[US] Wendy Perron

(Peprinted with permission from Dance Magazine)

Trisha Brown is becoming more sacred to us every year. Not only is she a great artist who pushed the boundaries of contemporary dance, but she is also a fine human being, an example of compassionate leadership. While dance legends like Martha Graham and Jerome Robbins were notoriously “difficult” to the point of occasional cruelty, Trisha was always respectful,nurturing, and generous. She fulfills the promise of a new, feminist way of being an artistic director.

Having danced with Trisha in the 1970s, when the company was just five women, and having followed her choreography since then, I have felt close to the work aesthetically and emotionally. On this occasion I would like to talk about the two categories of gifts she gave us:as an artist and as a leader.

Redefining Dance

Who would have thought that a dance could consist of the audience lying on their backs and looking up at the ceiling to imagine seeing what Trisha’s voice is telling them? (That was “Skymap,” 1969.) Who would have thought that two people surprising each other with what direction they would fall toward could be a piece of choreography? (That was “Falling Duets,” 1968.) Who would have thought that the optical illusion created by people walking on walls could hold the attention for a good thirty minutes? (“Walking on the Walls,” 1971.) Not me. But when I saw her concert at the Whitney Museum in 1971, these three actions were thrilling—kinetically,intellectually, and perceptually.

Now, years later, I can rub my chin and say, “Ah yes, I see the influences of Anna Halprin, Simone Forti,Yvonne Rainer, or Steve Paxton.” But at the time, this event gave me a pleasant shock that brought me up close to Trisha’s singular imagination. I wanted to dance that way—with an alert mind and a relaxed, pleasurable body.

She has said she felt sorry for spaces that weren’t center stage—the ceiling, walls, corners, and wing space,not to mention trees, lakes, and firehouses. She caused a revolution by simply, sweetly, turning to spaces that other dance-makers don’t. But she also caused a revolution in the space of the human body. She rejected the pulled up stance of ballet and the inner torque of Martha Graham.She loved Merce Cunningham’s work but she had no wish for dancing bodies to be so upright. She was going for something else, something more yielding and more of f-balance, a way for the energy to flow on unusual paths through the body. In her choreography the pleasure of surrender coexists with the willpower of adhering to a rigorous structure.i

Starting with Improvisation

Trisha’s earliest works were improvised. She had learned to deploy simple structures from Halprin when she studied with her in California in 1960. In “Trillium”(1961) she took a basic improvisation exercise to choose when to lie down, sit, or jump, and did it her own way. “I made my decision about lying down and jumping at the same time,” she said in a 1980 interview. By all accounts,“Trillium” was a wild solo that made people believe she could be suspended in the air.

Trisha of ten asked her dancers to improvise based on either a loose idea (e. g. “Line up” or “Read the Walls”)or quite tight verbal instructions. She wanted the look of improvisation, the feel of not knowing what you were doing until you did it. That aesthetic reached its apex in “Water Motor” (1978). Babette Mangolte’s film of that exhilarating solo has become essential viewing for students of postmodern dance.

When she taught us a choreographic sequence, her movement was so elusive that I remember thinking, “She teaches it as a solid but she dances it like a liquid.” The key to attaining that liquid quality was to know in your own body how one impulse triggers another, to know exactly what and when to let go. While Trisha rejects the term “release technique,” the dancers have to be precise about utilizing release as well as strength.

Trisha in Water MotorPhoto ? Lois Greenfield《水上機(jī)車》中的崔莎攝影：路易斯 · 格林菲爾德

Lines vs. chaos, rigor vs. sensuality

The lovely paradox is that she also insisted on containing this sense of discovery within a rigorous visual or mathematical order. In “Line up,” which we made collectively in the mid 1970s, lines of people would materialize and dissolve—like following one’s own thoughts.

She brought nature into the studio. She loved her home territory of the Pacific Northwest and, come summer,she of ten returned there to take her son backpacking. While teaching one phrase of “Solo Olos” (part of “Line up”), she said, “Imagine you are seeing Puget Sound in the distance and are tracing the length of it with your fingers.”

But it wasn’t landscapes alone that captivated her;it was the human body in an environment, for example,the inevitable sensuality of the body up against the absoluteness of lines.

In “Group Primary Accumulation” (1973), four or five prone women move the right arm from the elbow down, then repeat that, then go on to the second move of raising the left arm from the shoulder, repeat both and so on, up to 30 moves. The pelvis lifts sof tly on move #7—in a meditative way of course. The dance is incredibly sensual to do and to see, and yet the accumulation score keeps the mind strictly focused.iiWhile we were on tour,Trisha once said, “When I am doing ‘Primary,’ I’m thinking, ‘This is all there is.’”

And then there’s the delightful “Spanish Dance”(1973), wherein five women tread slowly across the stage, accumulating one at a time to form a crush of bodies that hits the proscenium wall on the last note of Bob Dylan singing Gordon Lightfoot’sEarly Morning Rain. While nothing much happens, each woman is sandwiched by others, flesh on flesh, swaying pelvis on swaying pelvis. The audience can see where the line of women is heading, but the physicality of it still elicits chuckles of delight.

Simplicity to sublime chaos

Over the years—Brown has created about 100 works including operas—I felt I was seeing a progression from simplicity to complexity, from clear strategies to hidden strategies, from orderliness to a sublime chaos. “Set and Reset” (1983), with its freeform look and lids-of fsense of play, definitely qualifies as sublime chaos. With music by Laurie Anderson and set by Robert Rauschenberg,it’s a masterwork that bears repeated viewing. It of fers a sense of possibility, a sense of the dancers being ready for anything. While jogging from upstage to downstage,Stephen Petronio suddenly gets pulled of fstage by Trisha grabbing his neck. Another time, Trisha dives into the arms of another dancer who seems to be looking the other way. “Set and Reset” is so overflowing with possibility,with unpredictable interactions and close calls, that it took me three times of seeing it to realize that simple walking and running are also woven into the dance. She is teaching us to see things that are not obvious.

Her trajectory of simplicity to chaos is paralleled by the trajectory of earth to air. Just as she managed to catapult herselfto be prone in the air for “Trillium” and horizontal while walking on the walls of the Whitney, she set dancers above the ground—floating with help, one might call it—in “Planes” (1968), “Floor of the Forest”(1970), and “Lateral Pass” (1985). And then, in the operaL’Orfeo(1998), she created an extended passage for Diane Madden to be airborne, floating as the demigod Musica,rigged by the ultimate prof essionals, Flying by Foy.

Dance and visual art

Part of Trisha’s vision has to do with giving dance the same seriousness accorded visual art. That means bestowing it with intellectual attention. It also means, in the balance of art and entertainment, tipping more toward art and less toward entertainment. When we gave lecturedemonstrations and the question came up, “Why don’t you dance to music,” she would counter with, “Do you walk around a piece of sculpture and ask why there is no music?” Now that we are engulfed in a wave of dance in museums, I feel it’s still Trisha’s early work—the silent pieces oriented around lines—that fit so nicely into the museum milieu.

After all, she is a visual artist too, and her drawings have been shown in galleries in the US and abroad. It was natural to her to collaborate with some of the best artists of our time, including Robert Rauschenberg, Nancy Graves, Donald Judd, and Elizabeth Murray.

Going back to the beginning

Her vision also had to do with going back to the beginning, questioning the assumptions that have built up and figuring things out for yourself. In clearing the air of “modern dance” histrionics, of course she had comrades in Judson Dance Theater like Yvonne Rainer and Steve Paxton. Yvonne ran or screamed, Steve walked,and Trisha fell. While that’s a gross exaggeration of the ground-breaking experiments at Judson, it shows how committed they were to getting down to basics, how much they aimed for the “ordinary” (to use their teacher Robert Dunn’s term).

For Trisha, that meant channeling the radical into an ordinary container. In the 1970s, she wrote a statement on “pure movement” that included this: “I make radical changes in a mundane way.”iii

When she started making works for the proscenium stage, she started at the beginning again, asking herselfwhat was essential about the stage. She enlisted Rauschenberg’s help in questioning the conventions of the stage. In “Glacial Decoy” (1979), they both envisioned the dance extending beyond the proscenium,creating the illusion that the dancers did not stop at the wings. For “Set and Reset” (1983), he made the stage wings transparent, blurring the difference between performing and not performing.

Her influence

Trisha Brown’s influence is larger than we can ever know. Young dancers see her work in a studio or in performance and learn how good it feels on their bodies.They may incorporate a version of her style, which tends to fold the body along different lines than in “modern dance.” There’s a respect for the plainness, the sensuality of simple movements framed by rigorous scores(structures). Even ifthey haven’t seen it first-hand, her way of moving is now in the air. It’s like a Trisha Brown mist that dancers all over the world are breathing in.

Do you remember the beginning of “Set and Reset,”when several dancers hoist one in the air so she can be horizontal and walk on the wall? I’ve seen this echoed many times in the work of others, most recently last month at Sadler’s Wells in London, during “Partita 2,” a collaboration between Anne Teresa de Keersmaeker and Boris Charmatz.

And then there are those who imitate Trisha very deliberately. Last year, Beth Gill’s “New Work for the Desert” borrowed liberally from Trisha Brown’s 1987“Newark” (Niweweorce). At the end of “Newark,” there’s is a double duet made of new and strange ways of leveraging each other’s bodies: holding or pulling by the neck and hooking an ankle—almost animal-like—though again, within strict lines. In the interview with Gia Kourlas ofTime Out New York, Gill says that she studied this section on video and incorporated it into her work.iv

of course, it’s fair to study an older artist’s work, but appropriating it is another story, maybe even a legal one.However I think the fact that Gill paid Brown tribute in this way speaks to how iconic Trisha’s work has become.It’s like Rauschenberg erasing a drawing by de Kooning,or Van Gogh copying whole scenes from Hiroshige.

Her generosity

Trisha was always generous in her encouragement to dancers like Stephen Petronio and me who were choreographing on our own. She once hosted a small gathering for possible funders to see my work, and she gave Stephen access to studio space in her building.

But most of all, she was generous to the dancers within her work. I spoke on the phone with Diane Madden,who has been a member of the Trisha Brown Dance Company since 1980, first as a dancer then rehearsal director and now co-associate artistic director. “She created a clear space that allows people to have lots of room,”Diane said. “You felt trusted by her, which allowed you to take more risks and give more...She would give us very clear guidelines, whether working around the perimeter of the space, or keeping close proximity to the floor,working in slow motion, but wouldn’t over-define or over-direct...She would challenge you to go beyond your comfort zone because she was always challenging herself.We all were challenged.”

In 1984, she asked Diane to become rehearsal director.“There would get to be a point,” Diane told me, “where the managerial role of taking care of the dancers’ needs had to be separate from the creating process. Things would happen that would turn her of for piss her of f, and she didn’t want that to sully her creative relationship with the dancers.”

I always felt that Trisha had an awareness of herselfas a woman leader, and Diane agrees. “It was important to her to lead well, to make sure she was making all the right choices,” she said. “She wanted to be a good role model for other choreographers and dancers.”

One choreographer who has been outspoken about her influence is Stephen Petronio, who danced in the company from 1979 to 1986. “The air of democracy in the room—I emulate that,” he told me. “I learned to be inclusive and democratic from her. She always made me feel part of the team, not her slave, and that made me want to give everything I have.”

Endings are beginnings

I’ve noticed that in some of Trisha’s most beautiful works, for instance, “Opal Loop” (1980), “Lateral Pass,”and “Newark,” the last segment ushers in an entirely different sequence from what came before. These nonconclusive endings break so clearly from the rest of the piece that they could be the beginnings of something else.

In that spirit, I am going to end with a beginning.The Trisha Brown Dance Company has just initiated a new series calledIn Plain Site.For medical reasons,Trisha withdrew from making new work in 2011, and the company took on a three-year legacy tour of the proscenium works under the direction of Diane and the other associate artistic director, Carolyn Lucas. Now,the company also performs in non-proscenium spaces;the rep includes not only the early works that fit so well in museums, galleries, and outdoor areas, but also snippets from the proscenium works. It is a bit like Merce Cunningham’s “Events,” and it is tailored to each different space. In September 2015,In Plain Sitecame to New York City’s River to River Festival, to Jerusalem, and more.

The education projects of TBDC continue apace in colleges and dance centers in the US and in Europe,where Trisha is especially lionized. As an alumna who occasionally leads these classes, I can say that students everywhere continue to find the keys that open doors to personal discovery within the vast and challenging oeuvre of Trisha Brown.

(Editor: SUN Xiao-yi)

崔莎· 布朗在人們心中愈發(fā)神圣，不僅因?yàn)樗且晃粋ゴ蟮乃囆g(shù)家，拓寬了當(dāng)代舞蹈的界限，更是因?yàn)樗且晃涣钊司粗氐娜?，是一位富有同情心的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)楷模。舞蹈巨匠中，瑪莎· 格雷姆和杰羅姆· 羅賓斯是有名地“難相處”，甚至被人認(rèn)為偶爾有點(diǎn)太狠心，而崔莎卻總是尊敬、培育和寬容他人。她以一種全新的女權(quán)主義的方式履行作為藝術(shù)總監(jiān)的承諾。

20世紀(jì)70年代，崔莎的舞蹈團(tuán)只有五名舞者且都為女性，我便是其中之一。自那時(shí)起，我就是她編舞風(fēng)格的追隨者。因此，無(wú)論是從我的審美還是情感的角度，我都覺得與她的作品非常親密。本文將討論她作為藝術(shù)家和領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者為我們留下的精神財(cái)富。

重新定義舞蹈

誰(shuí)能想到舞蹈作品中可以讓觀眾們躺下仰望天花板、隨著崔莎的聲音想象畫面？（這是她1969年的作品《天空地圖》。）誰(shuí)能想到兩位舞者互不知道對(duì)方將向哪個(gè)方向倒下而產(chǎn)生的意外情境也能成為一個(gè)編舞作品？（這是她1968年的作品《跌落雙人舞》）誰(shuí)能想到行走在墻上的人造成的視覺錯(cuò)覺可以吸引觀眾30分鐘的注意力？ （《在墻上行走》，1971）我是想不到。但當(dāng)我1971年在惠特尼博物館看到崔莎的演出時(shí)，這三個(gè)作品，無(wú)論從運(yùn)動(dòng)學(xué)的角度、理智上還是感官上，都令我激動(dòng)不已。

多年后的今天，我會(huì)摸著我的下巴說：“嗯，我能從中看到安娜· 哈爾普林、西蒙娜· 福蒂、伊凡· 雷納或斯蒂夫 · 帕克斯頓的影響。”但在當(dāng)時(shí)，我感到的是一種愉悅的震撼，被崔莎的個(gè)人想象所吸引。我也想像她一樣跳舞—頭腦清晰，身體放松享受。

她曾經(jīng)說過，她覺得那些不曾作為中心舞臺(tái)的空間很可憐，包括天花板、墻壁、角落和邊幕；更不用提樹、湖泊和火爐了。于是她掀起一場(chǎng)革命，啟用這些別的舞蹈家沒有使用過的空間。另一方面，她也在人體的空間方面掀起了革命，反對(duì)芭蕾的挺拔和瑪莎 · 格雷姆的內(nèi)在力矩的概念。她喜愛默斯· 坎寧漢的作品，但她不希望舞蹈的身體總是那么直挺挺的。她想做不一樣的東西，一種更加柔軟、不那么平衡的東西，讓能量在身體中用新的方式流動(dòng)。她的編舞旨在使妥協(xié)的愉悅與堅(jiān)持嚴(yán)格結(jié)構(gòu)的意志力共存。①

從 即 興 開 始

崔莎最早的作品都是即興的。1960年，她在加州師從哈爾普林時(shí)，向其學(xué)習(xí)了如何展開基本的舞蹈作品結(jié)構(gòu)。在《延齡草》中，她用自己的方式，基于最基本的即興練習(xí)去選擇何時(shí)躺下、坐起或跳躍。她在1980年的一次采訪中說：“我同時(shí)做出了躺下和跳躍的決定?！薄堆育g草》被評(píng)價(jià)為一支狂野的獨(dú)舞，讓人們相信崔莎可以懸掛在空中。

崔莎經(jīng)常要求她的舞者根據(jù)一個(gè)不成形的想法（比如“排成一排”或是“讀墻上的東西”）或明確的口頭說明作即興表演。她希望能夠?qū)⒓磁d感呈現(xiàn)出來，那種“直到真正地做出動(dòng)作才知道自己會(huì)做什么的”感覺。這種美學(xué)在她1978年的作品《水上機(jī)車》中達(dá)到頂峰。巴別特 · 蒙格爾特關(guān)于這支令人振奮的獨(dú)舞的攝像作品成為學(xué)習(xí)后現(xiàn)代舞的學(xué)生們的必看材料。

她在教我們她編的動(dòng)作的時(shí)候，她的動(dòng)作是如此變幻莫測(cè)，我記得我當(dāng)時(shí)想道，“她的教學(xué)如此堅(jiān)實(shí)，她的舞蹈卻如此流動(dòng)”。獲得這種流動(dòng)品質(zhì)的關(guān)鍵在于清楚身體中的爆發(fā)力是怎樣一個(gè)觸發(fā)另一個(gè)的，并且清楚用什么、怎么樣才能放松。雖然崔莎拒絕使用“放松技巧”一詞，但她的舞者們必須對(duì)如何放松和使用力量做到心中有數(shù)。

排列與混沌，嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)與感官性

這兩組對(duì)立的概念指的是，崔莎堅(jiān)持在嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)囊曈X或數(shù)學(xué)秩序中保留即興帶來的發(fā)現(xiàn)感。在70年代中期我們集體創(chuàng)作的作品《排隊(duì)》中，舞者時(shí)而成排時(shí)而分散，像是隨性而舞。

除此之外，她把大自然帶入舞蹈中。她熱愛位于太平洋西北的家鄉(xiāng)，到了夏天，她經(jīng)常帶兒子回到那里背包旅行。當(dāng)教授“獨(dú)舞”（《排隊(duì)》的一部分）中的一個(gè)動(dòng)作片段的時(shí)候，她說：“想象你正在眺望遠(yuǎn)處的普吉特海灣，用手指勾畫它的輪廓?！?/p>

不僅是自然景觀，她為人類的身體置于環(huán)境中這一主題而著迷，比如身體與絕對(duì)線條接觸時(shí)產(chǎn)生的感官性。

在《組合原始積累》（1973）中，四五位躺在地上的女性舞者首先抬起右小臂，重復(fù)一遍，繼續(xù)第二個(gè)動(dòng)作將左臂抬至肩膀，重復(fù)前兩個(gè)動(dòng)作，這樣一直累積到第30個(gè)動(dòng)作。第七個(gè)動(dòng)作是用一種冥想的方式，將骨盆輕輕地抬起。此舞蹈作品無(wú)論跳起來還是看起來都是非常感官性的，但是不斷積累的舞蹈動(dòng)作使人的注意力非常集中。②我們?nèi)パ惭莸臅r(shí)候，崔莎曾經(jīng)說過：“當(dāng)我在做‘原始’的時(shí)候，我在想，‘這就應(yīng)該是這個(gè)作品的全部’?！?/p>

在歡快的《西班牙舞》（1973）中，五名女子信步緩緩穿過舞臺(tái)，一個(gè)接一個(gè)，將身體緊貼在一起移動(dòng)，當(dāng)鮑勃· 迪倫唱出戈登· 萊特福特的《清晨雨》的最后一個(gè)音符時(shí)，這個(gè)整體正好碰到舞臺(tái)的側(cè)墻。雖然沒有什么特別的動(dòng)作，兩側(cè)的舞者夾著中間的舞者，身體貼身體，搖曳的骨盆貼著骨盆。觀眾可以看到舞者們排成一排前進(jìn)的方向，整個(gè)形體的呈現(xiàn)惹人發(fā)笑。

簡(jiǎn)單到壯觀的混亂

我認(rèn)為，布朗創(chuàng)作的包括歌劇在內(nèi)的約100部作品，風(fēng)格從簡(jiǎn)到繁，創(chuàng)作策略從清晰到隱晦，呈現(xiàn)從有序到壯觀的混亂。作品《設(shè)置與重置》（1983），采用自由而游戲化的呈現(xiàn)，是“壯觀的混亂”極好的例子。其音樂由勞里· 安德森和羅伯特· 勞森伯格所作，是個(gè)值得重復(fù)觀看的杰作。它給人一種充滿可能性、舞者可能做任何事的感覺。史蒂芬· 彼得羅尼奧從臺(tái)后向臺(tái)前慢跑，突然崔莎抓住他的脖子將他拉下舞臺(tái)。另一個(gè)例子是崔莎跳入另一舞者的懷抱，但后者眼睛看著別處將她接住。《設(shè)置與重置》充滿了如此多的可能性、無(wú)法預(yù)測(cè)的互動(dòng)以及驚險(xiǎn)動(dòng)作，我看了三遍才發(fā)現(xiàn)，其實(shí)簡(jiǎn)單的走和跑也穿插在這支舞蹈中。崔莎教我們?nèi)プ⒁饽切┎荒敲匆俗⒁獾氖虑椤?/p>

她由簡(jiǎn)入繁的軌跡與從地到天的軌跡并行不悖：在《延齡草》中，她成功地將自己投射并平躺于空中，她與地面平行地行走在惠特尼的墻上；在《若干平面》（1968）、《林中地面》（1970）和《橫傳》（1985）中，她讓舞者依靠幫助離開地面漂浮著。之后在歌劇《奧菲歐》中，她為狄安娜· 馬登設(shè)計(jì)了一個(gè)加長(zhǎng)的通道使其能升空，像半神穆?？ㄒ粯悠?。此表演由最好的專業(yè)人員福伊操作飛行支持完成。

舞蹈與視覺藝術(shù)

崔莎的一個(gè)愿景是賦予舞蹈像視覺藝術(shù)一般的嚴(yán)肅性。這意味著人們能給予舞蹈更多知性的關(guān)注，也意味著在平衡舞蹈的藝術(shù)性和娛樂性時(shí)，應(yīng)更傾向于前者。當(dāng)我們舉辦講座暨示范課時(shí)，有人問，“為什么你的作品沒有音樂？”她反問：“如果你參觀一座雕塑時(shí)，會(huì)問為什么這里沒有音樂嗎？”如今，我們被博物館中的大量舞蹈作品包圍，但我仍然認(rèn)為，崔莎的早期作品，那些以線性呈現(xiàn)為導(dǎo)向的無(wú)聲作品，與博物館的場(chǎng)地是那么的契合。

歸根結(jié)底，崔莎也是一位視覺藝術(shù)家，她的繪畫已在美國(guó)和世界其他地方的畫廊里展出。對(duì)她來說，與我們這個(gè)時(shí)代最好的藝術(shù)家合作，是很自然的事。這些藝術(shù)家包括羅伯特· 勞森伯格、南希 · 格雷夫斯、唐納德· 賈德和伊麗莎白· 穆雷。

回 到 最 初

她的愿景也與回到最初有關(guān)，質(zhì)疑已經(jīng)建立起的假設(shè)，自己找尋答案。她與賈德遜劇場(chǎng)的一些人（包括伊凡· 雷納和斯蒂夫 · 帕克斯頓）一起“肅清”現(xiàn)代舞中的浮夸。伊凡奔跑或尖叫，斯蒂夫行走，崔莎向地面倒落。雖然這種描述明顯夸大了賈德遜劇場(chǎng)的開創(chuàng)性實(shí)驗(yàn)，但彰顯出他們?nèi)绾沃铝τ诨貧w基本，追求“普通”（借用他們的老師羅伯特· 鄧恩的說法）。

對(duì)于崔莎來說，這意味著將激進(jìn)的東西導(dǎo)入普通的容器。20世紀(jì)70年代，她在關(guān)于“純粹運(yùn)動(dòng)”的聲明中說道：“我以平凡的方式進(jìn)行徹底的改變?！雹?/p>

當(dāng)她開始為鏡框型舞臺(tái)編創(chuàng)作品時(shí)，她將自己重新歸零，問自己什么才是舞臺(tái)的核心要素。在勞森伯格的幫助下，她質(zhì)疑舞臺(tái)的傳統(tǒng)。在《冰川的誘惑》（1979）中，他們共同設(shè)想出讓舞蹈作品超越舞臺(tái)，創(chuàng)造出舞者并沒有在邊幕下臺(tái)的幻覺。在《設(shè)置和重置》（1983）中，勞森伯格將邊幕透明化，模糊了臺(tái)上和臺(tái)下之間的界限。

她 的 影 響

崔莎的影響力遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)大于我們的想象。年輕的舞者在工作室或演出中看過她的作品后，學(xué)會(huì)如何正面地感覺自己的身體；在自己的作品中融入她的風(fēng)格，讓身體順應(yīng)不同的線條彎曲，而不是遵從一般現(xiàn)代舞的方式。不僅如此，舞蹈界彌漫著一種崇尚質(zhì)樸的風(fēng)氣，在嚴(yán)格的作品結(jié)構(gòu)下通過簡(jiǎn)單運(yùn)動(dòng)展現(xiàn)感官性。即使有些人并沒有親眼看過她的演出，她的運(yùn)動(dòng)方式如今已彌漫在空氣中，就像世界各地的舞者都在呼吸著崔莎· 布朗的霧氣。

在《設(shè)置和重置》的開場(chǎng)，幾名舞者托舉著一名舞者，使被托舉者身體與地面平行且在墻上行走。好多次，我都在別人的作品中看到對(duì)這一編舞設(shè)計(jì)的模仿，最近的一次是上個(gè)月在倫敦的薩德勒威爾斯劇院看安娜· 特蕾莎· 姬爾美可和鮑里斯· 沙爾馬合作的作品《帕蒂塔2》。

當(dāng)然還有一些刻意模仿崔莎的舞者。貝斯· 吉爾的作品《為沙漠而作的新作品》廣泛地引用了崔莎1987年的作品《紐瓦克》中的動(dòng)作。在《紐瓦克》的結(jié)尾，有一段雙人舞，由兩組舞者完成，使用了新穎且奇特的借力方式，幾乎是動(dòng)物般地抱住或抓住脖子以及勾住腳踝，但同時(shí)再次遵守了嚴(yán)格的線條。在與《Time Out New York》的吉雅· 克爾拉斯的訪談中，吉爾表示她是從視頻中研究了這段舞蹈并將其融入到自己的作品中去的④。

當(dāng)然，研究一位資深藝術(shù)家的作品是合理的，但未經(jīng)同意使用就是另一回事了，甚至還可能是個(gè)法律問題。但是我認(rèn)為吉爾以這種形式向布朗致敬，說明了崔莎的作品多么具有標(biāo)志性。這種行為就像勞森伯格擦掉德· 庫(kù)寧的素描，或者梵高復(fù)制了歌川廣重的整個(gè)場(chǎng)景。

她 的 慷 慨

崔莎總是慷慨地鼓勵(lì)像史蒂芬· 彼得羅尼奧和我這樣的獨(dú)立編舞者。她曾經(jīng)為我組織了一個(gè)小型聚會(huì)，讓潛在的資助者看到我的作品。她還將工作室借給史蒂芬使用。

但更重要的是，她對(duì)于在工作中接觸到的每一位舞者都非常慷慨。 狄安娜 · 馬登自1980年起成為崔莎 · 布朗舞蹈團(tuán)的一員，從起初的一名舞者到訓(xùn)練總監(jiān)，如今成了聯(lián)合藝術(shù)總監(jiān)。我電話采訪了她。“崔莎創(chuàng)造了一個(gè)清晰的界限，又使人有很大的空間，”她說，“你能感覺到她信任你，這讓你更愿意冒險(xiǎn)和付出……無(wú)論是在空間的邊界還是靠近地板做動(dòng)作，或是做慢動(dòng)作，她都會(huì)給我們非常明確的指導(dǎo)，但又不會(huì)過分界定或過度指導(dǎo)……她會(huì)挑戰(zhàn)你，讓你超越舒適區(qū)，正如她一直在挑戰(zhàn)自我。我們都面臨挑戰(zhàn)。”

1984年，崔莎希望狄安娜擔(dān)任排練總監(jiān)。狄安娜跟我說：“負(fù)責(zé)舞者需要的管理角色與創(chuàng)作過程必須是分開的。有些事情的發(fā)生讓她失望或生氣，但她不想讓這些事破壞她與舞者之間的創(chuàng)作關(guān)系。”

我一直認(rèn)為崔莎有著作為一位女性領(lǐng)袖的意識(shí)，狄安娜也同意這一點(diǎn)?！八J(rèn)為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)好很重要，要確保她做出的所有選擇都是正確的，”狄安娜說，“她希望自己成為其他編導(dǎo)和舞者的好榜樣?！?/p>

史蒂芬· 彼得羅尼奧從1979年到1986年在崔莎的舞團(tuán)里跳舞，他對(duì)于崔莎對(duì)他的影響直言不諱?！八诘目臻g總是充滿民主；這也是我一直在效仿的，”他告訴我說，“我從她身上學(xué)會(huì)包容和民主。她總是讓我感覺到我是這個(gè)團(tuán)體的一部分，而不是她的奴隸，這點(diǎn)讓我想要全情付出。”

結(jié)束即是開始

我注意到崔莎很多重要的作品，包括《蛋白石圈》（1980）、《橫傳》和《紐瓦克》，它們的結(jié)尾與之前的片段截然不同。這些不像是結(jié)尾的結(jié)尾似乎與其他部分是分離的，甚至像是別的作品的開始部分。

本著這個(gè)精神，我將以一個(gè)開始來結(jié)束本文。崔莎 · 布朗舞蹈團(tuán)剛啟動(dòng)了一個(gè)名為“在平原上”的新系列。由于身體原因，崔莎自2011年起不再創(chuàng)作新作品。舞團(tuán)在狄安娜和另一位副藝術(shù)總監(jiān)凱若琳 · 盧卡斯的帶領(lǐng)下，進(jìn)行了為期三年的巡演，表演舞團(tuán)經(jīng)典的鏡框型舞臺(tái)劇目。如今，舞團(tuán)也在非鏡框型舞臺(tái)上表演；劇目不但包括適合在博物館、畫廊和戶外場(chǎng)地演出的早期作品，還包括來自鏡框型舞臺(tái)作品的片段。這有點(diǎn)像默斯· 坎寧漢的“活動(dòng)系列”，根據(jù)表演空間的不同安排不同的演出內(nèi)容。2015年9月，“在平原上”參加了紐約雙河藝術(shù)節(jié)，后又去耶路撒冷等地演出。

崔莎· 布朗舞蹈團(tuán)的教育項(xiàng)目在美國(guó)和歐洲的大學(xué)及舞蹈中心繼續(xù)保持高速發(fā)展，這些地方非常推崇崔莎。作為一名時(shí)不時(shí)參與課程的校友，我認(rèn)為這個(gè)項(xiàng)目使世界各地的學(xué)生在崔莎· 布朗廣泛而富有挑戰(zhàn)性的作品中，繼續(xù)尋找打開個(gè)人發(fā)現(xiàn)之旅的鑰匙。

（中文翻譯：孫曉弋責(zé)任編輯：劉青弋）

About the Author:Wendy Perron, former Editor-in-ChiefofDance Magazine, member of Trisha Brown Dance Company during 1975—1978. Research interests: dance critique and Choreographic Studies.

Notes

i For a full bio of the choreographer, please see http://www.trishabrowncompany.org/index.php?section=36, accessed May 24th, 2017.

ii A 2008 performance ofPrimary Accumulationin Paris, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7apowAv85vs, accessed May 24, 2017.

iii For her full statement on “pure movement,” please see http://www.dancemagazine.com/trisha_brown_on_pure_movement-2306909524.html, accessed on May 24th, 2017.

iv For the full interview, please see https://www.timeout.com/newyork/dance/beth-gill-talks-about-her-latest-premiere-new-work-forthe-desert, accessed May 24th, 2017.

Bibliography

［1］ TEICHER H. Trisha Brown: Dance and Art in Dialogue 1961—2001 ［M］. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2002.

［2］ BANES S. Trisha Brown: Gravity and Levity ［M］//Terpsichore in Sneakers: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History. Middletown,CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1987: 77—96.

［3］ BROWN T.Trisha Brown on Pure Movement［Z/OL］. (2013—05—01) ［2017—05—24］. http://www.dancemagazine.com/trisha_brown_on_pure_movement—2306909524.amp.html.

［4］ BROWN T, KERTESS K, DAVIS R, et al. Trisha Brown: Early Works 1966—1979 ［CD］. Houston, TX: ARTPIX, 2004.

【注釋】

① 關(guān)于崔莎更全面的生平簡(jiǎn)介，請(qǐng)見http://www.trishabrowncompany.org/index.php?section=36。

② 《組合原始積累》于2008年在巴黎的演出，請(qǐng)見https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7apowAv85vs。

③ 關(guān)于“純粹運(yùn)動(dòng)”聲明的全文，請(qǐng)見http://www.dancemagazine.com/trisha_brown_on_pure_movement-2306909524.html。

④ 完整采訪請(qǐng)見https://www.timeout.com/newyork/dance/beth-gill-talks-about-her-latest-premiere-new-work-for-the-desert。