pina Bausch passed away earlier this week. Last week I was on a train that stopped briefly in Wuppertal, Germany, and I remembered Bausch, wondered how much time she spent in Wuppertal. Dance Magazine sent out an e-mail with the subject “The Dance Community Mourns the Passing of Pina Bausch.” I did not get an e-mail from them mourning the passing of Michael Jackson, even as dance writers from Apollinaire Scherr and Sarah Kaufman in the Washington Post, and a whole slew of folks in between eulogized him. For both, I went to youtube to remind myself of their creative output. For both, I went to facebook to see how my friends were reacting to the news. Both were inadequately memorialized by the New York Times. I think it’s notable that Bausch was still creating new work, and obviously had more work in her, just waiting to be born. (I would have loved to see her work inspired by Chile.) I know these thoughts are kind of inchoate; I’m just struck by the sudden absence of these two artists, one whose name is known by most everyone on the planet, one known by a segment of the cultural elite, at least in the US. How did they alter the dance landscape, both in death and in their lives? What lasting contributions did they each make? Who cares about which one and why? What would a Pina Bausch-Michael Jackson memorial dance look like? Why is one considered high art and the other not?
Dance Place in DC is hosting a memorial with music and dancing tonight from 5-6 pm for Bausch, Jackson, and Portland dancemaker Keith Goodman. I love this big tent attitude. Have you heard of similar events in other cities that put Bausch and Jackson together?
(As an aside, this week has solidified my position that I don’t really believe in people “resting in peace.” The now-defunct but fantastic LiP magazine used to run this column Honest Obituaries for a Dishonest World, obituaries that tried to give an unvarnished, complete record of a life, rather than just the nice things. The time to cut people some slack and give them a break is when they’re alive. After they’re dead and gone, you might as well give a true accounting of the life, what that person did and was responsible for, both good and bad and everything in between.)
Yikes! Remind me not to ask you to eulogize me or to write my obituary. I do agree about no one really being able to RIP. I just read C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce with people shuttling back and forth between heaven and hell. There’s no rest anywhere.
Comment by Lillian — July 3, 2009 @ 2:29 pm
There is a part of fame related to commodification, sexism, ethnocentrism. Real accomplishments are obscured. We have a US culture totally snookered by the ability to accumulate money.
Michael was a talented performer and a creative force. Pina Bausch revolutionized dance. She developed Dance Theater, ended the age of specialization through fusion and interpenetration of disciplines, returned passion and humanity to dance, and involved dancers lives in creating a new dance vocabulary.
Jackson and Bausch were not competitors in life, but oddly became so in death. I was devastated that NPR and other media sources ignored Bausch’s death. That we have not enough room for the most heroic, creative, innovative people on the planet is ignorant and involves exclusionary politics and ego-driven taste makers. It has nothing to do with art.
Comment by Christy Sanford — July 29, 2009 @ 7:44 am
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I especially appreciate your point that her dancers were involved in creating her new dance vocabulary. I think it’s interesting to consider Bausch’s impact on those who worked with her most closely.
Comment by wideningthei — July 29, 2009 @ 10:50 am